"Ohio man" arrested for aiding the jihad in Somalia

I e-mailed the reporter and said, "They're Muslims. Why can't you say the word Muslims?"

Don't know if I'll get a reply.

Hello Guy. You said,
It always annoys me when Omar Khadr is described as a Canadian from Toronto, so I understand how it feels to read about these "Americans".

I'm a Toronto boy and it bothers the hell out of me as well. Multiculturalism as currently practised bothers me as well and I am preparing my politically correct response to what it has become in Canada by coupling multiculturalsim with a new word (concept) that I have coined: visionism. This derives from the concept of vision which I roughly define as adhering, more or less, to a core set of values, that allows for the smooth integration of immigrants into the host country. For example, Canada absorbed vast numbers of Europeans without much problem because the core vision was the same. This I call "multiculturalism and univisionism" which makes integration possible. When it comes to muslims for example, we see that their core values are derived from Islam and hence we have the disastrous case of "multiculturalism and multivisionism" with resulting weakness, divisiveness, fractionism, and one sh*tload of trouble.
If someone counters by saying what about socialists and capitalists, I counter by saying that they are variations on the theme of a just society which can vary with time, circumstance, and perception.
Well then, there you have it. We now have the intellectual ammunition to defeat the leftist/liberal dhimmis who go around shouting bigot,racist, etc.
Europe, Canada, USA, shout "multiculturalism and univisionism" if you must and take to the streets to shout "no to multiculturalism and multivisionism".
Here are values in the inner circle that are components of a compatible core vision.
http://imageshack.us/f/30/backcover11.jpg/
This is how I intend to circumscribe MC in the book, Islam For Dhimmis.

I doubt you'll get a reply, Courreges W.

I've never received a reply from any of these " reporters ", or " editors ", that I've e mailed questions to.

I'm from Toronto too pokermutt and if I've got the gist of what you are saying, I totally disagree with you. To save some screen space, refer to my post on Jihad Watch from a few days ago. The link is:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/spencer-coming-to-memphis.html

I live in Thorncliffe Park which has a pretty high population of Muslims. I have yet to see ANYTHING there that would cause me to worry. I go out for walks every night around 2:00 am and I feel completely safe. I have done this for years and years. Not one problem to report.

Weirdly, at this time, I have occasionally seen Muslim mothers giving their kids a ride on the public swings. I guess they haven't yet adjusted to the time difference between Toronto and their home country.

These women are out on their own (except for their toddlers). This is hardly something I would have expected to see if these women or their husbands were totally tied to the customs and traditions of their home country.

We have a Greek Orthodox church near Thorncliffe Park and we also have a multi-Denominational church. As far as I know, there haven't been any problems between the Muslim community and the Christian community in my area.

It appears that the Muslims are coming around to the way we do things in Canada but they are holding on to some of their traditions, such as continuing to wear their head scarves but I have no problem with that. I have never got the impression that holding to this tradition is a political statement on their part as it is in France and Britain.

Actually, when I walk through the park in the daytime, their attire makes the park quite colourful. On weekends in the summer, some of them set up little stalls and sell kabobs etc. That adds even more colour to the park.

They always clean up after themselves before they leave so the park is not dirtied by their entrepreneurial activities.

I have yet to see an 'in your face' Muslim in all the decades I have lived in Thorncliffe. I'm sure there are some but not enough to convince me Thorncliffe, and by extension, Toronto, has a problem.

In my building, which is mostly Muslim, they talk to me, they hold the entrance door open for me when I'm locked out of the building and sometimes they even carry some of my groceries for me when I am overloaded.

These people don't fit into the 'stereotypical' authentic or by-the-book Muslims that I read about in Jihad Watch. If they did, they would deem me the worst of people, because I am a kafir, and they would ignore me (or worse).

Now, some bloggers at Jihad Watch might reply by saying they are only doing this because of Taqiyya or that they are smiling to my face but cursing me behind my back because that is what the Qur'an tells them to do.

Well, maybe some do, but to be honest, I never got that impression.

I think it is important to know the relevant passages of the Qur'an and to know the relevant interpretations of those passages. It is also important to know about taqiyya and kitman but it is far more important to understand all of these things are tools you can use to find the truth they are not tools you use to create the truth. If you go down this path Luke Skywalker you will become Darth Vader or worse Noam Chomsky!

As I stated, in my previous post, it was the Muslim community (or part of it) in Toronto that started the initiative to stop the Ontario Government from surreptitiously legalizing components of Sharia law.

They did their job so well. It should be used as a model for how those who live in democratic societies should dissent when their government is about to do something stupid or destructive.

I look at how well Ontario's Muslim community handled dissent in the Sharia Law fiasco and then I look at how German-born goons handled their dissent when Mr. Spencer and others talked in Stuttgart and am amazed. We have Muslims in Canada fighting for democracy and the Germans have some of their own sons and daughters trying to destroy theirs. That has to be right out of Monty Python.

So far, and I stress that, the Muslim community by and large fits in with my idea of good citizenry. There are exceptions for sure, and as Jihad Watch has pointed out, over the years, some of these exceptions border on the monstrous.

As far as I can tell, those that are bad and those that are very bad and those that are monstrous are in the minority. In saying this, I am not trying to be Politically Correct. I usually go out of my way to crap on people who subscribe to this mental aberration. I say it because that is my feeling from what I have seen, what I have read and what I have experienced.

When I look and see what is going on in Europe, and even in the USA, regarding 'assimilation' it seems the opposite is happening. In both these areas there is strong evidence of Muslim enclaves coming into existence where even the police are afraid to enter and worse, the Muslim leaders demand that no non-Muslims enter their turf.

If there are such enclaves in Canada I haven't heard about them. If you know better, I will defer to your knowledge but please inform me accordingly as I would really like to research this phenomenon.

So, I feel that the Muslim community on the whole is adapting itself to Canada and given time will be no less an asset to our culture than were the Italians, the Greeks, the Ukranians, the Polish etc.

Regarding your 'vision' concept, I am opposed but that is a tentative opposition because I may have misunderstood what you were saying. If I knew a bit more I might agree with you.

In any case, I would prefer that Canada endeavour to assimilate the 'best' from every cultural element into our society rather than expect a culture to be assimilated and thereby lose something from that culture that is worth preserving.

As long as we don't assimilate dangerous or evil ideas, concepts and constructs into our culture(e.g. Sharia)we will do okay.

