Tonight: the Zayed-Spencer Debate

debate-ad-jan28th.jpg

It ain’t exactly the Thrilla in Manila, or even Wasilla, but tonight I’ll be debating the Islamic supremacist writer Moustafa Zayed, who has written a book that he claims is a refutation of my book The Truth About Muhammad. His is entertainingly entitled The Lies About Muhammad, and when you read it, that’s exactly what you get.

The topic to be debated tonight is “Muhammad taught that Muslims must wage war against and subjugate unbelievers.” I’ll be arguing in the affirmative, and Zayed, presumably, in the negative.

I have debated Zayed before, although it wasn’t a one-on-one: some details are here, but the video seems to have been removed, so you can’t see him go down in flames just now. (I’ll see if I can find it and restore it asap, if it is still available.)

So if you enjoy seeing one man speak the truth and another man retail an endless barrage of obfuscations, denials, detours, falsehoods and personal attacks, watch the fun tonight at 8PM Eastern on ABN. (Video teaser here.) I’ll be the one with the truth.

FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    After all the facts, all the slashing away at the lies, half truths and wilted gardenias of distortion that he’ll throw at you, a bit of ad hominem but factually accurate humor would certainly be called for. There’s a funny article today that uses just this today over at americanthinker.com. Here it is:

    January 28, 2011
    Sharks Are Not Misunderstood Dolphins, and Islam Is Not a Religion of Peace
    By Kevin DuJan

    I’ve often been told rumors from very old, wise people about a time, long before I was born, when “Saturday Night Live” was both funny and relevant.  It’s hard to believe, but in those unimaginably distant days deep into the past, Chevy Chase played a Land Shark who wore various disguises in attempts to break into people’s apartments and eat them.  When subterfuge and gimmicks failed, he just lied and told various idiots he was a dolphin.

    [Knock, knock]

    “Who’s there?  It’s not that Land Shark I’ve heard about, is it?”

    “Nope.  Just a candygram, Ma’am.”

    “Candygram?  I’ve never heard of such a thing.  I think you are that Land Shark.”

    “No, Ma’am.  I am just a misunderstood dolphin.”

    “A dolphin?  Well, okay then.  No cause for alarm if you are only a dolphin.  I certainly wouldn’t want to appear to be species-ist by having reservations about trusting a dolphin.”

    In case you haven’t seen it in late-night reruns, that scene ends with a monstrous foam shark head bursting through the door to devour Jane Curtin, Gilda Radner, Laraine Newman, Lily Tomlin, and other unsuspecting New York City victims in one hungry gulp.

    Whenever there’s a new Islamic terrorist attack somewhere in the world (and that’s somewhat redundantly phrased because just about the only terrorist attacks that occur in this world are Islamic, unless of course you have heard of murder sprees the Amish and Buddhists often go on whenever someone draws a cartoon they don’t like or names a dog after a self-proclaimed prophet they revere…oh wait, no, those are Muslims who do that, as usual…never mind), I always think of this dusty old SNL skit.  The American media deliberately plays the role of stunned bystander shocked that there really was a Land Shark at the door.

    The idiots.

    No matter how many times the delusional fools in the American media try to convince you otherwise, sharks are not misunderstood dolphins, and Islam is not a religion of peace. 

    I think that even the media knows this, on some level, because I’ve noticed that few journalists ever cover Islamic terror attacks the way they’d report on other murder sprees and tragedies committed by non-Muslims. 

    In the case of the latter, great effort is made to explain precisely why someone like Jared Lee Loughner picked up a gun, killed six, and injured a dozen more in his assassination attempt on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.  His parents, friends, teachers, distant relatives, acquaintances, and kindergarten teacher, and a kid who sat next to him for an hour and a half on the ride to summer camp fifteen years ago, are all scrutinized for clues into his behavior, then blamed for being bad influences on him.  The media stokes an abusive outrage against these people — the parents in particular — for not catching the warning signs that could have prevented these murders.  Simultaneously, the media and the left join together in politicizing the tragedy, invoking Rahm Emanuel’s corollary to the Alinsky Rules for Radicals that no good crisis should go to waste.  This means that in addition to the people a murderer like Loughner actually knew, the entire conservative movement in this country must also be held responsible for this single man’s actions, including people Loughner never met, spoke to, or even knew much about, like Governor Sarah Palin.

