Spencer to speak at Texas A&M, Muslim Brotherhood-linked Muslim Students Association declines invitation to debate

"I always knew" they'd punk out-or if they showed up-look for a soft soft on the canvas to fall down on.

On page 672 (992 in the Arabic) of the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad, he says

...kill those who disbelieve in God.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

On page 222 (326 in the Arabic) of the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad, he affirms that those who do not follow him will be slaughtered.

Abu jahl said to them: "Muhammad alleges that if you follow him you will be kings of the Arabs and the Persians. Then after death you will be raised to gardens like those of the Jordan. But if you do not follow him you will be slaughtered, and when you are raised from the dead you will be burned in the fire of hell." The apostle [Muhammad] came out to them with a handful of dust saying: "I do say that."

Islam has spent 1,350 years lying. Islam is founded on a lie - that Mohammed was given recycled revelations in a shiny new package.

So, facing the truth about their lies in an open debate would be highly embarrassing.

Moslem goliaths are scared of non-Muslim davids slinging the truth at them. They would rather sling mud and hope some sticks.

"their motive is not to understand what we believe. Without the resolve to understand the other side"...

That means submission to Islam. Nothing else.

When the truth about Islam reaches Infidel ears...Muslims just hate it...

"Debate? We don't need no stinkin' debate!"

- Apologies to John Huston "Treasure of the Sierra Madre"

Totalitarianists having a debate? That is a non-sequitur.

Celebrity writer and internet sensation Danios of LoonWatch.com threw down the gauntlet recently, challenging Mr. Hugh Fitzgerald, regular contributor to JW, to a debate on Robert Spencer's works. Says Danios:

"I accepted Spencer’s challenge to a debate on June 17th, 2010. Since then, several influential Muslim-American spokesmen have expressed their interest in such a debate between Spencer and I. This includes Ahmed Rehab (Executive Director of CAIR-Chicago), who issued a scathing statement against Spencer. However, it has now been over 135 days since I accepted Robert Spencer’s challenge. JihadWatch has generated excuse after excuse as to why this radio debate cannot take place.

The latest set of excuses was that I must reveal who I am before a debate can take place. Spencer issued this pre-condition knowing full well that I value my anonymity too much to do that. He naturally thought that this was a creative way to get out of a debate with me while at the same time saving face. Said Spencer:

"Sorry, I don’t debate fictional characters or pseudonyms. “Danios of Loonwatch” can go debate Scot Harvath or Harold Robbins."

This is of course strange since Hugh Fitzgerald, the Vice President of JihadWatch since 2004, himself operates under an anonymous pseudonym. Fitzgerald is a co-administrator of the site, alongside Spencer. Is Fitzgerald then a “fictional character” who is only worthy of debate with Scot Harvath or Harold Robbins?

If that is the case, I challenge Hugh Fitzgerald–co-administer and Vice President of JihadWatch–to a radio debate. The topic will be Jihad, “Dhimmitude”, and Taqiyya (Stealth Jihad), namely chapters 1-4 of Robert Spencer’s book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades).

Hugh Fitzgerald of JihadWatch uses a pseudonym like myself, and he remains completely anonymous like myself. Surely two “fictional characters” are worthy of debating each other, right?"

; we hope that we can have a worldwide movement where Muslims say 'We're no longer going to practice violent verses that are in the Quran.'"

Two things...He is admitting that Mahoundians do practice the violent verses...and he is committing an act of apostasy for saying that...From Reliance of the Traveler on Islamic law...
On the list of things that constitute apostasy...

(7) to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus belongs to it, or to add a verse that does not belong to it;

I think someone is in big trouble with Allah...

"...just as Christians have denounced and no longer practice bad things in their holy books; we hope that we can have a worldwide movement where Muslims say 'We're no longer going to practice violent verses that are in the Quran.'"

The problem is, with Christianity, in the New Testament, Jesus himself denounced violence and thus, abrogated earlier violent verses in the Bible.

In the quran, on the other hand, muhammad denounced his own earlier, peaceful verses and replaced them with more violent, intolerant verses.

So, if a Christian practices those earlier, violent verses in the Bible, he is violating the teachings of Jesus. If a muslim practices the earlier, peaceful verses in the quran, he is violating the teachings of muhammad.

Islam is in exact contrast to Christianity.

