Arkansas jihadist: "Step by step I became a religiously devout Muslim, Mujahid -- meaning one who participates in jihad"

This lengthy piece contains numerous revealing extracts from writings by Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, who murdered one soldier and wounded another in a jihad attack outside a military recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas. He makes his Islamic motivations fully clear. I didn't reproduce here the material from various learned analysts explaining how Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad has gotten jihad and Islam all wrong, wrong, wrong, because ultimately the article offers no evidence of anything that the Muslims who supposedly reject Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad's understanding of jihad are doing to make sure that other Muslims don't misunderstand Islam the way he did. And that's because they aren't doing anything to ensure that more Muslims will not misunderstand Islam in this way.

Note also that Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad attempted to firebomb the home of a rabbi -- acting out the Islamic antisemitism that he learned in the Qur'an that told him that the Jews are the Muslims' worst enemies (5:82).

"Memphian drifted to dark side of Islamic extremism, plotted one-man jihad vs. homeland," by Kristina Goetz in the Commercial Appeal, November 14 (thanks to Axel):

What I had in mind didn't go as planned but Allah willing He will reward me for my intentions.

He planned for weeks, buying guns secondhand to avoid the FBI.

Then, to test whether the feds were watching, he bought a .22-caliber rifle over the counter at Walmart. He stockpiled ammo and practiced target shooting at empty construction sites.

By his own account, he was preparing for jihad.

From a black Ford Explorer Sport Trac, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, a Memphis native, watched two soldiers in fatigues smoking outside a military recruiting center in Little Rock. He aimed an assault rifle out the window and fired.

Muhammad sped away, hoping to flee 150 miles to Memphis where he would switch cars. But a wrong turn in a construction zone led him to police.

He stepped out of the SUV wearing a green ammo belt around his waist.

"It's a war going on against Muslims, and that is why I did it," an officer heard him say. "You see how I gave up with no problem."

Much of this account emerges from police reports and an 18-page mental-health evaluation contained in court files. But Muhammad tells a far broader, detailed story in seven handwritten letters to The Commercial Appeal. Taken together, those letters are not just an admission of guilt but a profession of failure for having not caused more death and destruction.

The letters, written in pencil between May and October, provide a rare glimpse into the thoughts of a self-described jihadist, according to one national security expert. Muhammad describes in his own words how he took his declaration of faith in a Memphis mosque; his motives for moving to Yemen and his attempt to travel to Somalia for weapons training; how and why he planned multiple attacks in the U.S, including ones in Nashville and Florence, Ky., that didn't go as intended; and how he allegedly executed the Little Rock assault.

In his own words:

It's a war out against Islam and Muslims and I'm on the side of the Muslims point blank ... The U.S. has to pay for the rape, murder, bloodshed, blasphemy it has done and still doing to the Muslims and Islam. So consider this a small retaliation the best is to come Allah willing. This is not the first attack and won't be the last.

Muhammad is yet to convince U.S. authorities he's anything other than the murderer of Pvt. William A. Long of Conway, Ark. He's being held on state charges, awaiting a February trial.

But one senior consultant to the U.S. government on global terrorism believes Muhammad's self-described attack in June 2009 and others like it -- lone gunmen with no formal al-Qaida training or direction -- illustrate the new nature of an old enemy.

Al-Qaida has shifted from a far away, tough-to-join group to a social network that almost anyone, anywhere can join. Even a middle-class, Baptist kid from Memphis, born Carlos Bledsoe, who played youth basketball and worked at Chuck E. Cheese's. [...]

"Regarding my pre-Islamic past ... I don't like to talk about it," he wrote to the newspaper. "... I was known as Bledsoe in the neighborhood and did things most teenagers do." [...]

During a visit to a Nashville mosque, he watched the synchronized movements of 50 to 75 people as they bowed and prostrated themselves in prayer. He was amazed.

"So I attempted to join and after realizing I didn't know what I was doing, somebody (asked) when did you become Muslim? I said I'm not just interested in it? And when I said that the whole place lit up. I mean brothers shouted 'Allahu Akbar'!! (Allah is the greatest) and embraced me like I was a long (lost) brother."

A man from the mosque explained the religion's fundamentals -- belief in one God, angels, the revealed scriptures, the prophets, predestination and the day of judgment. He also gave Muhammad a copy of the Quran.

Later, at Masjid As-Salam in Memphis, Muhammad recited the Shahada in Arabic: There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.

"They are not Mujahideen or militants or preach jihad," Muhammad wrote about the Memphis mosque. "But that's where I became Muslim."

So to make a long story short I believed in it wholeheartedly and decided to become a Muslim in a local Memphis masjid. I took my declaration or testimony of faith and bore witness to the truth. The year was 2004 and I was 19 years old.

* * *

A senior member of Masjid As-Salam and the Muslim Society of Memphis board, Mohammed Moinuddin, facilitated a meeting between mosque members and the FBI after the shooting at the agency's request. Muhammad spent very little time at the mosque, he said, but the few who remembered him described him as calm, not belligerent or hostile.

Moinuddin said he encourages people to speak up if they know about potential threats so law enforcement officials can be informed.

"Islam, our religion of faith, does not believe in killing people and stuff like that," he said. "It's a very peaceful religion. The very meaning of the word Islam means peace. And therefore it's kind of ironic that people are sometimes distorting the image of Islam."...

You can tell Moinuddin is lying right off, when he claims that the word Islam means "peace," when actually it means "submission." And he must know that. So it is hard to credit anything else he says.

By 2007, Carlos Bledsoe had become deeply observant and legally changed his name.

"So step by step I became a religiously devout Muslim, Mujahid -- meaning one who participates in jihad," Muhammad wrote. "I was a jihadist before I traveled to Yemen. I've loved jihad every since I became Muslim." [...]

And he ultimately went to Yemen, where he got involved in jihad activity:

He declined to answer certain questions about other Muslims for "security reasons." He also said in one letter that he was "asked many times to carry out a martyrdom operation in America" but "didn't have proper training in regards to explosives."

He did not elaborate.

Muhammad spent his days studying and then taught English after the Asr, or third prayer of the five daily prayers. He felt uncomfortable teaching "the language of the enemy" and considered it only a source of income. He learned Arabic by interacting with native speakers.

Muhammad met an elementary school teacher to whom he taught English and eventually married. He told the state psychiatrist he sold his car in America to help pay for the dowry.

When Muhammad had been married about two months, he was arrested at a roadside checkpoint. He carried a fake Somali passport and lacked the proper government permissions to travel.

He also had videos and literature about the daily operations "by our Muslim soldiers in different parts of the world," literature from people such as Anwar Al-Awlaki, an American Islamic cleric who uses the Internet to spread al-Qaida's message, and explosive manuals that included tips such as how to make gun silencers, he said.

Muhammad's plan had been to travel to Somalia for training in how to make bombs, particularly car bombs.

Instead, he was imprisoned in Yemen's Political Security Organization.

(H)ad I got this training my story would of ended a lot differently than it's going to end now. My drive-by would of been a drive-in with no one escaping the aftermath!! [...]

In regards to the CIA & FBI yea they followed me, yea they tapped my phone, read my emails, interrogated me not once, not twice but three times before my jihadi attack on the crusader recruiting center but what good did it do? I outsmarted them and they know it. That's why they don't want to pick these charges up and are leaving me in state court to be hung. ...

I know the real reason why they're so (quiet). And it's because they dropped the ball with me and not just me. Nidal (Malik Hasan, the U.S. Army major charged in the Fort Hood shootings), Umar Farouk (the Nigerian charged for trying to detonate plastic explosives on a Northwest Airlines flight), Faisal (Shahzad, the Pakistani-American sentenced to life in prison for his failed attempt to bomb Times Square) and others who evaded their agents and devices and paid-informants posing as Muslims.

They can't catch us all....

Muhammad bought several guns and stockpiled ammunition over a period of weeks because he was "on a budget." He didn't use a credit card to buy supplies because "Muslims don't believe in interest."

When he bought the rifle at Walmart and wasn't questioned, he recalled walking to the parking lot with the new gun, thinking: "It's on," meaning he was not under surveillance. "The FBI had not put a hold or checked."

Plan A, as he called it in one letter, was to assassinate "3 Zionist rabbis in Memphis, Little Rock and Nashville. Then target recruitment centers from the South to the nation's capital. And other Zionist organizations in the northeast. That was the plan, which mostly failed."...

Next he drove through Memphis to Nashville. He had prepared a carton of Molotov cocktails, lit one and threw it at what he believed to be the home of an orthodox rabbi. But it bounced off the glass. [...]

We believe in an eye for eye not turn the other cheek. ...We are all brothers under the same banner fighting for the same cause. ... (T)he war has no boundaries as you can see. ... Unless the U.S. government pulls fully out of Iraq and Afghanistan and stop(s) helping Israel in (its) massacre of Muslims, blood will flow in the U.S.A. like tap water.

* * *

On the morning of June 1, 2009, Muhammad drove down Rodney Parham Road in Little Rock. His Plan B, he said, was a "random and unplanned attack" for which he chose the recruiting center.

"I went around the corner so they (couldn't) see me," he said of the soldiers standing outside smoking. "I did not want them to see me coming. I had the SKS with me and put it out the window. I rolled by and started shooting."

He made his intent clear: "I was trying to kill them." [...]

He also explained that when he returned to America, he had hatred for the U.S. and was angry at what he saw as news outlets such as CNN filtering its reporting. He accused military personnel of target shooting the Quran and urinating on it.

Muhammad said he'd have killed more soldiers had more been in the parking lot.

Muhammad also told police there were at least six Molotov cocktails in a milk crate in the bed of his truck -- green and clear bottles filled with gasoline and oil and duct taped.

"And compared to what I had planned originally it was like a grain of sand," Muhammad wrote about the attack. "One crusader dead, one wounded, 15 terrorized, big deal. Nidal Malik (Hasan, the accused Fort Hood shooter) is the real Islamic warrior, and my plan A was on that scale."

Days after his arrest, Muhammad called The Associated Press to say he wasn't guilty of murder because "murder is when a person kills another person without justified reason."

I'm just one Muhammad There are millions of Muhammads out there. And I hope and pray the next one be more deadlier than Muhammad Atta!! (peace be upon him) commander of the blessed raids in NY and D.C. on 9/11.

In one letter, Muhammad explained what jihad means to him:

"In Islam there's a call to duty -- jihad -- and it's of different types but the one I'm mentioning is a defensive struggle or fight with weapons against those who attack, kill, maim the Muslims. And this is a part of Islam." [...]