    When a Muslim commits an act of mass-murdering terrorism, in contrast, the left does not camp out in front of the shooter/assassin/bomber’s home and scrutinize every person he ever in his life came in contact with and blame them all for his actions.  Instead, the media personalities report on acts of terrorism the way they do shark attacks.

    When great whites gobble a surfer or menace a beach somewhere, the media runs footage of vacationers running screaming from the water, family members of the victims shocked and in tears huddled together by the lifeguard station, and plenty of stock footage of ambulances racing to hospitals with helicopters overhead surveying the carnage.

    No effort is made to track down the family of the sharks responsible for the attacks, and not much effort at all is made to get inside the mind of the sharks to figure out why they did what they did, or to pretend Governor Palin was behind it after all, just as everyone in the media suspected.  Palin is behind everything, you know, except the things the media likes, which she’s singlehandedly responsible for making less likable just because she’s breathing.  Always breathing, somewhere, living rent-free in the media’s nightmares.

    There is no attempt in the media to connect shark attacks to any political ideology, because the sharks are of course brutes composed entirely of teeth, fins, and bite, churning the waters with blood, guts, and foam because that’s just what sharks do.  Everyone accepts that, even the most delusional bleeding hearts in the media ranks.

    Sharks are just animals.  Animals like sharks kill people sometimes.  It’s horrific and frightening, but there’s no one to blame.  After a day in the headlines, it’s back to reporting on how terrible the Tea Party is and how Governor Palin hunts werewolves from helicopters she, Todd, and her children make themselves in their backyard in Wasilla — or some other nonsense the likes of Ashley Judd are bound to parrot at the next red-carpet gala.  “Did you hear what Sarah Palin did now?”  Because the entire Palin family has been ascribed everything the media elite detest about regular, hardworking Americans, including the twisted fixation the media has on the conceit that these regular Americans are virulent racists.

    But have you realized how intensely condescending and bigoted the left is toward Muslims in all of its reporting?  The actions of a non-Muslim mass murderer like Loughner are pinned on everyone he ever met (and conservatives like Governor Palin whom he never in fact met), but the carnage caused by Muslims and sharks alike isn’t blamed on anyone or anything and just chalked up to “tragedy.”  Nothing more to see here, just move along now, and stay out of the water or don’t get on an airplane for a while, and you’ll be just fine.

    The reason terrorist attacks are reported on with the same style of coverage reserved for shark attacks is because the left sees both sharks and Muslims as just dumb animals who do what they do, unexpectedly, in gruesome fashion, without any blame assigned for their actions.

    Sharks aren’t people who can be held accountable for what they do — and neither are Muslims in the eyes of the left.

    When is the last time you saw MSNBC devote hour-long news specials to the parents, friends, teachers, and other relatives of Muslim terrorists responsible for mass murders and assorted bombings?  When was the last time CNN scheduled an in-depth look into the Koran and the very clear recipes for murder and mayhem contained in its instructive pages?  Probably about the last time the Discovery Channel set aside a night of Shark Week to explore the familial relations of the deep’s apex predators and why their behavior is influenced by blowfish with chalkboards or barracudas who put targets on treasure maps at the bottom of the sea.

    If a big story about some explosive, horrific event comes knocking at the door, rest assured the New York Times and rest of the dinosaur media will first ask if a Muslim’s involved before they decide on the course and tone of their coverage.

    If it’s a member of the “Religion of Peace” who blew dozens to pieces, then the trusty old shark attack template for reporting is dusted off, with no blame assigned to anyone or anything for this lone animal’s aggressive actions. 

    If it’s anyone at all with a link to conservatism who held the gun or lit the fuse, especially anyone connected to Governor Palin, no matter how remotely, then the story is covered obsessively, for months, with the full resources of the Gray Lady dumped into an indictment of every Republican less than a thousand miles away from the scene of the crime.

    It is as predictable and tired as a stale old “Saturday Night Live” skit.

    Only it’s half as funny, and ten times as stomach-turningly tragic. 

  2. says

    I am still ignorant to what it is that ordinary Muslims pray for every day. Do they wish for harm to fall upon their non-Muslim neighbors/co-workers/acquaintances, and re-declare their political affiliation with Islamic supremacists?