Here again we have yet another example of the brittle nature of Islam. As Robert has pointed out on numerous occasions, if Muslims have the upper hand in both truth and argument, they could easily refute him point by point, thereby demolishing him intellectually and rendering him useless forever more to the anti-jihadist cause. That Muslims, time after time, group after group, refuse to do this, notwithstanding their constant braggadochio that their debating Spencer would be analogous to their being a MLB team playing a Little League team of pre-teens, speaks volumes. They can't back up their claims.

People are noticing. At at each refusal more and more become convinced of the truthfulness of what Spencer is saying, reinforced by the witness of their own eyes at what Muslims do day in and day out to non-Islamic believers all over the world.

What the Texas A&M MSA fears, is the enlightenment the debate will bring to it's audience.

It's a debate between trying to justify lies and revealing the truth.

Godspeed Robert, but watch your back....
Islam prefers threats and violence to debate.

The Muslim students know only too well that they can't defend themselves against somebody who is armed with the actual truth; that is why Muslims won't debate.

They have to fall back on the weapons of Political Correctness and accusations of racism and religious intolerance - in other words, they use the weapons that leaders in the West have given them to use against ourselves.

For all their talk of Jihad, they won't fight openly and cleanly with the facts. It's not so much cowardice as it is fear that more people will come to see what the Koran actually says and that Spencer is right. So they hide behind 'civil' and religious rights that say they don't have to explain.

I'm not going to play the Muslims' game. Blind Freddy can see the murderous hate for Christians, and for Jews, and for all non-Muslims, simply steaming off the pages of the Islamic 'sacred' texts. (And their traditional interpretations generally make them even worse, more vicious, cruel and hateful).

Wafa Sultan, apostate from Islam, describes allah as "A God Who Hates". 1400 years of blood and screams and mountains of dead bodies says she's right.

Perhaps the Muslim would care to explain why zealous allahu-akbaring Mohammedans threw a hand grenade into a room full of unarmed Christians, in a church in Iraq?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq-church-20101102,0,7651697.story

'Iraqi survivors tell of hiding in priests' dressing room amid gunfire, blasts'

"...Many parishioners dived beneath the pews seeking cover. But the dozen or so gunmen, some wearing vests covered with explosives and carrying grenades and other weapons, took aim at the scrambling congregation.

"Those who couldn't find a place to hide were killed," Mikhal said...

"An hour into the attack, militants inside the church roared, "God is great! God is great!" A fresh explosion jolted the building. Screams rang out.

"Selim thought a suicide bomber had blown himself up. Mikhal was near Selim and tried to calm her with prayers.

"People started crying in their hiding place and the gunmen discovered them. Someone lobbed a grenade into the middle of the room."

Fun, fun, fun as the glorious mujahedin killed, killed, killed. (And although the Iraqi security forces - with the Americans - went into the church, one wonders whether they'd have done anything much, if a church full of Christians were attacked and there were no Americans there to see it. After all: one of the Iraqi military police seems to have been complicit in the attack; and the attackers were described, in one report, as wearing 'uniforms'. The Egyptian Muslim police and army do diddly-squat to assist or to protect Copts who are being attacked by Muslim mobs; and the Pakistani Muslim police and judiciary likewise tend to look in the other direction when Christians or Hindus are attacked and abused, and murdered, by Muslims.)

Hey, maybe we can discuss Beslan. Here's a very detailed account, based on testimony of the survivors, of what the Mohammedans got up to, when they had hundreds of unarmed people, most of them children, to play with.

http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0606BESLAN_140

Or we could discuss what was done in Mumbai, to an unarmed Jewish rabbi and his heavily pregnant wife, in Nariman House.

Sadistic murder, all in the accursed name of 'allah' and the world-conquest let's-hate-and-enslave-everybody grand programme of the long-dead-and-rotted warlord, sadist, rapist, slave-taker and robber abu 'l kasem, diagnosed by Maimonides as Ha Meshugga, the Mad One, known as Mohammed to the Mohammedans.

Islam is, at its core, a de facto human sacrifice cult. Here is something from a popular hadith collection, sold at online Islamic bookshops.

"When judgment day arrives, Allah will give every Muslim a Jew or Christian to kill so that the Muslim will not enter into hell fire." -- Mohammed (Mishkat Al-Messabih, vol. 2, no. 5552.)

Here is the Sahih Muslim -

Sahih Muslim, Book 037, Number 6665: 
Abu Musa' reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: When it will be the Day of Resurrection Allah would deliver to every Muslim a Jew or a Christian and say: That is your rescue from Hell-Fire.