Far as Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula I won't say much but yes, I'm affiliated with them. And it's more of a Islamic Revivalist Revolutionary Movement than an organization. Same with other Al-Qaeda fronts. Our goal is to rid the Islamic world of idols and idolaters, paganism and pagans, infidelity and infidels, hypocrisy and hypocrites, apostasy and apostates, democracy and democrats and relaunch the Islamic caliphate ... and to establish Islamic law (Shari'ah) -- Allah's law on earth and anyone who strives for this is affiliated with the movement.

So yes I'm Al Qaeda and proud to be. [...]

Muhammad now spends 23 hours a day alone in a cell in the Pulaski County Detention Center. He speaks to no one and can't see out the windows. His only book, he said, is the Interpretation of the Noble Quran. [...]

Good thing he is reading that, eh? Twenty-three hours a day with nothing but the Book of Peace and fairly soon he will be as "moderate" as the day is long!

I knew this would end with the enemies of Allah killing me. But the good thing is -- Martyrs don't die! Allah says, "Don't think of those who are killed for the sake of Allah as dead. Rather they are alive with their Lord and they have their provision!" (Qur'an 3:169) And that's what I believe. The jihad lives on. May Allah accept my jihadi operations and grant me what he promises all of the ... (martyrs) Ameen. [...]
| 81 Comments
del.icio.us | Digg this | Email | FaceBook | Twitter | Print | Tweet

81 Comments

| Leave a comment

this is so despicable that words escape.
and yet we must rise and continue ('join' for some) this battle.
it is only once the tepid west understands that we are at war with an ideology, and all these shootings here, suicide bombings there, are but a fruit of this sick death cult...and only when REAL FEARLESS LEADERS such as col allen west are at the helm, and not mentally challenged imbeciles, born loser-dhimmis a la janet napolitano ('man caused disasters'.......arrrrrrgh!!) and her traitor pos boss...
only then, i believe we stand a chance.
since we must attack everything that has to do with this religion of piss, figuratively and literally.
and it will NEVER happen under jugears' watch and his appointed cronnies . they are extremely well trained in the verbal gymnastics necessary to obfuscate the truth about pisslam.
we need a courageous leader and one who is knowledgeable and well versed with pisslam which is THE ENEMY.
sorry folks, dubya rushed to a mosque right after 9-11 to lecture to us how 'pisslam is a religion of piss'...
and after THAT brilliant speech, we get a true bonafide muslime in chief sitting in the white house with his shoes on the desk....

it is a sad state of affairs folks...
may god grant strength to the allen west-joyce kaufman team to succeed in the battle they were elected to fight.

A very fine piece of reporting. Too bad the MSM doesn't report like this - they seem to have a policy of not reporting anything about Muslim terrorists that is this illuminating - might upset the Muslims and the Obama administration whose Islamic leader insists that Americans admire & respect Islam in preparation, IMO, for an Islamic future.

Muhammad called The Associated Press to say he wasn't guilty of murder because "murder is when a person kills another person without justified reason."

He's right in terms of his intentions, but by his own admission his act was terrorism the point of which is to keep fear alive. But even this is not only unnecessary, it is counterproductive. What's ironic is that without the stupid Islamic terrorist attacks in America & Europe, there would not have been these destructive wars killing Muslims, and clueless Europe & America would have been on a much faster track to becoming Islamic. Religion-of-peace sucker propaganda, Stealth Jihad & Muslim baby production would probably have been enough.

Instead I think Islam is in real trouble and America & Europe are slowing waking up and smelling the sharia.

"...I think Islam is in real trouble and America & Europe are slowing waking up and smelling the sharia."

i love this play on words canto, i hope you're right...

i'll know we are on the right track when a condemning speech and demand for accountability is made. when a fearless exposure of what pisslam is vs what it pretends to be (taquyia) is made by a high ranking publically elected
official (peo).
this peo, must be able to repeat the same message to different audiences with no fear of repercussion (gert wilders)
AND,
such speeches must be REPORTED verbatim with no distortion from the msm (in other words, there must be a major reform and house cleanup in the msm AS WELL)

A senior member of Masjid As-Salam and the Muslim Society of Memphis board, Mohammed Moinuddin, barely remembers our friend Muhammad nor do all the others of the mosque ...except of course that there was no warning. That much they do remember.

"Islam, our religion of faith, does not believe in killing people and stuff like that," he said. "It's a very peaceful religion. The very meaning of the word Islam means peace. And therefore it's kind of ironic that people are sometimes distorting the image of Islam."...

Yeah, it strikes me too that those who convert to Islam have an inexplicable tendency to see persecution and oppression of Muslims everywhere. Why, I might even get the idea that they do convert because of the opportunity it gives them to roar and rage and act violently, quite legitimately.

By his own words, our friend Muhammad - aka Bledsoe - surrendered to Islam because of the submission concept, and none of that "peace" nonsense referred to by Moinuddin. People that inside are weak, gullible and susceptible cannot resist the attraction inherent in ideologies that have solutions claiming to be 100% true, self evident and valid. He would have been attracted by any fascist ideology, the bad luck is that the one who got to him have the history of self pitying victimization that allows it to see enemies wherever the primitive desert revenge concept lets it retaliate.

"During a visit to a Nashville mosque, he watched the synchronized movements of 50 to 75 people as they bowed and prostrated themselves in prayer. He was amazed."


That has to be the most stupid reason for becoming a murderer for allah that I've yet to hear.

Too bad he didn't see a ballet, instead.

Muhammad now spends 23 hours a day alone in a cell in the Pulaski County Detention Center. He speaks to no one and can't see out the windows.

I'm not down on Muhammed. If Islam is above criticism, and it is, then all he did was do his job and he did a darned good job at that.

Muhammed (and his murder victims) made a smart trade. After some boredom in the Big House, he'll end up in Jannat, the Moslem heaven, where the only women are 11 yr old virgins who don't talk back, and even better young boys, booze, rivers of milk and wine, lotsa fresh fruit for the health, and, most important, a perpetual hard-on to be able to enjoy the joy of muredering well done, or, to quote Allah himself, a horrible murdering.

*** 56:15 ***

Moslem martyrs will sit on gold-encrusted thrones of happiness, reclining upon them, facing one another in love. Immortal youths will wait upon them with goblets ... and accompanying them will be their companions pre, most beautiful of eye, like unto pearls hidden in their shells. This will be a reward for what they did during life. No empty talk will they hear there, nor any call to sin, but only the tiding of inner soundness and peace.

//Why, I might even get the idea that they do convert because of the opportunity it gives them to roar and rage and act violently, quite legitimately.//

In your own special way, you might be on to something here. I think it helps to understand who this person was before he converted to Islam. Let's find out by readin some of the article that Mr. Spencer chose not to quote:

"Muhammad also said he had experience using weapons that could cause serious harm beginning in middle school. He described using guns and knives in fights during his school years. He had been suspended several times for fighting. He added: 'I was a gang member.'A 2003 police report shows he was charged, months before his 18th birthday, with unlawful possession of a weapon -- chrome-plated brass knuckles. After a driver failed to yield at a stop sign and hit Muhammad's car, she told police he jumped out, put on the brass knuckles, hit the rear passenger window and yelled: 'Bitch I'm gonna kill you ... Get out. ... I'm going to kill you when I get your address.' The police report also indicates Muhammad was affiliated with the M.O.B. gang. Muhammad admitted running to the woman's car, yelling and swearing at her, but denied to police he hit the car or threatened the driver. He forfeited the weapon, and the case was handled nonjudicially by juvenile authorities. After graduating from Craigmont High, Muhammad left Memphis for Nashville to enroll at Tennessee State University, where he attended for three semesters. In February 2004, Knoxville police pulled over a blue Mazda for an equipment violation and found several weapons, including a loaded SKS assault rifle and two shotguns. Muhammad, a passenger in the back seat, told police he owned the guns and had planned to sell the shotguns. He also had marijuana and a switchblade, according to the report."

Wow. Muhammad was not exactly a peace-lover before converting to Islam. This thread is about Islam teaching Muhammed to be violent, but it seems like that trait was there before he ever heard of Islam. How could that be? He was growing up in a peace-loving society under a peace-loving religion ("He evaluated Christianity and realized he didn't believe in the faith of his youth.").

If Islam is responsible for Muhammad's violence after converting, what was responsible for his violence before converting? Christianity? Living in the US? That can't be! His violence before converting can be explained as him being a "bad apple" in an otherwise perfect society and perfect religion. Right? It is only after converting to Islam that his violence can be blamed on his religion. Right?

Let's read what a person with an IQ over 90 draws from Muhammed's pre-conversion violence and his conversion to Islam:

"Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University at San Bernardino, said Muhammad's previous contact with law enforcement suggests he might have been at risk for violence no matter what movement or ideology he joined. 'It's much easier to blame an out-group and to justify your own personal anger and mistakes by scapegoating and bastardization of scripture than it is to really take the bull by the horns and say, 'What is it about me that I have to improve?'' Levin said. He added: 'This is an example where it really is the fanatic and not the faith. The faith plays an important role in the sense that if you have an extremist with a disposition towards aggressive violence, it's not good for them to find a belief system that they can use to find refuge and legitimacy in. With that being said, it's not the faith. It's their contortion of it. In other words, this is not something that people have to worry about from well-adjusted, learned scholars in Islam.'"

He must be wrong.

So tell me, who or what is to blame for Muhammed's pre-conversion violence?

Mr. Spencer did not quote this, either. It turns out Muhammed looked at other religions before Islam:

"So he turned to Judaism because he was attracted to monotheism. He visited a couple of orthodox synagogues and was given pamphlets but was turned away and stared at because he was black, he said. 'But that religion seem(ed) to me like too much of racial pride and not for other people,' he wrote. 'It seem(ed) to be all about 'the Jews' or 'children of Israel.'"

Spot on. He was not accepted into Judaism, and he was accepted into Islam, because Muslims are not racist supremacists like most of the "chosen people" are. This acceptance was not good in this case, because Muhammed was ALREADY DISPOSED TOWARDS BEING EXTREMELY VIOLENT. As Levin explained above, "it's not good for them to find a belief system that they can use to find refuge and legitimacy in."

Summary:
An extremely violent person could not find acceptance in a supremacist, racist religion, but did find it in an accepting, egalitarian religion. This acceptance allowed an already extremely violent person to legitimize his rage and to manifest itself through bastardizing the teachings of an otherwise peaceful religion. Then a right wing extremist reframes the whole story and blames the person's violence on Islam.

Explain to me how Islam is also resonsible for Muhammed's violence before he even heard of Islam.

"I was a jihadist before I traveled to Yemen. I've loved jihad every since I became Muslim."