    Do Islamic supremacists more closely resemble the pro-slavery political block or the pro-abolition political block from our own history on March 5, 1790? (See Congress’ response to Benjamin Franklin’s petition in favor of abolition.) To whom would a pro-abolition Islamic supremacist make an appeal for elimination of objectionable features of the Koran, and to objectionable features of daily prayers? (Or, is a pro-abolition Islamic supremacist just like a Unicorn?)

  3. says

    Got to see the song-and-dance last night when a few of us monkey-wrenched a presentation by Muslim Student Association stooges trying to do taqiyya-dawah on students and parents at a local public high school. There were two presenters and each read a piece from the Koran in Arabic, though 95% of the audience didn’t understand Arabic. Very hypnotic with that sing-song quality and sort of muted drone. Then read in English the Adam-and-Eve equivalent Sura. (First snicker line: “Islam began in Arabia and then spread very fast.”)

    They guy then started asking “who-knows-what” questions of the audience and throwing candy bars to the “winners”. The Moonies could learn things from these people. Whenever they wanted to illustrate “special” small groups they dragged in the Amish. When confronted with some of the quotes from the MSA Western Conference that have been reported over on Atlas the female speaker claimed it was all “out of context”, and tried to equate the Nation of Islam speakers’ calls for “civil disobedience” to Henry David Thoreau. These questions so angered the school club co-ordinator that she told the audience they could ask “nice” questions, or leave. This was in a public school.

    The guy tried to claim that the slaves who were brought to the US were all Muslims. He mentioned “muslim sects” and claimed to be bi-Sunni-Shia. The female speaker droned on about “diversity”, “ethnicity”, students finding their ethnic/religious “identity”, the “challenges” they face post-9/11. When asked about muslim self-isolation, she switched to but-we-are-still-good-Americans mode. Sharia was equated with “rabbinical law” (to the outrage of the elderly Jewish couple sitting in front of us), they blamed the Saudis for any “abuses”, and claimed it was all just related to “personal life”. There followed an extended reading of the creation-of-man-and-sin-and-forgiveness-and-going-to-heaven part of the Koran with emphasis on “free will” but no mention of free will having been ditched from Muslim theology a millenium ago. Shirk got skimmed over very quickly as “idolatry”. This was essentially dawah, but the organizer would probably have been as indifferent to that as she was to our free speech rights.

    All in all an enlightening evening. These people certainly do have lying, equivocation, manipulation, and question-dodging down to a science. Hope we at least put a few dents in the bandwagon.

  4. says

    I know you will ask your learned opponent about this verse, but I would love to hear his response –

    9:38 “Believers, what is the matter with you, that when you are asked to go forth and fight in Allah’s Cause you cling to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? Unless you go forth, He will afflict and punish you with a painful doom, and put others in your place.”

  5. says

    It’s always good to get your opponent riled before a debate. It puts them off their stroke. So, here goes: ‘That Moustafa Zayed guy, he looks, well….he looks kinda Jewish to me!’

    OK, now that he’s spitting blood, go get him Robert.

  6. says

    May God bless you Robert and Pamela always – for your unbelievable bravery in standing up for the truths against the evilness of Islam. Which is causing so much suffering, to ordinary Muslims, especially women/girls and non-Muslims alike. I hope you can ask the Muslim guy the basic question – why any decent human being can go on being a Muslim after knowing about Islam’s creator, the Arabic Pedophile rapist, robber, slave-owner (including sexual slaves such as young Jewish captive girls), and mass murderer of the Jews, Mohammed, who used the intellectuality and writing-skills of the Jewish intellectuals, where many were also forced to convert to Islam, to plagiarize from the Bible and the Torah to create part of the koran. The evil part of the koran was created by mohammed and his Arabic culture’s savagery, primitivism, barbarism and Arabic conquest!

  7. says

    Should be a short debate. All Spencer must do is quote the Quran and subsequently the Islamic scholars who maintain the nirvana that awaits jihadists.

  8. says

    The Don Quixote of la Jihad Watcha!

    I didn’t want to comment on my latest TV appearance against Mr. Spencer of (Jihad watch) and Mr. Pipes, for the video clip speaks clearly for itself; the same unfounded nonsensical bizarre claims about Islam against the well known truths that are usually not just different but totally the opposite.