Doing it that way may leave room for cultural or societal evolution rather than monolithic stagnation. It is a fact of nature that those things that can't adapt to changes eventually die out. That in itself may be the fate of Islam but I don't want it to be the fate of Canadian culture.

I agree with you about the liberal left but I would go further than you do.

In my view the liberal left presents a far greater threat to democracy and western values in Canada and the United States than the extreme Islamists ever could.

Mr. Spencer loves quoting the following Muslim Brotherhood statement:

"The Muslim Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers"

Well, hey, Muslim Brothers, wait your turn. The liberal left has been up to this for decades and they have been doing a pretty good job of it.

As far as I'm concerned, the extremist elements of Islam wouldn't get away with what they do except for the liberal left and its intentional hamstringing of our politicians, our military, and our police forces to prevent them from doing their jobs in the way they need to.

I also get worried that while our attention is focused on what the Muslim extremists are doing, the liberal left is rapidly dismantling the very structures that were erected to protect us from such dangers. It is reminiscent of a magicians trick where he gets your attention centred on one hand so that he can do his trick with the other.

Getting back to your vision idea pokermutt, you might be interested in reading John Ralston Saul's recent book that deals with the Canadian identity ("A Fair Country").

You can save time reading the book by watching an interview of Mr. Saul on TV Ontario: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFXo1z4zSNI

You don't have to subscribe to his views but might want to think about what he says in case it impacts your 'vision' theory in any tangible way.

Shearer

but this, too, happened in Canada, in Toronto. It was reported by a Canadian Jewish contributor to this site, in the following thread.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/06/canada-lawyers-allege-jihad-suspects-being-tortured-in-jail.html

libbysmom | June 13, 2006 12:39 AM

'This is totally OT, but I've got no place else to post it.

'Living in a border city in CAnada, though, I am furious that anyone could claim that the Canadians are torturing anyone.

'Right now, my eldest son is at work, guarding a construction site for Habitat For Humanity.

' As in the past two years, H for H homes here have all gone to Muslims and are being built within a two-block area surrounding the big Shia mosque here.

'The one whose members held the demonstration about the Mo cartoons back in February and scared my kids half to death. That mosque.

'Anyway, the neighbourhood used to be nice here, but H for H has begun accelerating urban blight.

'The homes built in the two previous years are ruined- no grass in the yard, glass broken out of many of the windows, garbage all over the property, they are a scandal.

'Tonight, my son is trying to prevent the looting and vandalism that occurs at these sites.

'Show of hands, who can guess who the looters are?

'Y'all are clever, I think you've figured it out - the Muslims in our neighbourhood, the ones getting the free homes, they're the ones carrying off building supplies as fast as their nasty little legs can move.

'I won't be sleeping tonight, I keep driving over to check on my child.

'Oh- and before the children in the other homes went to bed, he got to see them playing.

'Innocent little children, right?

'And so, when the favourite game turned out to be that one boy would wrap a big black cloth belt around his waist, run into the middle of the other boys and yell,"Allah akbar, allahu akbar,BOOM! We're all dead!" and then the martyr would race towards the girls, all of whom would hug and kiss him and cheer wildly, well, my child called me in tears, he said he was almost going to throw up.

'This is my fully grown, six foot black belt in karate - crying after watching these children practice his death.

'The children, he says, were between 8 and 12.

'Ok, rant over. It's too sickening to even know what to do about this kind of BS. Just, don't ever make the mistake of thinking that it can't happen in your neighbourhood. Honestly, it probably already is. I'm moving back to the US, at least there you can still talk about this stuff without being afraid of being charged under hate crime legislation'

She related the same story also in this thread:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/09/norwegian-blogger-political-correctness-is-more-important-than-life-itself.html

"…Ok, now for my examples, and this time, you must answer my questions:

" I live in a mostly Muslim neighbourhood, and the largest shia mosque in my city is a block from my house.

"During the recent war in Lebanon the majority of cars in my neighbourhood flew the Lebanese flag as well as one proclaiming "Hezbollah!". I allowed fear to rule my actions then. I decided not to fly an Israeli flag from my car, even though my children wanted me to. In other words, I gave up my right to free speech.

"I am still upset with myself for not flying my flag, but at the same time, I think it is probably why I still have a house and my car still has windows. What would you [politically correct poster to whom she was replying] have done in this situation, assuming that you are an ardent supporter of Israel?

"One more, please:

"this past summer, my eldest son was hired as a security guard. He was gurding the new Habitat For Humanity houses being built, and these were in the very heart of the Muslim area. All of the homes were being built for Muslim families.

"My child had been on duty for only an hour when he called, nearly in tears.

"Now, this child is 19, he's 6'2", a black belt in karate and has since signed up for Army ROTC- in other words, it takes a lot to rattle him.

"However, he called me to come and sit with him for a while, because the neighbourhood children had been outside playing.

"Their game? Suicide bomber meeting his virgins.

" The children, all between 8 and 12, had made a pretend suicide bomb belt with pop cans serving as the bombs.

"The bomber would run up to a small group of younger boys who were being 'the Jews' - my son understands quite a bit of Arabic.

"Anyway, the bomber would run into the Jews, pretend to blow himself up, and then the little girls waiting on the other side of the street would begin their trilling screaming, clapping and smiling, and would wave the bomber over to them, covering him with hugs when he arrived.

"This is what so upset my child..."

dumbledoresarmy has provided you with a large number of cases, showing that the smiling, pleasant muslims you describe may well have another face. And that's the problem - one NEVER KNOWS.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/28/british-airways-bomb-guilty-karim (sorry, I don't know how to do this as a link)

This man, Rajib Karim, was *also* a well liked, social, smiling and friendly character. He had many non-muslim friends, loved football, belonged to a gym, blah, blah. He has been found guilty, and sentenced to 30 years, for plotting to blow up an airplane. (Many of whose passengers could have been like yourself).

The 7/7 bombers in my country, the UK, all had non-muslim friends, were middle-class, university educated, considered to be pleasant, friendly young men. And yet they did what they did.

''I live in Thorncliffe Park which has a pretty high population of Muslims. I have yet to see ANYTHING there that would cause me to worry. I go out for walks every night around 2:00 am and I feel completely safe. I have done this for years and years. Not one problem to report.''

I'm glad you feel able to feel this way. No doubt Karims' non-muslim 'friends' and co-workers felt safe around him, too.