Yemen isn't exactly a tourist destination.
Unless you're with a government agency what are you doing traveling to Somalia?
Is there NO way the US government can keep these people from coming back to the US? They're letting us know their intentions and we can do nothing but watch?

One more quote of interest that Mr. Spencer missed:

"Some have questioned whether he had any contact with an al-Qaida organization."

As far as I can ascertain, islam is the only faith/culture where intimidation, violence and murder (honor/single/fartwas/mass) is condoned by the druids of Mo.
Perfect for the toerag, and the promise of 72 slappers and endless hangover-free vino collapso musta got the yeehadi gagging for it.
Sheet, if Quarawdi (wasn't he a Commanche chief in the 19th century?) could prove that heavenly bollock to me, I'd quote the shitada in Arabadic, slip on a semtex waistcoat and blow myself up in the local church (iraqi fav I notice).
There are many exclusive clubs you can't join and wouldn't want to.
Pedophile (Mo), warlord, (Mo), ethnic cleanser (MO), caravan raider (Mo), murderer (Mo).
Islam - wanna kill, be praised and get nooky for eternity. Just pledge your soul to Sauron and your AK47 is ready.

ok da'oud!

the guy was violent before he joined pisslam.
so now birds of a feather flock together...
you don't even realize how you're shooting yourself in the foot with this lame argument.

continued inbreeding by the followers of pisslam has led to some serious s**t...
so this guy most likely has an extra y chromosome...
the point is simple:
killers, wannabe killers, pedophiles (i am describing a hefty % of convicted inmates don't i?) gain instant acceptance and encouragement by joining this murderous cult. it couldn't have been more custom made than this...

do you understand this? mister?

My dear dave, if you had bothered to understand what I am writing and quoting me in that light instead of making up something yourself, you would know that I opinion his conversion to Islam is founded on Islam playing into his violent past and his violent leanings. I in no way blame Islam for Mr. Muhammad's previous tendencies, I blame Islam for offering him a solution in the form of further possibilities for realizing them.
I am glad I gave you the opportunity to air a bit of superiority. You really are a wonder, aren't you?

Summary: An extremely violent person could not find acceptance in a monotheist religion who saw though him, but did find it in a supremacist religion willing to take anyone no questions asked. This acceptance allowed an already extremely violent person to legitimize his rage and to manifest itself through concentrating on certain teachings of the alleged peaceful religion. Then a right wing blogger sees this as another story in the occurrences of violent thugs buying into Islamic ideology and blames the person's continuing violence on Islam.

A part of the way I agree with Mr. Levin's conclusion it cannot be "good for them to find a belief system that they can use to find refuge and legitimacy in. With that being said, it's not the faith. It's their contortion of it. In other words, this is not something that people have to worry about from well-adjusted, learned scholars in Islam."

Of course, "contortion" is a pretty severe twist. And pray, what is a "well-adjusted" scholar in Islam? I see to many imponderables here to accept it in entirety.
Also I am trying the figure out how director Levin's "Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism" categorizes Hizb Ut-Tahrir as "Anti-capitalism, theological".

In short: I haven't the faintest idea what you are saying, dave, except covering everything in a cloud of smoke.

"Too bad he didn't see a ballet, instead."
When you picture it in your mind, that's really funny, hehe.

I read the full article, too, dave472, but do not find that Spencer's edited presentation materially affects the overall substance of the story. Yes, Bledsoe was predisposed to violence and had a criminal record before converting to Islam. The real significance of this story is that he thought Islam is the belief system best able to accommodate his violent streak. Why do you suppose this is?

//I blame Islam for offering him a solution in the form of further possibilities for realizing them.//

Islam did not give him any “solutions.” As Levin said, Muhammed would have been violent whether he had converted to Islam, Judaism, or remained a Christian. Muhammed would have been violent if he joined the Quakers.

//I am glad I gave you the opportunity to air a bit of superiority.//

I read the whole article instead of what Mr. Spencer spoon fed me using his selective quoting style. I drew the obvious conclusions that any sentient being would conclude from reading the article. Strangely enough, doing that in this forum does make me superior – I don’t think anyone else did. It’s difficult not to feel superior when discussing issues at JW.

//An extremely violent person could not find acceptance in a monotheist religion who saw though him//

The Jews at the synagogue could “see through him” and knew he was violent just by looking at him. I guess the “chosen people” have special powers. Could they read his mind as well? Maybe they talked endlessly about how special the Jews are just to drive him away.

//but did find it in a supremacist religion willing to take anyone no questions asked.//

A “supremacist religion” that takes anyone with no questions asked?? Does this really make sense to you? Do you know how stupid you are?

//This acceptance allowed an already extremely violent person to legitimize his rage and to manifest itself through concentrating on certain teachings of the alleged peaceful religion.//

As Levin said, “it's not the faith. It's their contortion of it.” Once again, Muhammed would have been violent had he converted to Zen Buddhism.

//Then a right wing blogger sees this as another story in the occurrences of violent thugs buying into Islamic ideology and blames the person's continuing violence on Islam.//

If that is what Mr. Spencer was getting at, then why did he omit the passages that I quoted? It is strange that he would purposefully omit the passages that convey his point. In reality, he omitted those passages because he knew that it would be obvious to any rational person that this is a story of a violent, psychotic individual whose behavior has nothing to do with Islam. Obviously, he is giving JW readers too much credit by omitting these passages. From your response, we see that even after reading those sections, the average JW reader still cannot comprehend what they mean. He need not be concerned with spinning a story when his readers are too stupid to know the difference.

//In short: I haven't the faintest idea what you are saying, dave, except covering everything in a cloud of smoke.//

What I am saying is as clear as can be. I cannot help beyond what I already said. Just forget what I said and go back to your “Muslim = evil” mindset. It’s clear that this is the limit of your comprehension.

//The real significance of this story is that he thought Islam is the belief system best able to accommodate his violent streak. Why do you suppose this is?//

The exact opposite was conveyed in the article. Try reading it again with a different brain.


Dave fails again...
You don't have to have pre-violence in order to convert to Islam and participate in jihad...But it helps...

If Muhammad was violent previously, Allah and Islam did not remove violence from him, but re-enforced it...

sorry Dave your in need of a brain! the words in islamic texts allows those who have no inhibition to cause violence. l would say if those people who were born into islam who do not follow their texts as described have some self control over the wanton violence allowed in the koran. Dave you need to compare the lives of Jesus, Budha, etc to Muhammad, and tell me which one inspires peace or war? It is very simple Dave you need to just read the koran.

Islam exonerates and encourages and sanctifies every form of cruelty, intolerance, misogyny, depredation, deception, theft, rapine and slaughter... as long as you do it for Allah.

In essence, Islam is criminal's religion, begun by a proto-Mafia chieftain named Mohammad, the enshrined pedophile warlord of the uncritical, unskeptical, terroristic "submitters".

"Islam, our religion of faith, does not believe in killing people and stuff like that," he said. "It's a very peaceful religion. The very meaning of the word Islam means peace. And therefore it's kind of ironic that people are sometimes distorting the image of Islam"

LOL! Check out those outrageous lies! All 4 sentences are lies.

People - "dave742" is Danios at the reprehensible "LoonWatch."

The most pathetic website on the net, along with Huff Post and LGF. Don't go to "Loonwatch" for any reason, or you'll get "bugs," as duh swami has reported.

I have a feeling that the poster (on some other threads) going by the name "Daniel Bielak" is a Muslim masquerading as a fanatic, frothing at the mouth, Zionist. There's a bad smell emanating from "Daniel Bielak"s postings. If I'm wrong I don't apologize. Whatever he is, I don't like the smell of it. Methinks he protests too much.

I agree.

So far as I can see, this guy - who had already joined gangs - finally zeroed in on the biggest, baddest, and oldest organised crime cult/ gang in existence - the Ummah, or Mohammedan Mob.

If he'd been in Hong Kong or Shanghai, he'd probably have ended up a Triad hit-man.

If he'd been in 18th or 19th century India, he'd have found his way to the Thuggees.

But Islam was what was available, and Islam drew him, for Islam - unlike Judaism or Christianity, which would have demanded a total renunciation of murderousness and resentment and theft, and the use of his brain, and an active attempt to practise truth-telling, and charity toward all his fellow creatures - offered him instant and total validation and sacralisation of all his evil desires.

(His claim that he had 'visited a couple of orthodox synagogues' but was repelled by Jewish racism and arrogance, I take with a large grain of salt; it is perfectly probable that this tale may be a self-serving taradiddle.)

look,

daniel bielak may have rather lengthy posts, and indeed, i have recommended myself to be a little less verbose.
i have visited his youtube channel, and i really have no problem with its content.

your comment however 'frothing at the mouth zionist'.....
woooo, tabarnak!
exactly what is your problem with someone whose ancestors have been persecuted since time imemorial, and in today's day and age, 60 years after arms and legs of what was once a jewish body, were brutally amputated... while the world stood still and CHOSE to look the other way... and the same phenomenon appears to have an attempt of a repeat performance to the cheers of jewhaters....

so yes, his verbosity got on my nerves too, but i KNOW where he's coming from...

YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?

So, Muhammad was violent before his conversion to Islam, OK.

But it would be a strawman-fallacy to say that Jihad Watchers simply believe that it was only Islam that made this person and so many other Muslims violent.

But like Duh-Swami said: Islam did not take the violence out of him. The relevant question it seems to me is: What influence did Islamic teachings and that which this person heard from and discussed with fellow-Muslims have on him? Was it a beneficial, ennobling or a detrimental, violence-exacerbating or at least -sustaining influence?

Robert quoted this man's own words and from them that Islamic influence showed pretty clear.

But I take it that now many Muslims officially distance themselves from this guy. But although presumably he had low IQ, nevertheless he was reasonably sane. And this is what a reasonably sane but violent human UNDERSTOOD about Islam.

And there are countless misunderstanders or misusers of Islam, as is amply shown on Jihad Watch and many other websites.

It seems to me that Islam-I, the Quran, Sira, Hadith, explained by Islam-II, the most revered Islamic scholars and leaders, are too anti-democratic and alowing and encouraging too much violence for power or paradise.

OR ..... just too vague, ambiguous, incomplete, self-contradicting and simply way too vulnerable to misunderstanding, misuse.

Look at the enormous variety of Islam-III; all it's existing interpretations and practices how multi-interpretable Islam I, even with Islam II, is.

That Robert Spencer and so many others so many times have the opportunity to show clues of how detrimental, violent the influence of Islam can be, shows by now how negligent Islamic defenders are.