    Yet, all of a sudden, when the Christian channel ABN invited me again to debate Mr. Spencer, I see an announcement for the debate by Mr. Spencer claiming:

    “One might have reasonably thought that the Islamic supremacist writer Moustafa Zayed, author of a purported refutation of my book The Truth About Muhammad (his is rather comically and tellingly entitled The Lies About Muhammad, which is what it is indeed full of), would have retired to lick his wounds after he went down in flames in our exchange”!

    Was that why Mr. Spencer had to be given almost double the time given to me to save him?, is it because he delusionally thinks that the viewers – after his readers – can’t read, understand or comprehend for themselves, or is it that never addressing the glaring historical facts, yet instead, ranting the usual pre-manufactured labels of “deceptive, bait and switch, evasive, tactic..” is called victory in the Jihad watcha land!

    In addressing a claim that Christians were persecuted by Muslims, I brought the well known fact -yet never mentioned by Spencer to his readers – that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) had received the local Christians of Najran and had them perform their rituals inside his Mosque pledging that the Muslims will remodel their churches if needed from the Muslim Taxes. Did he or Mr. Pipes even dare to address this 7th century “persecution”? Never.

    When I compared that to the “convert or be killed” to Muslims and Jews of the inquisitions, did either address it? Never. But what was Mr. Spencer’s reply? The reply was that I was bringing him back to history, then I was baiting and switching between the two topics that he still never addressed.

    Mr. Spencer’s claims however, were more entertaining. Mose Ben Maimon (RamBam), according to Mr. Spencer, had said that the Jews existence amongst the Muslims was a curse upon them, yet the rabbi loyalty to the Muslim state was utmost enough to trust him with the life of one of the greatest leaders of Islam (Salahu Eldeen who defeated the Crusaders) by appointing him as his leading physician, not to mention that his ideology as a scholar was so entrenched in Islamic law that researchers considered his writings to be some of the prominent Islamic philosophy at the time!

    Mr. Spencer answered the glaring fact – that Jews before Christians would testify to – of the co-thriving, not just co-existence of Muslims, Christians, and Jews in Andalucía for 800 years, under Islamic rule and law, by the fabrication that 4000 Jews were once murdered because a Jewish man was appointed as a government official; which is not only a fabrication, as usual, but even so, who, supposedly, would have appointed that imaginary Jewish official? The Muslim rulers?!

    While in Spencer land; if a knocked down boxer, while hugging the floor, can raise his hand and mean ” a wounds licking” for his opponent, then let me assure Mr. Spencer; that “the wounds licking” knock out will be even more spectacular on the 28th.

    Finally Mr. Spencer ended his “Ad” by saying: “I will, on the other hand, come equipped only with the truth”
    Having wrote an entire book “The lies About Muhammad” that mopped the floor with all of your laughable claims; I will, again, say: Mr. Spencer, you are really funny!

    “The wolf of fascism is blind. When you stay silent watching it attacking others; it will still be blind when it imminently turns viciously, chasing after you.”

    Ask the Germans.

    Originally posted on http://www.theliesaboutmuhammad.com

  9. says

    First break.

    There has beeen alot of taljk about the jizya, the Muslim poll tax levied against non-Muslims (People of the Book specifically), but a good point that Robert should put forth is the discrepency of zakat versus jizya, applied respectively, to Muslims and non-muslims.

    Muslim zakat is a consistent 2.5% tax for Muslims to sustain Muslim countries, but jizya, varies, even according to Mr. Zayed, which he initially attributed to a maximum of one dinar, then accepted that no history shows jizya no more than 5 dinar.

    Zayed contradicts himself initially on this point.

    The discrepency of taxation based on religious ideology subscription, in and of itself, supports the argument that Islam inherently discriminates against non-muslims.

    If the jizya is canonically and divinely mandated in sura 9:29 of the Qur’an, then certainly Muhammad, based on Qur’an 33:21, that he is a perfect example of Muslim behavior, and by extension, must support it.

  10. says

    They hung up on me twice, but that said, Robert just obliterated his debate opponent.

    Why?

    Simply because Islam, and Muhammad, the founder of the heretical Islam, are indefensible.

    Good evening all.

  11. says

    Free Thinker wrote:
    “any replays?”

    At the moment, no, but probably in the not so distant future.

    Feel free, one and all, but more importantly, did you watch and listen tonight?