Hi DDA. Thank you very much for making a reply that was obviously a huge effort of time, mind and erudition on your part.

Admit it. You had help. You must have used one of Rita Skeeter's Quick-Quotes Quills.

I will try to respond with something that does justice to your grand effort as soon as I can but I may not be able to do so until Monday or Tuesday.

At the moment I am committed to other things but I thought I should at least let you know that I wasn't ignoring you.

I do have a question about your reply before I go.

Are you assuming that I believe there is no problem with respect to Islam in Canada?

If so, I'm not sure what gave you that impression.

I thought I made it clear that I knew there were elements within the Canadian Muslim community that were monstrous but the vast majority of the Muslims were an asset to my country.

The overall intent was to say that the Canadian version of Multiculturalism works for some reason.

Anyway, I gotta go now. I just have enough time to reply to the next Jihad Watcher who replied to me. By a stroke of good fortune they didn't have access to a Quick-Quotes Quill. So I can give them a quick replay.

Thanx again for your comments

Hi Jan. Thanx for the reply.

Just off hand did you count the actual number of Canadian Muslims who were involved in these references?

I admit that I haven't either but if I can find the time I will.

What I need to know is how many 'bad eggs' are represented in everything that DDA brought out compared to the overall Muslim population in Canada (or just Toronto).

If it amounts to 50 when compared to a population of hundreds of thousands then I'm not going to worry. If it amounts to several thousand then it is time for me to do a rethink on my stand.

What are useful in a debates like this are hard numbers. Jihad Watch provided such numbers in a recent article.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/mordechai-kedar-and-david-yerushalmi-new-study-shows-that-only-19-of-mosques-in-us-dont-teach-jihad.html

That kind of a number is alarming and has to be dealt with.

How does that number compare with Canadian Mosques? If DDA can find something on this it would be useful to the argument. I will see if I can find such figures for Canadian Mosques. If I can, I will pass the information on to the Jihad Watchers.

I have only had time to have a cursory look at all the information DDA supplied. It is interesting, and some of it is useful to keep in my database for future reference but it isn't the type of information that can be used to address the issue. To use the mathematicians term for this type of information, its anecdotal.

That is not to say I discount it or that I think it is totally irrelevant. I'm only saying it can't be used as proof of a trend one way or the other.

In any case I will be replying to DDA sometime next week. If you are interested you can read my reply then.

Nice talking to ya.

I rather think you have missed the point.

My post was intended to point out to you, and give two examples thereof, that just because muslims may present a friendly, pleasant face, that is no guarantee that they are in fact so.

Indeed, I emphasised the point, that *there is no way of knowing.*

''... a pretty high population of Muslims. I have yet to see ANYTHING there that would cause me to worry. I go out for walks every night around 2:00 am and I feel completely safe. I have done this for years and years. Not one problem to report.''

And as I have tried to point out, Karim, the 7/7 bombers, and many other examples, no-one had any problem to report with *them* either, until 'sudden jihad syndrome' struck.

Hi Jan. You might be right that I've missed your point. I have a feeling I still might be missing it. It is possible that we are talking about two different scenarios or concepts that are only related tangentially and we are talking at cross-purposes because we are skirting away from the tangent point.

If your only point is to say "there is no way of knowing" all I can say in return is that is a tautology. We can never know what anyone is going to do (whether they smile or not). We only ever have a best guess of their possible behaviour.

There is no way of knowing when you board a bus and the driver smiles at you that he won't stab you in the back when you disembark.

You have no way of knowing whether your mother or husband whom you believe (know) loves you won't smother you with a pillow while you sleep.

There is no way of knowing when you go to work that someone at the next desk, with whom you have a good working relationship (in your estimation) won't just blow you away.

These are all real life scenarios but you don't consider them when dealing with life because you know they are statistically improbable in the extreme. You also reject them because thinking along these lines would feel morally objectionable and possibly indicate you are suffering from paranoia.

So, it isn't an issue for me when I walk through Thorncliffe or judge the Muslim community in my home town.

I will judge them on what they do and say, not what I imagine they might do based on a few newspaper articles that may or may not be relevant for Thorncliffe or the Toronto Muslim Population as a whole.

Now if the Toronto newspaper articles, relevant to this topic, start turning up in the hundreds to show a problem along the lines I think you are pointing out; then I will change my life-style because the playing field and the rules have changed.

Canada and the United States both operated along the 'you just can't know' principal during the Second World War, much to their disgrace.

When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, both countries interned their Japanese populations and in the case of Canada, confiscated and sold their property with no compensation.

I can't speak for the United States, but most Canadian historians agree that the Japanese Canadians were no threat to Canada. In the early 1980's, the Canadian Government finally agreed and began to compensate the Japanese-Canadians and issued an apology to them.

If you aren't just arguing along the 'you can never know' principle then I'm left with the impression that you are trying to support following a rule based on an exception within a category rather than from the norm of the category.

In this case, I interpret that the rule is "beware of Muslims because they will turn on you when you least expect it." (Sounds more like a Doberman Pinscher). The category is Muslim behaviour.

The support for your rule (or my presumption of your rule) is based on a couple of cases where this has happened. That type of evidence can be used to prove the possibility of your rule but it can't be used to determine the probability and therefore the applicability of the rule.

If that is what you are intending to do; then I can only reply that doing so would be similar to someone in the United States being afraid to deal with of the US Postal Service because there has been a few instance of postal workers becoming homicidal.

That did in fact happen in the US by the way and the phrase "going Postal" became an overused idiom for any type of violence within the workplace. If you are not familiar with this phenomenon have a look at the following Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Going_postal

If someone creates a rule that basically says "You can't trust US postal workers because they have a history of being homicidal" then they are creating a rule based on exceptional behaviour of workers within a the Post Office rather than on the normal behaviour of these workers.

So, changing one's own behaviour or outlook in recognition of the rule is wasted effort. It isn't going to make one any safer but it is going to effect one's life-style one way or another, probably for the worse.

I am starting to wonder if part of the difference in our outlook has to do with the difference in our societies.

So far, in Canada, Muslim radicalism and anti-social behaviour is minimal. It does happen (the Toronto 18 for example) but it isn't like we are facing an epidemic of Islamists trying to shove Sharia law down our throats or blow up the Canadian Legislature.