All they manage to do seems to be issuing stories about "plausible deniability", at best negating the evidence of bad influence of Islam. Often not being able to do even that. When their denying arguments are soundly refuted or if they do not even dare to utter them in the many articles with undeniable clues.

True Good Islam-defenders should by now be considered to start some kind of "New Islam", which shows a clear-as- possible interpretation of Islam, something like the laws of Democratic Nations.

A New Islam that can be updated everytime misunderstanders and misusers once again discredit and embarrass "Old Islam". A New Islam moreover that should put strong conditions on membership or continued membership. Instead of only uttering the Shahada and adhering to Ramadan, Zakat, Hajj if rich enough, and 5 prayers a day.

In this way New Islam would not allow itself to be discredited and embarrassed all these countless occasions by the misunderstanders and misusers of Old Islam.

New Islam CAN be formulated and chosen, and now that is NOT yet chosen by Muslims. But this very choice in future could constitute a way out for them.

And eventually all Muslims who do not take it, could be held accountable for their association with all the known misunderstanders and misusers, on a worldwide scale. And denial of influence of Islam then won't be enough any more to be considered not co-responsible and for really earning trust and respect from their fellow-citizens.

Nah, our dave is not worth the trouble. I always feel silly when I have to give up on a discussion but we are walking around in circles here and our dave leaves me with no other option. I do not enjoy exchanging insults: I am not impressed by our dave's arguments but by his manners.
Mr. Muhammad - aka Bledsoe - did not join some Christian sect in order to express his opinions, or in order to get the chance to express some opinions in the manner people like him express their opinions. It seems he was willing to go anywhere for a bit of absolutist guidance, and to his misfortune - and the misfortunes of others - he chose and was accepted by Islam. And suddenly he had some new objectives in his life. Good for him ...but we are trusting his own words here and I would hate to trust a man like him. "Al Qaeda affiliation" can be claimed by anyone with a crush on Osama.
Islam consistently promotes itself while confounding other religions: I call that supremacism for starters. If our dave cannot understand this - and he should by now - I wash my hands of all blame, I certainly see no reason to accuse me of being "stupid".
We might of course argue that had Mr. Muhammad joined some other sect he would be killing imams and blowing up mosques, but I somehow think that slightly less likely. Not impossible, being the man he is!
It is perfectly obvious to anyone reading Mr. Spencer's post that Mr. Muhammad was was a man with a past, and further details are in the original piece linked to by Mr. Spencer. But there is quite a distance from being a common thug and street brawler with an ugly temper to actively seek out people in order to kill them. He had discovered something that made him cross that line.
Finally I see that our dave's tendency to generalizations and unfounded conclusions leads him to accuse me of being what is termed "a hater", in his words because I believe that "Muslim = Evil". I clearly never have implied this to be the case, only that Mr. Muhammad's failings were emphasized by Islamic teachings that abound in the Quran for us all to read.
Aw, what's the use?

Like all cults, islam attracts the disturbed, the violent, the misognyistic, the "intellectually challenged" -the dregs of humanity.

Replying to captain nemo: Some of my best friends, and relatives, are Jewish and Zionists. The poster "Daniel Bielak" just doesn't sound like any of the Jews I know. That's not an apology. Moreover, you have mischaracterised what I said. You should apologize.

(His claim that he had 'visited a couple of orthodox synagogues' but was repelled by Jewish racism and arrogance, I take with a large grain of salt; it is perfectly probable that this tale may be a self-serving taradiddle.)

It could be that he was discouraged, but not likely because of racism or arrogance. Just the opposite, in fact. Jews discourage conversion to Judaism because non-Jews are perfectly capable of serving G-d as non-Jews. In fact, it is much easier for non-Jews. If they are very sincere about wanting to convert, they will come back even after being initially discouraged.

In agreement with you, ImNoDhimmi. As with all cults and totalitarian ideologies, a small, intellectual elite (e.g., Joseph Goebbels, Leon Trotsky and Osama bin Laden) form the leadership of thought systems which are no good right out of the gate. After this hierarchy, which is pretty thin in numbers, there then follows in large numbers the detritus of the human race as true believers. Same old same old.

Damn trouble is that such predictable rot is ordinarily not recognized as such by the majority of those who are non-totalitarian in their thinking, this being the case because it's the nature of non-control freaks to just think that most everyone is a good Joe or Jane and wants the ordinary things that they themselves want (e.g., security, family closeness, a live and let live approach to life, good beer at sporting events, etc.). Those who continue to exculpate Islam (such as the previous President and the current one) are demonstrative of this sad truth. Again we can see that ignorance of evil systems of thought by the bulk of mankind functions as just about the greatest ally of the haters. Yep, same old same old.

The thing about islam is that it makes you identify very strongly with all other muslims, everyone in the ummah. And almost all muslim websites I used to visit emphasized this, that the suffering of muslims in other countries is something that concerns all muslims, cause they are all brothers and sisters in islam. You become so entangled that it really does feel that way, and you wish you could do something. And that is where jihad comes in, not only can you do something, it's a religious obligation. Islam encourages and legitimizes taking violent action against those that are seen as oppressors and aggressors against muslims anywhere.

Demsci: I don't know where you're going with this 'new islam' idea. Most of the websites I mentioned above see what they are doing as a return to the roots of islam. In christianity we had the reformation, we did away with all the superfluous bullshit the catholic church made up and went back to the basis, the core. Which is the bible and jesus. Muslims are doing a similar thing, they are doing away with all modernisms and are going back to their core, the quran and hadith. Except in this case, the core supports violence and preaches supremacy of islam over everything. The only 'new islam' would be possible if they rejected most of the teachings of the islam we know today. It would have to reject the idea that the law of allah is superior over everything just to start, and that's something that I don't think is possible for the large majority of muslims. Rejecting even one law of allah is akin to saying 'I know something better than this' and as we all know, the quran states over and over that allah knows better. It's pure blasphemy to do this, so a new islam doesn't stand much of a chance I'm afraid.

bhobby,

i hope you can 'hear' what you have just said and how it sounds:" Some of my best friends, and relatives, are
Jewish and Zionists" ...why, this is the proverbial antisemite preamble....

i do not know what your jewish best friends and relatives sound like, but one thing i can assure you of:

i am not religious and hardly observant, but i consider myself knowledgeable with the old testament, simply because it is my history of which i am extremely proud.
there is a fundamental jewish value, which says 'all of israel are responsible for one another'. (kol israel arevim zeh lazeh)
a biblical example to this might be moses rushing to defend one of his brethren attacked by an egyptian overseer.
(and hence my defense towards d.b.)

forgive me if my 'israel and zionism under attack' detector is on at all times....because we ARE under attack ...

now i do not mean to turn this into a p*****g match
but in one post you blatantly say that "If I'm wrong I don't apologize."....
and in your reply to me you tell me "You should apologize."

i have NO PROBLEM apologizing if indeed i was wrong but, having just quoted you......am i missing something?
:)

I don't mean to be critical, but you castigate a major religion, Roman Catholicism, and perform a great disservice when you write that that sect of Christianity is guilty of "superfluous bullshit." Only someone who is uninformed, or who doesn't care for a different perspective if he is informed, would assert that the medieval Catholic Church was a load of bull. That church produced an enormous amount of outstanding achievements, from Gregorian Chant to Gothic cathedrals to Giotto's extraordinay frescoes to Thomas Aquinas' intellectual architecture. Moreoever, you seem oblivious of the Catholic Church's position that revelation did not end with the Bible. Yes, the Protestant world maintains that it did, but an objective account of the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism here would note this dispassionately and not pejoratively.

It serves no purpose to go after a truly wretched religion, which Islam is, by a route which defames and insults the largest single sect in all of Christianity, such sect of this religion, by the way, being arguably responsible for as subtle an interpretation of the human condition and as steeped with as great an artistic legacy as any religion in the history of man.

One can focus on criticism of Islam without slamming other religions in the process. You know this or should know it. And if you don't, just imagine, if you can,
how a devout Catholic would have read your comment, for instance, Robert Spencer himself.

//It is perfectly obvious to anyone reading Mr. Spencer's post that Mr. Muhammad was was a man with a past//

Really? Show me. Show me what he quoted that makes this perfectly clear. From what I see, he deliberately left that information out. Mr. Spencer said that he "didn't reproduce here the material from various learned analysts." He also didn't reproduce the part about Muhammad being a violent psychopath before converting to Islam.

Why didn't Mr. Spencer simply supply the link to the article and let the JW readers read it? Doesn't he think you know how to click on a link? Why did he instead quote from it at great length, completely taking over the home page? Was that all to save you the effort of clicking on a link? Was he worried you might sprain your finger? Or did he not want you to know all the details. Like I said before, I really don't think he had to worry. JW readers are quite capable of blocking out any information that does not conform to their preconceived ideas. He doesn't trust you enough.

Nice try at changing the subject, Dave, but still, this person became violent after his conversion to Islam, and he himself said that the more pious he became, the more of a jihadi he wanted to be. His words, not yours or anyone else's.

Try as you might, you can't erase the truth.

Here's a small excerpt from a recent JA meeting:
"Hello, my name is Mujahid Muhammed and I'm a jihad-a-holic"
-audience groans and gasps-
"I was a lonely psychopath with violent tendencies, but I really had no socially respected way to express by paranoiac rage and megalomania. Then I discovered Islam.
Suddenly I was able to hate and kill people and rationalize my thoughts and actions as those of a freedom fighter, a real Mujahid. And in the Prophet of Islam I had a perfect role model. Not only could I do all sorts of things normally labeled as being demented and perverse, but among the Umma I would be considered morally upstanding and heroic.
In my new, topsy-turvy world, to kill, maim, rape, rob and torture would be fine - as long as the victims could be called enemies of Islam. Conveniently, that included Jews as well as most of the population, making victim identification easy.
Well, after several years in prison, after reading all of Robert Spencer's books, I've come to regret my ways. Just to keep clean, however, I have to keep away from the Koran, so I spend a lot of time grooming my cat.
Yup, it's One Day at a Time for me. No more jihad."
-audience claps-

:)....

jd, you've just cracked me up....
THAT was priceless!!!!

Replying again to Captain Nemo - It seems to me that the poster "Daniel Bielak" has a style, a tone, a demeanor more like what I've seen in Muslims, rather than what I know in the many Jews I know personally. It's not the content of his posts that bothers me. In fact I already know about most of what he reports, have known about that stuff since many years past. Like you, I also have a sensitive "radar" that picks up on subtle threats and dangers. The essence of the Muslim way of operating is fakery, flimflam, pretense, feigning by means of camouflage and misdirection. Ie. The main elements of warfare. They do it all the time, in everything they do. It's possible the poster "Daniel Bielak" is really a Jew. If so, all I can say is his way of presenting his point of view is ineffective and actually a put-off, if it's not a put-on.
I have my own values too which lead me to care about the persons in my life, which includes my two dear Jewish grandchildren. I'm a Christian.