Sahih Muslim, Book 037, Number 6666: 
Abu Burda reported on the authority of his father that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: No Muslim would die but Allah would admit in his stead a Jew or a Christian in Hell-Fire.

'Umar b. Abd al-'Aziz took an oath: By One besides Whom there is no god but He, thrice that his father had narrated that to him from Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him).

But some Muslims just can't wait:

‘Adel Amastaibou [a French Muslim] took out a long knife and stabbed Sebastien Salem [a Jewish Muslim, who had foolishly thought Adel was his 'friend' and colleague] repeatedly in the chest, killing him.

'He went upstairs to his mother's apartment and told her and then the police when they arrived, "I killed a Jew, I will go to paradise. Allah made me do it."’.

Here is a summary of the comments,

A man is taking a walk in Central park in New York. Suddenly he sees a little girl being attacked by a pit bull dog . He runs over and starts fighting with the dog. He succeeds in killing the dog and saving the girl's life. A policeman who was watching the scene walks over and says: "You are a hero, tomorrow you can read it in all the newspapers: "Brave New Yorker saves the life of little girl" The man says: - "But I am not a New Yorker!" "Oh ,then it will say in newspapers in the morning: 'Brave American saves life of little girl'" – the policeman answers. "But I am not an American!" – says the man. "Oh, what are you then? " The man says: - "I am a Saudi !" The next day the newspapers says: "Islamic extremist kills innocent American dog.

Checking back on this thread I see that DDA has summed it up in her ususal concise & eloquent style.

I just want to add, DOI and Venus: People who refuse allegiance or even friendliness to America have no business living here. If you place your first allegiance to your sick islamic "religion" before the best interests of this country, then you are no more than enemy agents on our soil. I would have you deported before you could say, "Allahu Akbar."

There won't be any sharia law here, EVER.
If you can't deal with that, feel free to leave. You won't be missed...

ADD says 'I am not blind.' Very happy to hear that, but probably you wont be happy to hear this: I am not,either.

Muslims are forbidden to say lies about their religion ADD, as for some group of people, I am sure I made my point clear enough earlier starting with; "Here is a summary of the comments".

By the way George, who said I am in the US? Also, I remember reading your constitution which offers the freedom of religion. What happened to you? Are you not any more a citizen of that country? As I mentioned before, that is all about how fair you are, and obviously you have proven that well. Muslims in the US want nothing but good for their country.
'There won't be any sharia law here, EVER.', you said. I dont understand what makes you angry then, and why is this afford to stop if it will never exist?

Is there anyone here who thought Michael Mackay AKA Abdullah Mikhail wouldn't eventually come sneaking back?

Venus says Muslims 'aren't allowed to tell lies about their religion'.

ROFLMAO.

Muslims lie, lie, lie, lie, lie. They lie to themselves, to each other, and especially to us the infidels...usually in order to try to do us harm, since if we're harmed, the Ummah benefits.

A couple of dissections of examples of Muslims blatantly misrepresenting Islam.

Here's an analysis of the pretty-pretty 'Discovering Islam' posters which appear at pretty well every mosque 'open day' and da'wa and 'interfaith' event, which exposes them for the fresh, hot, smokin' lies that they are.

http://revuse.wetpaint.com/page/Discover%20Islam?t=anon

And here's another discussion, by the same astute observer, of a pretty clear case of a Muslima telling lies about the deen.

http://revuse.wetpaint.com/page/Ten+Questions+for+the+Muslim+Next+Door?t=anon

Now, on the subject of deception in Islam, a scholarly article by a scholar who is fluent in Arabic:

http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war

'How Taqiyya Alters Islam's Rules of War'

Oh, and here is an ex-Muslim, Nonie Darwish, speaking of what she heard and saw:

My Call to the Left at UC Berkeley 
By Nonie Darwish

FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, October 25, 2007

http://frontpagemag.com/articles/Read.aspx?GUID=17069DA6-6C04-4E06-81C7-010C9F29AD55

"On Arab TV, I once saw a Muslim preacher telling little children that lying is not allowed except under three conditions

"1- Lying to non-Muslims when it is in the best interest of Islam.

"2- Lying to Muslims if it will end conflict between them.

"And 3rd: Lying to one’s wife to improve the relationship.

"Lying thus has become an obligation in international relationships, Muslim relationships and family relationships. Any wonder why Muslims were silent after 9/11? Those who expose the lying game are considered traitors.

"By allowing lying, Muslims have created a culture unable to distinguish between lies from truth; truth has become a convoluted game of saving face for the best interest of Islam."