I think we may be seeing far less of the so-called radicalized Muslims in Toronto than you see in the UK.

In other words, if you had wanted to, you could have deluged me with examples to support your contention.

If that is the issue then I can only say that our communities may be too different to discuss the issue because we are doing an apples and oranges comparison.

By the way, Toronto in general is a pretty safe place in which to live. In its larger form called the Greater Toronto Area it has a population of around 5.5 million. In 2010 there were only 60 murders.

I do know from Jihad Watch that at least one of them was Muslim related: a young girl was murdered by her father for the sake of 'honour'. I think the murder count is low enough that it doesn't bear delving into to look for a 'Muslim connection'.

Anyway, have a look at this entry in Wikipedia on crime rates in Toronto. As I said, it is a pretty safe place and that includes our Muslim population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Toronto

Actually, that reminds me, we did have a violent demonstration in Toronto recently when the G20 convened in the city. There were even Molotov Cocktails thrown on police vehicles.

Muslim extremists demanding Sharia? NO!
Muslim extremists demanding Jihad? Nope!
Anjem Choudary demanding more Social Assistance. Not yet!
Muslim nice-guys demanding I stop walking in Thorncliffe? No! Well, maybe but I hope not.

Actually, most of the Bozos that caused the problems looked liked they would have fit in quite nicely with the goons that threatened Robert Spencer and friends in Stuttgart. Nice young Euro-descendant anarchists trying to do a little urban reconstruction. No Allah Akbar this time round.

There is one city in Canada that is really interesting, Windsor. This city is on the US-Canada border and you can cross a bridge from Windsor to get to Detroit Michigan.

In 2010 Windsor had a final murder count of 0. Detroit during the same period had a murder count of 308.

So there may be differences between Canada and other countries that explains our differing perspectives on the Muslim population.

Then again I just may be living in a dream world. I guess I will find out when I reply to DDA and he gives his rebuttal.

So, nice talking to ya again. I hope I didn't tie up too much of your time my long winded reply.

The examples you give have nothing to do with muslims.

Muslims who attack non-muslims do so because of their religious ideology, *jihad*, which includes the determination to destroy Western civilisation, and force non-muslims to accept islam and sharia. Part of their strategy for doing this may well include smiling and befriending the non-muslim. Taquiya.

When I said *you never know*, I was referring specifically to muslims, and the imperatives of their totalitarian ideology, not random other people. So the friendly, pleasant, 'assimilated' muslim *may* very well be planning to blow up an aeroplane, or plant a bomb, or strap on a murder vest - slaughtering innocents, in the name of his/her 'religion'. As I said, the 7/7 murderers, the would-be-murderer Karim, were all *muslims* who, to everyone around them, appeared to be pleasant, friendly, nice people.

The examples you provide of family, husband, wife, bus driver, co-worker, postal employees possibly committing murder, or causing harm: the point is surely they would not be committing such acts in order to further a totalitarian religious agenda.

''So far, in Canada, Muslim radicalism and anti-social behaviour is minimal. It does happen (the Toronto 18 for example) but it isn't like we are facing an epidemic of Islamists trying to shove Sharia law down our throats or blow up the Canadian Legislature. ''

So far.

Hi Jan. Thanx for the reply.

I can't agree with you about the relevancy, or lack of it, as you see it, of my examples.

The reason I gave examples that excluded Muslims was to handle the possibility that you have become too polarized in your way of thinking vis-a-vis the problems with Islam in the West.

If you are polarized, then any attempt to persuade you that there is an alternative to your way of thinking won't work because your reaction will be knee-jerk rather than reasoned. Kinda like the liberal leftists who use the race card to stop argument you might use taqiyya or some other concept from Islam to reject an argument that goes counter to your belief system. I'm not saying I thought that would happen only that I wanted to avoid it if it actually was a possibility.

In my "going postal" example I was trying by means of reductio ad absurdum to show where your type of reasoning can lead.

By the way, when I say 'your type of reasoning' I hope it is understood that I actually mean my perception of how you are reasoning this out. If I'm putting words in your mouth sorry about that; I certainly don't intend to misrepresent how you reason.

In the case of the internment of the Japanese I was trying to show you and example of what can happen when outsider knowledge of a culture can be used inappropriately and lead to horrific mistakes.

The American and Canadian advisers in World War II were aware of certain aspects and concepts in Japanese culture that they believed validated the internment of an entire population.

They knew about Bushido, 'the way of the warrior' which required the warrior to fight to the death while possibly committing atrocities as they did.

The advisers knew that Bushido allowed fighting dirty hence the sneak attack on Pearl Harbour. Sneakiness was one way of proving your skills as a warrior.

They advisers knew that Bushido permitted saying one thing while planning to do another. This allowed the Japanese to be involved in peace negotiations with the US government while their fleet was sailing to attack Pearl Harbor.

So, the advisers reasoned that the Japanese population in US territory would be equally duplicitous and were a potential militant threat.

The advisers also knew about Shintoism, the Japanese state religion.

They argued (quite rightly actually) that since the 1600's this religion had presented the view that the Japanese were the best people in the world and by consequence everyone else represented the worst. The concept of World domination through Imperialism to which the 19th and 20th Century Japanese governments subscribed was derived from Shinto beliefs.

The advisers also knew about the 'cult of the Emperor' which made him, a God and infallible. The advisers argued that the Japanese Americans would be going against their God if they didn't support him in the war against the US.

All of the above was argued to the American and Canadian governments well enough to convince them that incarceration was the only way to deal with a people hostile force within their midst.

The problem was, the government never bothered to connect each person incarcerated with the concepts discussed by the advisers. They didn't take into consideration that there might be other forces at play such as Patriotism to the US. The advisers forgot to take into consideration that they were dealing with individuals who have personal beliefs and ethical values that go beyond state religions.

Anyway, I'm sure if you look at the arguments presented by the advisers in WW2 then you will see they have a familiar ring to them. That familiar ring is a major concern for me because I fear we may still be capable of repeating history.

Now I'm not trying to argue, based on the above, that we turn a blind eye towards Islam. I'm just saying we should scrutinize it appropriately.

The saying "If you only have a hammer you see every problem as a nail." has applicability in this discussion.

Now, my reason for bringing up the lack of crime in Canada wasn't intended as an act of nationalistic Chauvanism but it was intended to have a Muslim connection. Specifically, that there is no Muslim connection. I was trying to posit a possible connection between the low crime rates and the fact that we have a fairly large Muslim population.