Aye Aye, Captain. Man the torpedoes! Full Speed Ahead! Up Scope! - Somali pirate vessel at 12 o'clock - Fire One (whooosh), Fire Two (whooosh) - BLAM! BOOM!
Pirate vessel struck and going down, Sir. Giant squid sighted off the Nautilus port bow...

dear bhobby,

we are on the same page and i hope i did not come on too aggressive...
we DO AGREE that "The essence of the Muslim way of operating is fakery, flimflam, pretense, feigning by means of camouflage and misdirection. Ie. The main elements of warfare. They do it all the time, in everything they do. "

my best to you and yours
cheers!

There seems to be an issue as to whether Islamist violence is "caused by" poverty, poor education, and other such factors, or whether it is "caused by" ideology and religious beliefs.

As with most complex questions, the answer is most likely to be "all of the above." Thinking is hard and we have a tendency to simplify.

Having read "Jihad Watch" and various other sites devoted to analysis of the actions of Islamists, it is apparent that there is an elite within the band of Islamists and also the lumpenproletariat from whom the group of foot soldiers will
be chosen. It is a parallel to the phenomenon of most revolutionary movements. There is a porous boundary between the two groups such that some of each group may migrate to the other.

It does appear that there is a large pool of potential recruits to be the footsoldiers, who respond positively to the bait placed by the elite who, themselves, never seem to be the people who die in the operations.

The elite have to convince the soldiers that it is worth their lives to die for issues the elite deem worthy. The same dynamic applies, by the way, to the dynamic which pertains to the relationship between the government of the United States and the military.

Everyone must judge the facts for himself/herself.

The facts mandate the conclusion that Islam is a bellicose religion/political regime which prospers to the extent that it can undermine existing cultural institutions.

Thus, we know what we must do.

"drifted to dark side of Islamic extremism"


Dark side?

There's a bright side to Islamic "extremisim"?

I'm sure dopey Dave can point it out to us.

Hey, Daoud742,

Congratulations. You just demonstrated that Mohammad/Bledsoe was a dangerous, violent psychopath who shopped around at several different religious venues before settling on the cult that was a perfect fit for a dangerous, violent psychopath like himself.

Now can you duplicate that neat trick for the perpetrators of the other 16,000+ fatal jihadi attacks that have been committed worldwide in the nine years since 9/11?

If you can establish such a pattern, you will really be on to something.

A little OT but still about jihad. I ran across this Jihad website today, you might want to take a look. It has information about jihad by country and info about the crusades.

Be warned it comes from a humanist slant and is anti fundamentalist religion and religion in general.

History of Jihad
http://www.historyofjihad.org/canada.html?syf=contact

Also,I have always hated the PBUH after the word Mo. Here is how they use it.

* For those uninitiated, PBUH expands to Perpetual Battle Upon Hagarism (Islam) founded by the mass-murderer and pedophile pretender prophet Mohammed-ibn-Abdallah (Yimach Shmo May his name and memory be obliterated).

Beautiful, jewdog. Thank you.

//For those uninitiated, PBUH expands to Perpetual Battle Upon Hagarism//

That's funny. I had always assumed it stood for "Pedophile Between Underage Haremgirls".

I see Wellingtons point in reaction to you. But otherwise I also see the knowledge and wisdom in your post.

Still, you mentioned the Reformation and that IS what we could recommend to the Muslims, to do something like that.

If they refuse to write a New Islam, we could consider doing it for them. For the benefit of clarity for all these undecided humans who still don't see Islam's real nature OR it's great vulnerability to misunderstanding and misuse.

It would be an honest undertaking to help them, to at last give them a "clear religion", a choice, hence accountability, responsibility and a way out of staying with irresponsibly unclear "Old, normal Islam".

The idea is to show to the world that what Muslims and Islam-defenders assume and demand the rest of mankind to believe, that "old, normal Islam" is harmless, really peaceful, compatible with laws of Democratic Nations is now contradicted by mountains of evidence provided by Critical Islam Experts, who are very good and prolific about this.

And so these claims by Muslims and Islam-defenders no longer can be proven or without a clear New Islam-interpretation can not YET BE PROVEN. And that by now Muslims are hugely, yes criminally negligent to provide the world with a clear updatable interpretation of Islam. That can make its members be held accountable at last. Accountability Muslims keep ducking all the time.

And if that really IS an illusion, like you say, the world needs to be shown that Muslims can't and refuse to provide this much needed clarity about Islam.

But it is crucial that Muslims at least are seen to be having a reasonable choice! And that they are very responsible for adhering to such a potentially dangerous religion despite it's huge unclarity.

"...Muslims are not racist supremacists like most of the "chosen people" are."

BWAHAHAHAHA!

Let's see, Arab Muslims persecute and make war on black Muslims in Darfur because they are black and Christian, on Christians and Jews worldwide because they dare to not be Muslim, they hate and kill Hindus because they are polytheists, and call black people 'abd" which is Arabic for "slave" and "black".

They think they should rule over all because of their Islamicity and have exactly three options for those who are not Islamic - to be dominated, converted, or killed.

Jews make war and kill people because they are not Jewish in...um...let's see now...davethingy can't possibly be wrong...er...no, wait, don't tell me...

That was absolutely pricelss and side splittingly funny! IMHO you have just surpassed "The whacky mullah"! Cheers! ;)

Bhobby,

I am, in fact, Jewish.

I am extremely distressed about the current situation.

I realize that that posts are verbose and ineffectual.

I suffer from, and am disabled by, severe OCD, which makes everything I do, including writing, very painful and very difficult.

I am in extreme psychic, and often, physical pain, and I am socially isolated. I am maddeningly frustrated because I cannot communicate effectively.

It is very hurtful to me and distressing the way you expressed that you perceive me to be.

I wanted to be sarcastic and say "I'm sorry that my manner of behavior conformed to the idea you have of "the nice little self-effacing 'Jew'" - but I thought better of it, because I realize that sarcasm is not sincere - is not honest - and is unbeneficial.

I realize that I am not a beneficial and effective spokesperson for the Jewish people, but Jewish leaders are not protecting the Jewish people. The situation in the world - the situation that the Jewish people - the country of the Jewish people - is in is obscenely perversely horrificly surrealy. Jewish leaders - the leaders of Israel - the members of the government of Israel - could completely change the world for the better if they would just honestly, accurately, clearly, effectively tell the truth - the factual currently 90 year history and current reality of the situation.

Correction:

"...I wanted to...say...I'm sorry that my manner of behavior did not conform to the idea that you have of "the nice little self-effacing 'Jew'..."

Memphian drifted to dark side of Islamic extremism

There's a light side?

La-la-la-la-la our dave is talking to me la-la-la-la-la. I did mention I do not answer to people calling me names, didn't I? la-la-la-la.

Anyway: Robert Spencer has his focus on the following:
He makes his Islamic motivations fully clear. I didn't reproduce here the material from various learned analysts explaining how Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad has gotten jihad and Islam all wrong, wrong, wrong, because ultimately the article offers no evidence of anything that the Muslims who supposedly reject Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad's understanding of jihad are doing to make sure that other Muslims don't misunderstand Islam the way he did.

acting out the Islamic antisemitism that he learned in the Qur'an

"Memphian drifted to dark side of Islamic extremism,

"Regarding my pre-Islamic past ... I don't like to talk about it," he wrote to the newspaper. "... I was known as Bledsoe in the neighborhood and did things most teenagers do." This is where I linked to the main article to find particulars.

"I was a jihadist before I traveled to Yemen. I've loved jihad every since I became Muslim." [...] Implicit is to me that his past and tendencies are popping up here again.

Robert Spencer's focus again: Our goal is to rid the Islamic world of idols and idolaters, paganism and pagans, infidelity and infidels, hypocrisy and hypocrites, apostasy and apostates, democracy and democrats and relaunch the Islamic caliphate ... and to establish Islamic law.

That our dave thinks Mr. Spencer should have focused more on the past of Mr. Muhammad is neither here nor there. Mr. Spencer has emphasized the Jihadi motives behind the actions of Mr. Muhammad as they were clearly and most interestingly stated by the man himself; this is the intention of his post, of this blog.

la-la-la-la-la

The fun we have. I find nearly all my discussion to be rudely interrupted when the opponent begins calling me names and doubting my integrity, opinions, intentions and (blush) intelligence.

Yes... Islam-lite... I hear little dolly's talking about it at WalMart... or was that "islam is the light"? Hmmm? Maybe we could ask Jewdog... he's spearheading a JA program that involves cat grooming!

"Well, after several years in prison, after reading all of Robert Spencer's books, I've come to regret my ways. Just to keep clean, however, I have to keep away from the Koran, so I spend a lot of time grooming my cat.
Yup, it's One Day at a Time for me. No more jihad."
-audience claps-"

Love it!



just hang in there, mate.

Do you read 'Dry Bones'? Here are few things to try to cheer you up.

http://drybonesblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/first-rains-1973.html

http://drybonesblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/computer-worm.html

http://drybonesblog.blogspot.com/2008/10/sukkot-continuity.html

http://drybonesblog.blogspot.com/2007/09/sukkot-1980.html

Now, back to the jihadwatch forum.

Everybody here gets antsy at times, and some are more trigger-happy than others. Friendly fire happens. Plenty of posters have gotten mistaken for a Mohammedan, and been blasted out of the water when, for example, they did things like forgetting to use a SARC mark on a comment that ironically mimicked the Muslim POV.

Internet forums, where everyone takes a nom de plume, and where one only has to reveal as much as one chooses about oneself, or can invent - if one is so inclined - an entirely fictional persona, are jam for Mohammedans, to whom deceit is second nature. I have read most of the archives here - I came on board in late 2006, during or just after the Israel-Hezbollah war - and one of the things I've noticed is that there are two kinds of Mohammedan poster.

There are those who openly identify as such - they're the easy ones to deal with. Then there are the others who pretend to be what they ain't. The second kind can claim to be all kinds of things, and sometimes they get away with it for quite a while. Which is why you got into trouble. People were picking up your OCD, and confusing it with Muslim mannerisms; understandably, because it could be argued that the really devout Muslims are artificially *programmed* to engage in OCD-type behaviour.


Explain to me how Islam is also resonsible [sic] for Muhammed's violence before he even heard of Islam.

Not so fast Mr. 472, in some alternate universe Islam may be a peaceful religion, but that Islam is an aggressive political-religious ideology with a propensity for violent exhortation, is an indisputable fact. The evidence for it is overwhelming. Read the Qur’an, the Hadiths and the biography of Muhammad for yourself if you have not already done so. It is all there. In the Islamic writings, you will find the Manichean division of the world; the insistence upon the Islamic theocratic state; the separation of Muslins from polluted non-Muslims; the hierarchy of Infidels and their offenses; and among other detritus, the tedious list of all that Allah does not love – though no mention of love as an abstract noun. In the Qur’an Allah is the author of deceit and actually creates sinners for hell who have no hope of redemption, and seem to serve no other purpose than to entertain Allah for, “Allah does as he will.” Fancy that. Too bad for sinners.

The tone of the Qur’an is rigidly authoritarian; the supremacist intent of its message is clear, and its dualistic ethics are perfectly obvious. In the hadiths, Muhammad’s words show the chthonic undercurrent of his thought – as the barbaric nature of the punishments he favored for violations of his codes so amply illustrate. Muhammad was a savage. Maybe it is a sign of the West’s decadence, an echo of one of Rousseau’s sillier notions, that Thomas Carlyle and George Bernard Shaw found this atavistic quality in Muhammad sincere and appealing. Still, neither man found Muhammad appealing enough to become Muslim themselves. Those who would emulate Muhammad’s every behavior as faithfully as possible are savages as well. If that insults Islam generally and Muslims in particular, so be it. Muslims may blame Muhammad if they, however wrongly, would excuse themselves from their own violent actions. They are nevertheless pathetic when they do so and make Muhammad all the worse showing Islam for what it is. Islam's major problem is Muhammad.

Your request that Mr. Spencer quote from the entire article on Bledsoe is a red herring; and I do not expect to give you a sufficient explanation of Bledsoe’s violence if you cannot draw the inference from his behavior and his statements. You seem to have made up your mind already. I could say this in your defense - however mistaken I may be - you have not read the Qur’an. If you have not, then you are somewhat unarmed in this discussion and the old rules of dueling would prevent a fight with the defenseless. If you have read the Qur’an, it makes you deliberately blind. I would not say that you might be worse than blind, I would not know; but by posting on JW, you have put yourself in the arena, even if it makes this discussion unfair. In any case, in your apologia for Islam, you seem determined to ignore what Bledsoe has said.

I suppose it is possible for someone to understand the motives for violent behavior better than a perpetrator of violence does himself, but in that, you would be a seer as well as a genius. The tone in the things you write, betrays your lack of modesty, so perhaps you are a genius Mr. 472 - but it is bad sir, to claim intellectual superiority, even if you have it, and it is worse to argue that you are intellectually superior to everyone else, but offer no new twists in the argument or no new evidence. Intellectual superiority is not something that one can decently claim for oneself – it is rather like the insufferable Hillary Clinton who once said that she had “gravitas.” Your parents would be embarrassed to know that they have produced a boor.

…Let's read what a person with an IQ over 90 draws from Muhammed's pre-conversion violence and his conversion to Islam:…

I do not claim to have the highest IQ on JW, or even to have a high IQ at all, but for the purpose of this discussion, allow me to assume that I have but one point over ninety – leaving you to enlighten me as a poor unfortunate. Go ahead - edify. Write to me as if I were a child, I won’t be insulted. Please use the mighty powers of your extraordinary intellect to excogitate on Islam in such a way as to lift the crushing burden of ignorance from us at JW. We stagger Mr. 472.

Perhaps one could blame racism, or the climate of racism for Bledsoe’s behavior, though it is far more likely, that baring some mental abnormality, he was instead, very badly socialized; that may absolve Islam somewhat, but it identifies his parents, his teachers, his priests (if he had them) and his friends as the negligent, obtuse creators of an anti-social thug. Further, some of the adults around him shared his race - his parents certainly. But they can't be racists as well.Or maybe they suffered from that capitalist problem of false-consciousness identified by Marx as the condition of the oppressed. In the end, they are not to blame; Mr. Bledsoe is responsible for himself and what he chose to believe and how Islam led him to believe. He seems to have taken Islam at its word, straight up, in literal fashion, as so many Muslims do; yet no smarter Muslims disabused Mr. Bledsoe of his bad ideas.They did not do so because Bledsoe's ideas were orthodox Islam. I could admit Brian Levin’s argument if we did not have Bledsoe’s words. It is not the fallacy of composition to ask why Islam seems unable to solve personal problems when we so often hear that Islam is superior and has an answer for all that troubles the world. One would think that if Islam can solve society’s problems it might have beneficial personal effects as well. Recently, Anjem Choudary did claim that Islam is superior in an interview with CNN. JW posted the video on this site on Oct.30. Yet this superior religion did society no good in the person of Mr. Bledsoe; but we will have to wait no doubt, until every person in the world is a Muslim in order to see the benefits of the glorious Islam.

According to Mr. Spencer’s article, Bledsoe wrote:"Regarding my pre-Islamic past ... I don't like to talk about it,"[ he wrote to the newspaper.] "... I was known as Bledsoe in the neighborhood and did things most teenagers do." [...]

In his previous life, Mr. Bledsoe failed to make himself coterminous with Allah’s will. He failed to submit. If he doesn’t like to talk about his pre-Islamic past, like those Muslims who refer to pre-Islamic history as the “period of darkness,” then he must in some way be ashamed of that past, showing at least a small capacity for self-reflection or introspection. What was his period of darkness? His shame doesn't seem to have anything to do with his past violence. Did conversion to Islam help Bledsoe to know himself better? He seems to believe so. He also seems un-ravished by his conversion to the un-partnered God, * unimproved ethically with regard to non-Muslims, but still a happy Muslim and one in good standing it would seem, with other Muslims. Thus, his conversion to Islam and his devotion to the faith, seems to have made him a very good Muslim indeed. Nevertheless, Mr. Bledsoe did not really remain the same - he became worse and carried out his violence according to what the books taught him. His actions say so.

Obviously, Mr. Bledsoe did not see violence as incompatible with his Islamic faith - how lucky for him that his submission to Allah allowed him to retain his anti-social behavior - but then as a Muslim at jihad, his isn't anti-social behavior but anti-Infidel behavior in the service of Allah. No “I once was blind but now I see, - and I'll treat my fellow human beings better” for him; instead we have, "it's a war on Islam and Muslims," and "I'm proud to be a jihadist." Well where did he get those ideas but from Muhammad and the Qur'an? It seems that there has been a war on Islam from the start of Islam. Oh dear.

Islam taken in earnest, and at its word, eventually leads to evil behavior - especially where it concerns non-Muslims. It does not follow that Muslims are evil unless they strive to emulate Muhammad himself – the original Muhammad as well as this deplorable example, Mr. Bledsoe. The more devout Muslims become, the worse they are.

Islam will never have a thing to recommend it as long as its prophet is remembered and revered.

*See John Donne, sonnet 14, for the allusion.


Completely OT however, just had a friend send me a link for a movie trailer for "The Infidel", it looks like it may be rather funny and therefore right up my alley... might be a good sidebar for some much needed laughter!

dumbledoresarmy,

Thank you very much.

dumbledoresarmy,

Thank you.

"In christianity we had the reformation, we did away with all the superfluous bullshit the catholic church made up and went back to the basis, the core. Which is the bible and jesus."

"We had the reformation"? "We"???

Well, obviously not around one billion Christians who are Catholics. You, obviously, believe that Reformation is the objective platform enabling the "reformed ones" to pronounce who is and who is not Christian.

For your information there are many non-Catholic Christians and atheists who would dismiss someone who calls Catholicism "superfluous bullshit" as uneducated bullshitter. So please try to educate yourself on the subject before resorting to such silly sarcasm. It only reveals your ignorance.

Besides, there are websites dealing exclusively with denigrating Catholicism where you could impress others with your profound understanding of the nature of the Catholic bullshit. Jihad Watch should not be the place you flaunt your "reformed" understanding of Jesus and Bible. Please do go there whenever you feel the urge to relief yourself of your anti-Catholic bigotry.

BTW. Is your lower casing of Jesus and Bible part of dispensing with the "Catholic bullshit"?

Grow up, man/madam/kid.

I asked to to quote where Mr. Spencer talked about Muhammad's past. IMO, the most relevant response you came up with is this, which was quoted by Mr. Spencer:

"'Regarding my pre-Islamic past ... I don't like to talk about it,' he wrote to the newspaper. '... I was known as Bledsoe in the neighborhood and did things most teenagers do.'"

This quote does not convey the past actions of Muhammad. Using guns and knives in fights when going to middle school, punching out people's windows with brass knuckles, carrying around assault rifles in your car, and getting arrested are not things that most teenagers do. You response shows nothing.

classicus:
//I could say this in your defense - however mistaken I may be - you have not read the Qur’an.//

I have read it. I have also read about several issues that Mr. Spencer has dwelled on in the past, instead of accepting Mr. Spencer's words at face value. For example, his mistaken views on the "Gates of Ijtihad". Mr. Spencer has brought up this issue hundreds of times to defend quoting thousand year old books to show Islam's present day stance on issues.I responded to Mr. Spencer's stance here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/20753339/Gates-of-Ijtihad

He has not replied.

dave742 says in his last posting:

"classicus:
//I could say this in your defense - however mistaken I may be - you have not read the Qur’an.//
"

to which Dave 743 responds with:
"I have read it"

But Classicus also says,
If you have read the Qur’an, it makes you deliberately blind.
And that part dave743 prefers not to quote.

He doesn't have to.

The people on this thread read a story about someone who has demonstrated throughout his life that he is a violent psychopath. This person coverts to Islam and continues the same violent behavior post conversion as he did pre-conversion. THis is not surprising, because violent behavior like that shown by Mohammad cannot be switched off by any religion. Years of intense therapy would also not be able to switch off this behavior. Regardless, because he did not stop his violence immediately upon converting to Islam, then according to JW readers, Islam is to blame. JW readers have absolutely nothing to say about who or what is to blame for his pre-conversion violence.

These same JW readers tell me that I am blind. Hilarious.

Answer this hypothetical for one dollar:

Let's say Muhammed never converted to Islam, and you heard his life story up until that point. The arrests, brass knuckles through the window, the knife and gun fights, the assault weapons in the trunk. If you heard this person's story - who or what would you "blame" for his actions?

This chicken/egg question regarding Carlos' prediliction for violence doesn't change the fact that the message of Islam is to incourage violent retaliation against all enemies. He shopped religions, and found a home in Islam.