Muslim related crime is low in Canada and that needs to be explained.

In Sweden and France there seems to be a horrific rate of Rape crimes caused by Muslim. As I understand it, in some of these countries the rate of rape can be attributed almost 100% to the Muslim component of the population. I don't know what the rate is in the UK but I would guess it is much higher than in Toronto.

So you may be looking at the worst face of Muslim immigration and Canada by luck or intention is looking at the best face. In both cases, we have to judge the Muslim population by what it does and deal with that appropriately. That is support the Muslim population if it does good and condemn it if it does bad.

If I'm right that the Muslim community in Toronto is basically moderate then I don't want to do anything that would alienate that population or worse pushing them towards radicalism.

If I and my fellow non-Muslims push them in that direction the really bad guys in the Muslim world will be coming to Canada like sharks to a feeding frenzy.

I guess the discourse we are having is akin to the old glass half empty vs. the glass half full paradigm.

I'm hoping that I'm not putting words in you mouth, but you appear to be seeing all Muslims as half blowing themselves up and I see them (that is the Canadian ones) as half blowing the radicals away.

Now your viewpoint may be right as it applies to the UK and 'Eurabia'. I won't dispute that with you and I would be stupid to try. You are there and can see what is going on. I can't. No amount of reading, logic and rationalization on my part can override what you have seen and what you know to be true.

I hope you can extend the the same to me when I speak of the Canadian (Toronto) Muslim community.

As I've said before, it was the Muslim community or a part of it that 'rose up' and helped put an end to a duplicitous government's attempt to sneak parts of Sharia law into Ontario.

It wasn't me, it wasn't my fellow WASP's and WASC's. It was Tarek Fatah and those who followed him.

So what should I have said to Tarek and his followers when their work was done:

Nice Jihad Tarek?
Nice bit of taqiyya Tarek?
Nice bit of smiling in our faces while cursing us to our backs Tarek?

Actually, I said nothing at all to him and that was bad enough.

One thing I will concede to you, 100%, is your final comment "So far".

I am one who subscribes to Thomas Jefferson's dictum "The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance." [You may not believe this from what I am saying but there is a reason why I subscribe to Jihad Watch besides ]

That is why I mentioned in first email to you my curiosity about the number of radicalized mosques in Canada.

The percentage is a good indicator of how sick or how healthy the Muslim population is within a Western society. It isn't the only determinant but it is a pretty good one.

Jihad Watch's article on this matter, too which I referred you, provided a doubly scary number for the United states.

First, it is scary because the radicalization number is absolutely frightening. and indicates something better be done to address this issue immediately. The simplest but possibly most contentious way to handle it might be to withdraw recognition of Islam as religious entity because too large a component of its activities are political in nature.

Second, the investigation in 2010-11 produced the same figures as a similar investigation produced in 1998. That thought troubles me the most. It certainly indicates a reason why the Muslims in the mosques came to the USA and it wasn't to build a better life (in our understanding of the term).

Knowing the figures for Canadian mosques would be a good start at determining whether there really is a problem in Canada along the line you think. If they turn out to be similar to the figures for the United States you will certainly get a retraction from me by way of apology.

One parting thought, it is important to understand that knowing about tagiyya, kitman, Qur'an passages like the passage of the sword are tools. They are not in and of themselves truths. They can be used to describe the general (Islam itself) but they cannot and should not be used to describe a Muslim.

Speaking of taqiyya, let's try this one on you. It may keep you busy and out of trouble.

If I'm right, that you believe that all 'bad' Muslims practice taqiyya, hudna, smiling in our faces while cursing us behind our backs, then why hasn't Hamas and the PLO used all of these 'tools' to further their objective of destroying Israel in the simplest way possible.

All they have to do is say "Hey, we were wrong, Israel is right. So Sorry, we will give up the right of return. Hey, we'll even sign a treaty to that effect. Hey, we'll even surrender on all the non-contiguous land issues we have rejected. All we ask in return is we are allowed to smile and blow kisses at the Israelis across our mutually respected borders. By golly, we think we'll even throw in recognize Israel's right to exist even if they don't want us to do that. The right of return? Oh that thing. That was a brain fart from Yaser Arafat. He's dead now so Palestinians don't want to return to the country that as we all know rightfully owns all that land we gave them back in 1948. Who are we. Why we thought you knew. We are the 'Lover's of Zionism formerly known as Hamas'.

This would wow the UN and all the liberal leftists around the world and believe me the pressure on Israel would be insurmountable to accept this bull***t at face value. In fact there might even be pressure worldwide for Israel to cede more land to the Palestinians now that there is a second "Arab Spring".

Of course Hamas would benefit financially from worldwide funding intended to help this new Hippie-nation survive its infancy.

Then, when Hamas and the PLO have amassed enough cash and arms all the 'hudnas' are abrogated and Palestine (I assume that will be its name), Syria, Egypt (who is already abrogating its treaty with Isreal) and Iran take another crack at Israel.

Somehow both the PLO and Hamas has avoided availing themselves of lying their way to untold wealth and possession of land that would put them in perfect position to obtain the objective that has eluded them since 1948.

Ooops. Sorry Jan, I intended hitting the preview button to correct spelling and grammar mistakes. Instead I hit the publish key and you got an unedited version of my reply.

I did a quick scan of what got sent to you and I think there isn't too much that will confuse you as to what I am trying to say.

I'm actually not quite as illiterate as my reply might make it seem.

Mea culpa

Thanx for the input DDA.

I appreciate your thoughts as always. It looks like you really did your homework on this one. Hopefully, I can keep the size of my reply to a minimum and still do justice to your efforts. I may have to replay in several segments to prevent the replay from spreading across several screens.

To start, I am assuming the first link that you sent to me was in response to my comment to pokermutt as follows:

"It is also important to know about taqiyya and kitman but it is far more important to understand all of these things are tools you can use to find the truth they are not tools you use to create the truth. If you go down this path Luke Skywalker you will become Darth Vader or worse Noam Chomsky!"

I assume your intention was not to show me or other Jihad Watchers that Islamic sh*t happens in Canada. If that was your point I do know that and know it well. In fact my use of the term monstrous in my original reply to pokermutt was directed towards the "Toronto 18"

So, lets get to the first link.