The policy in the Catholic Church, which does not allow priests to marry, was a fundemental reason that large numbers of gay and pedopheliac men were drawn toward the priesthood as if by a magnet. Although their behavior was not in accordance with Catholic doctrine, the crisis in the church now, was a result of the acceptance, aid, and support these men got from Rome.

The Muslem faith goes much further in it's responsibility for the murder of the soldier. His behavior was in accordance with the teachings. Certainly,Carlos expresses the zeal of the newly converted. Like so many Jihadists, they are more likely to give a fuller measure of devotion to the teachings of their adopted faith.

I would blame Muhammad's violent behavior on human nature. He is just one of those who are criminally engaged in violence.

This behavior happened all the time in history, as is recorded well enough. But according to Stephen Pinker, violent deadly behavior is and has been declining per average human for some time now.

But after Muhammad's conversion Islam made him worse, not better, from our viewpoint. This violent thug allied himself with Muslims and was accepted by them. Some Muslims told him there was a war against Islam. Didn't they know better than to tell that this violent gangbanger?

This blog constantly shows clues, evidence, of the detrimental influence for the rest of mankind of Islam on Muslims.

And there you come, with full denial, countless times, it seems like forever. Will you ever succeed?

You defend texts that were drawn up long before your birth, over which you had no control or responsibility. And you constantly have to defend these texts because of people who have joined your religion over whose admittance you and many so-called moderate Muslims have no control.

You then work hard to exonerate that religion from any blame for inspiring it's clearly too violent members.

But one of our reactions could well be a sustained effort to apply the same methods of denial to all the perceived "good and true" effects of Islam. The same doubting attitude that you display could be displayed to the good explanations of texts and behavior of people in Islam. And where would that leave Islam? It would make it almost totally irrelevant.

And if you only doubt the reports of bad influence of Islam and not the reports of good influence of it what does that make you?

A person who beliefs something merely on the basis of liking it and who rejects something merely for not liking it. As opposed to rationally searching for the most rational and truthful explanation. As you claim to be doing, don't you?

Sir, Islam, with its martial theology, abetted Mr. Bledsoe's violence, furnished him with a clearer target for his anti-social behavior, and gave him pride in what he hoped to accomplish for Allah.

Forget what I wrote about helping us on JW; use your prodigious intellect to write a new Qur'an instead. For the new edition, take out all the violent exhortation.

To late for you, my dear dave, you have called me too many things. I found my answer adequate concerning Mr. Muhammad's past as Bledsoe and Robert Spencer's focus. I cannot help it if you insist on digging through a concrete floor with a toothpick but do not involve me, please.

Right, one final attempt. And I do mean final: Mr. Muhammad was very aware that he was let off lightly in his youth and the prospect of years in prison scared him. By his own account. So what did he do, our religiously reborn friend? Joined an ideology offering too many opportunities for him to pick up old habits, except the new habits were far worse. Robert Spencer didn't make much of that.
Again: the focus of the post is on Mr. Muhammad's reasons and Jihadi experiences.


//I would blame Muhammad's violent behavior on human nature.//

So when a Christian engages in violence (he was raised a Christian), "human nature" is to blame. When a Muslim engages in violence, Islam is to blame.

//This violent thug allied himself with Muslims and was accepted by them.//

There is no indication that the Muslims he joined in this country knew anything about his behavior. There is no indication that he had any contact with Al Qaeda, and it specifically says in the article that some doubt it. It is possible that he did not tell a single Muslim what he was up to.

//Some Muslims told him there was a war against Islam.//

A Muslim would not need to have that said to him for him to think it. The US has 800 bases around the world and are currently at war with a handful of Muslims and threatening more. It is perfectly natural to think that there is a war against Islam.

To any new poster or lurker.

Read the whole of the article we are currently discussing (click on the link, read the lot).

Me, I filed this story in an e-file I call "the dangerous convert".

Because this bloke Bledsoe is not by any means the first or the only convert to Islam to jump into Jihad boots and all. There was a chap in the UK, of English ethnicity, convert to Islam, who was discovered to have been cooking up explosives in his kitchen (he kept the stuff - highly unstable - in a biscuit tin) and he had a suicide vest hanging up in his wardrobe. There was that convert in Alaska, with his dear wife, who was avidly compiling a list of Infidels to Assassinate. There was Shane Kent and David Hicks. And there are others, both men *and* women.

For some mysterious reason, quite a few converts to Islam seem to maintain an interest in, or develop an interest in, accumulating weapons and/ or explosive materials, and identifying people and things to be destroyed with same; something that does not seem to happen to those who become interested in Hindu or Buddhist ideas, or the Tao, or Christianity, or Judaism.

I have read David Wilkerson's "The Cross and the Switchblade" and "Run, Baby Run" by Nicky Cruz. Guess what was the first act of newly-evangelised-and-converted ex-gang members in New York City? They marched off as one to the local cop shop and ceremoniously handed in over the counter all their illegally-held weapons. Knuckle-dusters, knives and firearms, all dumped in a heap in front of the astonished NYC cop.

By contrast, what does Bledsoe do after his recruitment to the army, or gang, of Mohamed? He doesn't trot off to the cop shop to hand in weapons ...rather he actively - and surreptitiously - *acquires* weapons, to use in expanding the power of his new gang, the biggest and baddest gang on earth.

This person coverts to Islam and continues the same violent behavior post conversion as he did pre-conversion.

No, not the same - totally different. One can’t isolate human action against other humans from its motivation and from the way it is perceived by the perpetrator and others.
A typical violent psychopath is a lonely nut, shunned, detested, feared and eventually hunted down. He doesn’t discriminate between Jew, Christian or Moslem in his choice of target, but, like a mad dog, attacks anything, or rather, “anybody that moves”. His violence is amorphous and its eruption, unpredictable.
The main thing is that as long as he, like a mad dog, is dangerous to everybody there is no society, culture, civilization or ideology calling him its own, applauding and celebrating his acts, offering him moral support, or asylum. Only a violent psychopath would try to emulate him.

But his post conversion behaviour differs dramatically from the earlier one by the fact that it is unmistakably structured as it now targets particular people. But that is not the only difference. He, is not a lonely, evil nuts anymore. He found the “truth” and is now a warrior - one among many warriors. His act is perceived by him (and countless million Moslems around the world) as highly moral whereas the question of morality would never even enter his mental world before. His finding of Islam has transformed both him AND his behaviour. He now believes in right and wrong and his act are consistent with his belief.

THis is not surprising, because violent behavior like that shown by Mohammad cannot be switched off by any religion.
That is not true. Many violent, even murderous men, have been able to completely change their social interaction after becoming devoted Christians. I personally knew someone like that.

"...because he did not stop his violence immediately upon converting to Islam, then according to JW readers, Islam is to blame. JW readers have absolutely nothing to say about who or what is to blame for his pre-conversion violence.

I don’t see anyone saying that “Islam is to blame” for his not stopping his behaviour after the conversion. Rather they mean that Islam offered him and his behaviour a “rational and moral” justification.

JW readers have absolutely nothing to say about who or what is to blame for his pre-conversion violence.

That question has limited interest. Man’s moral character can only to a very limited degree be “explained” as a result of interaction of particular factors.
For example, who could even consider finding out “who or what is to blame” for prophet Muhammad’s turning into sadistic, murderous, child raping pig.
Some people are born evil.

Some people are born evil.

People like Muhammad - apparently a charmer, but born evil all the same.

He doesn't trot off to the cop shop to hand in weapons ...rather he actively - and surreptitiously - *acquires* weapons, to use in expanding the power of his new gang, the biggest and baddest gang on earth.

Exactly right DDA. Mr. Bledsoe's gang has for far too long enjoyed a respect it has never deserved.

Islamismus delendus est.

Classicus

have you read Chesterton?

Here's his book 'The Everlasting Man', available online.

http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/chesterton/everlasting/content.htm

If you haven't read it - start with Part 1, chapter 7: "the war of the gods and the demons", which is about Rome and Carthage.

http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/chesterton/everlasting/part1c7.htm

(Another Chesterton novel that I recommend is "The Flying Inn", which depicts - I kid you not - the liberation of an Islamised England. If one reads it today, the hair stands up on the back of the neck).

Dave 742:
"So when a Christian engages in violence (he was raised a Christian), "human nature" is to blame. When a Muslim engages in violence, Islam is to blame."

Not exactly, my and our argument is that "human nature" is everywhere, among all religions. But it seems to us that ....

Islam has an exacerbating, detrimental influence on the behavior of it's newly converted members instead of some neutral, ameliorating, beneficial influence. In regard to non-Muslims that is.

The rest of your post is denial again. The other Muslims need not have known about his past and need not have told him there was a war on Muslims going on.

Your argument is about persons, or religions, being innocent until proven guilty.

But when there is a dangerous situation or a situation which is constantly detrimental, the situation becomes different. Then it is irresponsible for authorities to assume persons are harmless until proven harmful.

But still the persons involved, Muslims in this case, do have their civil rights, just as anybody else, OK. People must be only reasonably held accountable. Then discrimination against them is justified. As discrimination against speeding or drunk drivers is justified.

There now exists many good blogs and books which show mountains of evidence, or at least clues, steadily growing, about the influence of Islam and Muslims on their adherents. Detrimental to (the rights of) the other Citizens of Democratic Nations.

By now, under these circumstances, equivalent mountains of denial from Muslims seem to be inadequate, what with the danger and violation of human rights of others by Muslims.

Moreover, mountains of denial can also be levied against any perceived beneficial influence of Islam on persons.

Like when Bryan Levin said: "Oh, you see hear an example of the fanatic, not of the faith. Islam has got nothing to with his behavior, he only contorted it." Fine.

Now we can say: "Oh, look, how nice behaved many Muslims are, but we see only law abiding citizens here, not the faith. Islam has got nothing with their behavior, they only modified it".

That's what Muslims deserve when they only play this massive denial-of-bad-influence-of-Islam-game. Bad influence on Muslims for other Citizens.

For intelligent Muslims it can be argued that it's not reasonable any more to deny massively bad influence of very UNCLEAR, INCOMPLETE, SELF-CONTRADICTING, AMBIGUOUS most important guiding texts of Islam. When it seems so obvious because of a huge preponderance of evidence.

Evidence caused by co-religionists, on whose membership Muslims put almost no conditions, in whose religion-organisation the both terrorists and apologists shamelessly remain.

It seems to me it is going to be fair to hold Muslims accountable for their own membership of this religion-organisation. Which neglects improving and updating its very faulty message and which keeps allowing in it all those proven and highly likely offenders. Offenders, in the sense of oppression of religious minorities and women, and terroristic intentions and acts.

Muslims should be pressured to earn trust and respect by .... writing much better and clearer interpretations of Islam and putting high conditions on membership of a NEW ISLAM-organisation.

Hey Daniel, don't worry about what anyone else thinks. I too have a medical condition that makes it incredibly difficult to post what I want to say but I do it anyway. Every warrior for the cause is important and every warrior for Israel is too. I hope you find a way to keep on posting and BTW I have found a number of your posts absolutely enlightening.

muhammad wrote the book on criminal behavior ...err, the quran.

Thank you for the recommendation dumbledoresarmy. I have not read "The Everlasting Man" or "The Flying Inn."

I did click on the link you provided and went straightaway to chapter seven. The first line is very germane to the general themes on JW and perhaps explains why so many people do not understand some of the motivations behind the Islamist threat. Chesterton wrote:

The materialist theory of history, that all politics and ethics are the expression of economics, is a very simple fallacy indeed.

The last time I was in France, I spent about a week of my trip in the Massif Central and the Dordogne. One afternoon, I went to the village of Conques to see the Romanesque Abbaye de Ste-Foy with its well-known tympanum and reliquary. Conques is one of the many stops on the Chemin de Ste-Jacques de Campostelle. As I walked the village, it was impossible not to think of the discomfort of those early pilgrims. It is difficult now, to imagine modern Westerners going anywhere for a religious purpose - least of all by walking. I don't think I could explain to a through and through materialist how travel on the Chemin de Ste-Jacques was not for edification or entertainment.

Another striking thing from Chesterton was:

If the Romans were ruthless, it was in a true sense to an enemy, and certainly not merely a rival. They remembered not trade routes and regulations, but the faces of sneering men; and hated the hateful soul of Carthage.

Bledsoe-Muhammad and the most devout of his gang have very hateful souls indeed; and they seem willing to travel anywhere to carry out their hateful Islamic intent. Who put that hate there for non-Muslims but the original Muhammad?


when*pigs*fly,

Thank you for your support. It is a support for me.

Leave a comment

NOTE: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.







Not Peace But A Sword by Robert SpencerDid Muhammad Exist? The Muslim Brotherhood in America, by Robert SpencerIslamophobia: Thoughtcrime of the Totalitarian FutureMuslim Persecution of Christians, by Robert Spencer Obama and IslamThe Ground Zero Mosque: Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks
The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran


Stealth Jihad


The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam


The Truth About Muhammad


What they’re saying about Robert Spencer
“My comrade-in-arms, my pal, my buddy.”
Oriana Fallaci

“Robert Spencer incarnates intellectual courage when, all over the world, governments, intellectuals, churches, universities and media crawl under a hegemonic Universal Caliphate’s New Order. His achievement in the battle for the survival of free speech and dignity of man will remain as a fundamental monument to the love of, and the self-sacrifice for, liberty.”
Bat Ye’or

“Robert Spencer is indefatigable. He is keeping up the good fight long after many have already given up. I do not know what we would do without him. I appreciate all the intelligence and courage it takes to keep going despite the appeasement of the West.”
Ibn Warraq

“America's most informed, fearless, and compelling voice on modern jihadism.”
Andrew C. McCarthy, Senior Fellow at National Review Institute

“Robert Spencer is the leading voice of scholarship and reason in a world gone mad. If the West is to be saved, we will owe Robert Spencer an incalculable debt.”
Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs

"The consummate Islam critic and expert." — Bruce Bawer

“Over the years, we have become friends, and I have received his assistance on several pieces of legislation I proposed.”
Former Congressman Tom Tancredo

“Few people are capable of applying scholarship, analytical reasoning, and objectivity to their topic -- while simultaneously being readable and witty -- as can Robert Spencer.”
Raymond Ibrahim

“A national treasure...The acclaimed scholar of Islam.”
Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy

“I am indeed honored to call him my friend.”
Brad Thor, novelist

“A top American analyst of Islam....A serious scholar...I learn from him.”
Daniel Pipes

“A brilliant scholar and writer.”
Douglas Murray

"One of my best teachers."
Ashraf Ramelah, Voice of the Copts

“Thank God there’s at least one man with balls left in the West.”
Kathy Shaidle, Five Feet of Fury

“I read people like [Mark Steyn] and Bob Spencer and the rest of them, and I say, ‘Boortz, you’re pretending you’re an author. These people really are. They really write some entertaining, some standup stuff.’”
Neal Boortz

“Robert Spencer is the Stephen King of Jihad.”
Chris Gaubatz, Muslim Mafia

“Armed with facts and fearlessness, Spencer stands up for Western civilization.”
Michelle Malkin

“Widely read in conservative foreign policy circles.”
New York Times

“Widely read in many quarters in Washington.”
Washington Post

“A canny operative who likely has the inside track on the State Department’s Middle East affairs desk should the tea party win the White House.”
New York Magazine

“A hero of the American right.”
Karen Armstrong

"The leading anti-Islamic intellectual in the United States....The go-to Islam expert for the right wing."
Salon Magazine

“Robert Spencer is an Edward Said turned upside down.”
Stephen Suleyman Schwartz

“One of the nation's most notorious Islamophobes.”
Hamas-linked CAIR

"Geller and Spencer are probably the most important propagandizing Islamophobes in the world. These people's voices speak very loudly — not just here in the United States but overseas."
Heidi Beirach, Southern Poverty Law Center

“Satanic ignoramus.”
Khaleel Mohammed

“The Likud anti-Christ.”
Dar al-Hayat newspaper (Saudi Arabia)

“Zionist Crusader, missionary of hate, counter-Islam consultant.”
Al-Qaeda’s Adam Gadahn, “Azzam the American”



Follow me on Twitter
facebook islam
RSS feed

Monthly Archives



Donate
Jihad Watch is a 501 (c) 3 organization. Donations are tax-deductible.


Robert Spencer debates on The Quran Teaches WarVideo: Robert Spencer on CPAC Breitbart News
SIOAFreedom Defense InitiativeJihad Watch VideosAmerican Freedom Law Center
Note: Listing here does not imply endorsement of every view expressed at every linked site.

» ACT for America
» Always on Watch
» American Center for Democracy
» American Coptic Association
» American Council for Kosovo
» American Freedom Alliance
» American Freedom Law Center
» American Islamic Forum for Democracy
» American Sheepdogs
» American Thinker
» Americans Against Hate
» Americans for Legal Immigration
» Amerisrael
» Amillennialist Contra Mundum
» Annaqed
» A New Dark Age Is Dawning
» Answering Islam
» Answering Muslims
» Anti-CAIR
» Apostates of Islam
» Aramaic Broadcasting Network (ABN)
» Armies of Liberation
» Assyrian International News Agency
» Atlas Shrugs
» Atour — The State of Assyria
» Australian Islamist Monitor
» Biafra Nation
» Blazing Cat Fur
» Bosch Fawstin
» Brad Thor
» Brussels Journal
» CAIR Watch
» Campus Watch
» Caroline Glick
» Christians Under Attack
» Citizen Warrior
» Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights
» Conservative Nation News
» Copts.com
» Creeping Sharia
» Daniel Pipes
» David Horowitz Freedom Center
» The David Project
» David Thompson
» David Yerushalmi Law
» D. C. Watson
» Dearborn Underground
» DEBKAfile
» Dhimmitude.org
» Dry Bones
» Ellis Washington Report
» Europe News
» Eye On Islam
» Ezra Levant
» Faith Freedom International
» Father Zakaria
» Federale
» Five Feet of Fury
» Foundation for Democracy in Iran
» Free Congress Foundation
» The Free Copts
» Freedom Defense Initiative
» FrontPage Magazine.com
» Geert Wilders
» Genocide1915.info
» Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center
» History of Jihad
» Hizb ut-Tahrir Watch
» Honest Reporting
» Honor Killings
» Human Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities
» India Defence
» Infidel Blogger’s Alliance
» Infidels Are Cool
» The Intelligence Summit
» International Analyst Network
» International Free Press Society
» Internet Haganah
» The Investigative Project on Terrorism
» IOwnTheWorld.com
» IranPressNews
» Iran va Jahan
» Islam Review
» Islam Speaks
» Islam Versus Europe
» Islam Watch
» Islamic Terrorism in India
» Islamist Watch — Middle East Forum
» Israel Matzav
» JihadOnBuddhists.org
» Kejda Gjermani
» KRSI: Radio Sedaye Iran
» Liberated
» Logan's Warning
» Looking At the Left
» Mahdi Watch
» Mapping Sharia
» Mark Steyn
» Martin Kramer
» MEMRI TV
» Middle East Facts
» Middle East Quarterly
» Middle-East-Info.org
» Middle East Media Research Institute
» Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA)
» Militant Islam Monitor
» Morning Star
» Muhammad Tube
» The Muslim Issue
» Muslim World Today
» Myths and Facts
» National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition
» NewsReal Blog
» No Mosques At Ground Zero
» Nonie Darwish
» Northeast Intelligence Network
» Occidental Jihadist
» One Jerusalem
» Open Speech
» Operation Give
» Operation Gratitude
» Organiser
» Orwellian Culture
» Palestinian Media Watch
» PamelaGeller.com
» Panun Kashmir
» Pedestrian Infidel
» The People's Cube
» The People of the Book
» Persecution Project
» Political Islam
» Politically Incorrect
» Politiskt Inkorrekt
» Q Society of Australia
» Radio Farda
» Radio Jihad
» RAWA: Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
» Raymond Ibrahim
» Red Alerts
» Refugee Resettlement Watch
» Religion of Peace
» Republican Riot
» Reuters Middle East Watch
» The “Reverend” Jim Sutter
» SANE: Society of Americans for National Existence
» The Second Draft
» Shire Network News
» SITE Intelligence Group
» Small Wars Journal
» Smoke-Filled World
» The Snooper Report
» Snow Report Blog
» StandWithUs
» Steve Lackner
» The Stiletto Blog
» STOP! Honour Killings
» Sultan Knish
» Tell the Children the Truth
» Terrorism Awareness Project
» Theodore’s World
» Tom Gross Media
» Translating Jihad
» Una via per Oriana
» Undaunted
» United States Central Command
» Urban Infidel
» Walid Shoebat
» Winds of Jihad
» Women Against Shariah
» World Council for the Cedars Revolution
» Yid With Lid
» Z Street
» Zilla of the Resistance
» Zionist Conspiracy
Crucified Again by Raymond IbrahimDavid LittmanOriana Fallaci Thousands of Deadly Terror Attacks Since 9/11The incredible Reza Aslan automated insult generator! iGoogle Gadget
Site Meter