I will concede the facts as reported in the Jihad Watch news excerpt as completely factual and not being out out of context or misleading in any way.

What interests me in the story is the allegation by Zakaria Amara. The story related by Mr. Amara does not follow the classic lines of torture. In 'state supported torture' the purpose of the exercise is the application of pain or extreme psychological pressure to elicit information or to force a confession or to achieve conversion to a frame of mind the state desires.

If Mr. Amara wanted to adhere to the playbook and gain public sympathy I would have thought that he would be lying his ass off along those lines rather than presenting the lame story reported in the article.

Based on what I read in the excerpt, Mr. Amara is actually talking about police brutality not torture. The scene as he depicts it comes off sounding inane but I can tell you that it probably isn't quite as inane as you think.

A relative of mine was a police officer for years and some of the stories he described to me were definitely in line with what Amara claims and many of them were far worse than what Mr. Amara reported.

The problem is, the police have authority and they need to be respected (on a personal level and on a professional level). A police officer's safety sometimes relies as much on the public's respect for his badge as it does on its respect for his gun.

Policemen can have a great sense of humour but it ends with their badge. Anyone who laughs in the presence of an on-duty officer may be in trouble if the officer interprets the laughter as directed at his badge. In situations where there are no witnesses or where the only witnesses are fellow police officers, there may be a physical and painful response from the offended officer.

My relative quit the police after years of service and part of the reason for their doing so was observing incidents of police brutality.

Another part of their decision was the practice followed by the officers of getting together after administering a beating to 'get their story straight' in case there was going to be court case.

But, you don't have to take my word for it and you don't have to take into consideration the possibility that I made up a fictitious relative to support my contentions. Have a look at the following article.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2006/05/05/toronto-police-misconduct.html

Even the RCMP our Internationally famed police force is known for using police brutality in the performance of their duty. Some of these actions may be inoccuous form the most part but some of them may be responsible for in-custody deaths.

Just as there is a Jihad Watch to keep the public aware of the dangers of Jihad terrorism, there is an RCMP Watch to make Canadians aware of abuses perpetrated by our premier police force. The following is a link to one such article from RCMP Watch:

http://www.rcmpwatch.com/rcmp-officer-loses-pay-over-kelowna-assault/

In the Yukon territories there are other cases of RCMP abuse:

http://www.yukon-news.com/sports/10459/

The worst example of all involves the RCMP using terrorism to stop terrorism! Essentially, the RCMP burned down a barn in Quebec to cause fear in a terrorist group in Canada called the FLQ. The reason for doing this was almost laughable in the sense that the RCMP came off more like the Keystone Cops than Canada's premier law enforcement agency.

You can get an idea of the kind of nasty things are linked to the RCMP in the following Wikipedia article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involving_the_Royal_Canadian_Mounted_Police

So, I think the incident described by Mr. Amara is at least plausible enough that it shouldn't be discounted.

That is not to say I believe him, in point of fact I don't (damn that al Qaeda playbook).

It do believe his allegations must be looked into however to protect the future rights of those who may be wrongly charged and are actually beaten.

Now Mr. Amara, got laughed at for using this 'tickle defense'. That actually is one of the parts of the story that convinces me that it was no laughing matter. Even a young child would come up with a better story if they are trying to lie. More to the point, Amara's lawyers must have warned him about how dumb his story sounded before he went public. In fact it was they who went public with it. Why would Amara be 'attached' to something that sounds so weak on the surface? Possibly because it is true.

We will probably never know the truth of the allegations made by Amara but at the moment I would say DDA that the article does show their MIGHT be a causal connection between 'The Toronto 18', the al Qaeda playbook and allegations of torture. As it is, the article didn't even bring out whether these guys even knew about the playbook.

That was not the purpose of the article, I know, but when you are dealing with something this serious you do have to connect the dots. It would require you to create the dots before connecting them in this case.

So, are there any articles that show that 'The Toronto 18' ever had access to or knowledge of the playbook? I'm not aware of any but possibly over time some Jihad Watcher will provide us with the answer. Until then I will the article in mind for future reference if more incidents of this nature show a strong trend.

I have one very serious concern about ever looking at the al Qaeda playbooks as anything more an indicator of possible strategies used by terrorist defendants is the potential for real human rights violations to take place with no recourse to justice.

If we overemphasizing the applicability of the play book and claim it proves that all al Qaeda defendants will invent torture allegations then our law enforcement can use that reason to torture with impunity. How can the defendant ever bring defend himself on this in a legal context. The law or the society has already deemed in effect that torture can never happen to an al Qaeda terrorist in custody.

Hi DDA, this is the second segment of my reply to you regarding your comments on my reply to pokermutt.

The first reply may have some coherence problems. I'm not sure. I was previewing the document and clicked the publish button by mistake just after I made a correction.

I've already done that once to Jan. on this thread. I guess I will have to be more careful.

Anyway, in your reply to me you included a Jihad Watch blog from libbysmom that was dead on to what I need. I had asked pokermutt to give me an example. I never got a reply. I guess he abandoned the tread once he had posted his thoughts. So its kinda ironic that I received what I needed about my home grounds from somebody half way around the world. Thanx.

I can't make a reply to her comments about the Canadian city or town in which she lives. Do you happen to know off hand the name of the city, town or village to which she is referring? I'm sure I can work it out using the Internet and a bit of logic but I would rather avoid that if you can save me that effort.

In any case, one way or another I will hunt down the story and try to give you a cogent reply to her concerns.

I do have some thoughts on some of the other things she discussed.

Regarding the kids playing that repulsive Jihad 'game', Ive never seen it where I live but I will accept that libbysmom is reporting a real,and disturbing incident.

I have never seen anything even remotely like it in Thorncliffe which has a school near its centre. It is mainly Muslim as you would expect from my previous postings. I have seen the kids playing soccer, baseball and cricket but that is about it.

If I ever saw kids playing 'Jihad tag' you can bet I would be right into the Principal's office and there would be hell to pay. If the Principal refused to act I would take the issue up the food chain until I found someone who had the power and intestinal fortitude to fix the problem. Eventually, if I had to I would take the issue up with the news media.

I would also make sure I had plenty of video clips taken of the offensive activities and I would make sure that the activity was filmed over a long enough time frame that I could prove that the problem was endemic not anecdotal.

I believe in Edmund Burke's maxim:
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

I also try to append John Stuarts Mills idea of evil to Burke's maxim

“A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury.”

In other words I can't stand by and do nothing because such inaction is harming these kids who probably don't know any better. They are innocent contrary to how libbysmom views innocence in these situations. They won't be innocent in a few years unless I do something.

I openly admit I would have a bad feeling doing all of this. Why? When I was much younger, I used to view the politically correct parents on my street with absolute contempt if they stopped their kids from playing "Cowboys and Indians." with the other kids in the neighbourhood. To me, "Cowboys and Indians" was a harmless game that was part of growing up.

It was only much later that I understood that as much as I detested political correctness (and still do) there are some parts of it that are worth heeding.

Playing games of murder against an identifiable segment of society is definitely repugnant. A grownup sanctioning such activity is far worse than a kid doing it. Kids can't know any better unless grownups teach them what is right and what is wrong.

I have to wonder if libbysmom or her son tried anything along the lines I've just suggested. They aren't obligated to, of course, but silence can have its consequences.

Libbysmom also said the following: I am furious that anyone could claim that the Canadians are torturing anyone.

I thank her for her goodwill towards Canada and I too share her sentiments that torture sounds unCanadian but as pointed out in Part 1, Canada has dirty hands when it comes to torture and police brutality.

She ends her comments by stating that she is returning to the US because at least there you can still talk about this stuff without being afraid of being charged under hate crime legislation

I'm not quite sure what he is trying to say. If she is saying that in Canada or in Ontario, Human Rights Commissions will arrest her for talking about what she is currently discussing then she is entirely wrong. If that were the case they might have done so already (assuming they frequent Jihad Watch.

Hell there are talk shows on Canadian television that deal with these issues and in far more inflammatory terms than she is doing. They do so with impunity. So can she.

Further down I will come back to this and give links to such shows. Interestingly, the shows are aired on the Ontario Governments television station so what libbysmom is concerned about escapes me at the moment.

It is my impression that Canada is a freer country than the US in many ways. Americans like to think otherwise but I have yet to hear them give me an example of their extra freedom.

By the way, Geert Wilders recently gave a talk in Toronto. If there was ever a chance that our Human Rights Commissions were going to come down on someone you would think ti would be Mr. Wilders. As far as I know he was free to say whatever he wanted to.

You pointed out she repeated the story on the the Jihad Watch page that hosted the article on the Norwegian blogger.

I noticed she also said in one of her comments on that page
I also live in Ontario, and we're no better than the UK- and getting worse daily.

Well I beg to differ.

I'm trying to figure out what she is using for comparison to come to that conclusion.

I can tell you that I look on YouTube almost every day to see if there is anything new with respect to Islam and the UK.

What I see scares the sh*t out of me. So does the UK related material I read at Jihad Watch.

I can't even think of an analog in Canada to what is going on in the UK.

If Muslims started walking around carrying placards saying "Canadians you will die" or "Show me the jizya" or "Your country will soon be ours" you better believe our politicians would act and it wouldn't be to open a Jizya bank account for the Muslim whose placard demanded it.

Canada had a problem with home grown terrorists in 1970. Back then a province of Quebec separatist group named the FLQ kidnapped a British diplomat and a Canadian Cabinet Minister.

The Prime Minister of Canada, Pierre Trudeau, had no problem invoking the War Measures Act which technically suspended all civil rights in Canada. If you are interested a fuller account of this story have a look at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Crisis

It was this crisis, by the way, that helped precipitate the RCMP barn burning incident I mentioned in the previous segment.

I could be wrong, and if I am, I will have no problem apologizing to libbysmom but I don't think she has any idea about Canada, any idea about the UK and not as much of an idea about her home country the USA as she thinks she does.

I'm not sure I would consider most of what she said as trustworthy based on some of the things she said. She certainly didn't provide any links to articles that would substantiate her stand.

Regarding Fitzgerald's Hashemite dreams article I would like to respond to you with something seeing as you took the effort to point it out. I couldn't quite follow its point. I did send it to a couple of my friends to see if they could decipher the main thesis. Both of them (and one is an English major) refused after a few paragraphs claiming the prose was too convoluted to make for easy reading.

This was my impression and I was surprised because Fitzgerald usually writes very clear articles. So, I'll tell you what, if you state a couple of themes from Fitzgerald's article that you think are important to this discussion I will give you as good a reply as I can in answer.

In the meantime, I can address the issues you brought up below the Fitzgerald link.

Addressing the issue of 'people can turn on you' is a difficult because no matter how you deal with the issue you are going to p*ss-off someone.

Regarding the breakup of Yugoslavia DDA, wasn't it the Bosnian Serbs who started the festivities. As I recall the events, when Bosnia was formed, the Serbian population within Bosnia got the support of Slobodan Milosovic to rise up and wrest 'Serbia' territory from Bosnia.

If my recollection is correct it would be the Muslims (i.e. Bosnians) who should feel betrayed not the Serbs.

I also seem to recall that when the fighting began, the Serbs where attacking the Muslims citing atrocities to Christian martyrs back in the 15th century.

My memory on this may be faulty so if you know better I will accept any rectifications of the facts that you can provide.

I forget what happened in India's partition but I will concede that it is most likely the Muslims who started the violence. Whether the outbreak was chiefly religious, or chiefly political is hard to say. I do know the Muslims were not too happy about the way the partition went.

I believe they felt that Pakistan got a raw deal in the partition because India was a democracy and Mountbatten represented a democracy that wanted to stay good friends with a country with a similar political system.

Anyway, I've have no problem with conceding to you that all of your examples represent situations in which the Muslim were the betrayals of trust.

I have never entertained the idea that the same can't happen in Canada. I have only entertained the idea that it won't happen; based on what I have seen so far from the Muslim community in Toronto

As long as this community gives me no indication that they are planning to betray my trust in them I will support them and see them as useful and welcome citizens.

The next thing you point out is my comment about the mothers pushing their child on the swing. I can tell by your wording that you entirely missed the point of the story.

I wasn't trying to show some idyllic pastoral scene with Angels singing praises in the background while peaceful Muslim mothers were playing with her equally peaceful children.

I was making a comment about the obvious fact that this scene should have been impossible based on how Jihad Watchers depict the position of women in this world.

I have no problem with the truthfulness of that depiction because Wafa Sultan and Nonie Darwish paint a similar picture and they have gone through that nightmare.

The women in Thorncliffe of whom I made reference, are out of their homes after midnight and they are not in the company of their husbands or a male member of their family. Even worse, they are frequenting a park that is known to be haunted every night by their worst nightmare, a kafir(me).

My point in the story was to suggest this scene may be an indication that some of the Muslim community at least is adapting to our social mores. The women still wear their distinctive garb but they seem to have been given a certain amount of autonomy. For this to happen, some of the males in this community would have had to make adjustments as well.

Now, it these people really don't fit into your stereotypical constructs for Muslims, the proper thing to do is investigate why that community differs. It is not proper to take an anecdotal but stereotypical example from somewhere else in the world and use it to prove those who don't fit the stereotype can't (don't) exist.

That is like telling an animal behaviorist that he can't really be talking to his Chimps using American Sign Language because it has already been proved that Orangutans can't learn it.

Now regarding the lengthy list of examples of opinions that there is no Muslim anywhere that doesn't hate the Jews I would respectfully suggest that Tarek Fatah and Irshad Manji are both Muslims and both not Jew Haters.

Tarek Fatah recently wrote a book called "The Jew is not my Enemy". I have read it and quite liked it. There are several things in the book with which I don't agree but that is minor.

Fatah talks in his book about going to Saudi Arabia to try to find the Trench which Mohammed supposedly had built so that he could execute the 900 Jews. It seems from the story that Saudi Officials tried to discourage Fatah in continuing his search. When Fatah finally was able to get to the site where the trench was supposedly dug he realized that such a trench couldn't possibly have been built there. The story of the massacre was a myth!

Anyway have a look at the interview given by Tarek to TV Ontario the provincial television station.

The interview is in to parts as follows:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W892ZNIn6vM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVp_gyjQ_PM&feature=related

When you listen to the interview listen closely to what Mr. Fatah says about his religion. It is pretty incendiary He does the quite a lot. Take this into consideration when you evaluate the truth of libbysmom and her implication that if you say anything objectionable the Human Rights Commissions will be down your throat.

Irshad Manji, if you haven't heard of her is an author, lecturer, teacher and debater. She is best known for her book "The trouble with Islam" and a later update called "The trouble with Islam Today".

I have met her. Talked with her, listened to her lectures and she is definitely not a Jew hater. In fact, when I first met her it was at the Holy Blossom Temple (synagogue) in Toronto. This is a big building and it was packed right out the door with people who wanted to meet her and listen to her lecture. Almost all present were Jewish.

Manji was also a guest of the Israeli government in 2002. The results of that visit appeared in her book as part of her attack on the Muslim's views about the the Jews and about Israel.

Anyway, the following link provides more info on Ms. Manji
http://www.geraldinesherman.com/Truth.html

Thinking about this a bit more, I have to wonder if it is significant that the first two non-Jew-hating Muslims that come to mind came from the Toronto Muslim community.

I think that is all I have time for today. I will try to finish off my reply in the next segment.

Well DDA I just got in to post the third segment of my reply to you and found this. I have to say I am surprised at your start. I have no idea where you got the idea I was condescending and sneering. If my name was Sneerer instead of Shearer I could see where the confusion might arise.

I have gone over my replies to you, which I admit are long winded, I said so myself, and found no use of verbiage of abuse or nastiness that would support your claim.

If anything my reply was civil and quite polite.

I even apologized to you at the beginning of the second segment because on the first posting I hit the publish button by mistake and I was concerned that the unedited reply might have given you a problem. I did the same to Jan because I had committed that same error in replying to her. I apologized to her as well.

Just for interest's sake, go to my reply to you, at the following JW page.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/confrontation-in-germany.html

To refresh your memory, I was replying to your post telling me that you had extracted part of my post for future use.

Was I sneering at you in that reply? Was I condescending towards you in that reply? Was I spinning truth into lies in that reply? Was I speaking in denial of the threat of Islam in that reply?

Your answer does matter because what you saw in that reply is pretty much how I am always. It's pretty much how most Canadians of my generation are.

If you need to know which generation that is, I was born in 1950. People of that generation were raised to behave courteously even when the same isn't extended to them. I suppose it's an extended version of the 'turn the other cheek' philosophy.

Johnny Carson, the famous American comedian spoke to this attitude once. He said "It's easy to recognize a Canadian because they say 'I'm sorry when you step on their foot. They are the one's who say 'Thank You' to the automated Banking Machines when they get their money." I can't speak to the truth of the Bank Machine observation but I have seen Canadians apologize when someone steps on their foot. I've done it myself.

I think at this point I should include an excerpt from the beginning of the third segment of my reply (the entire reply is appended to this reply)

Hi DDA this is the third segment of my reply.

I noticed at the beginning of the third segment of your reply the following phrase "More on those who smile, and smile and smile." I hope that wasn't intended as an ad hominem directed at me.

If it was, all I can say is that it was (is) my opinion that such things were beneath you. I am far far far from smiling smiling smiling. I have been studying the problem posed by Islam from a time that probably predates the birth of most Jihad Watchers and I know there is nothing much to smile about.

. . .

Anyway, rightly or wrongly, I will continue to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that ad hominems are beneath you and that my initial reaction to the phrase was equally beneath me.

Hmm, I guess I was dead wrong about you with respect to ad hominems. They not only aren't beneath you, you seem to use them with reckless abanodon. Que sera, sera.

Anyway, how you perceive me and what you think I was saying or doing in my posts and who I really am and what I was really saying and doing in my posts are universes apart.

That is troubling in many ways; but, the most troubling aspect is whether your position on Muslims is also that far off.

I know, in fact, that it isn't the case, but a stranger to Islamization who knew me and heard your take on me would immediately see the 'universes apart' issue and your stand on Islam would lose credibility even though it is absolutely correct.

The trick is to always deal in truth (not ad hominems) so that the public is on line with you. If you lose the public's support, the Islamists will win, not because they were smarter but because we were dumber.

You seem to be the touchy sort and seem to take affront where none was intended so what follows is NOT an attempt to show I know more than you or that your 'credentials' are less than mine.

It is just a comparison that is intended to show you that I am not a neophyte to this issue. I do this because I now have the impression that you think I am and that is colouring your perspective and attitude.

You state that you have been saving JW articles since 2007. Well I have been saving news and magazine articles on this topic since before 2001. I also save Jihad Watch articles if they address a particular topic about which I'm researching.

The stuff from 2001 to 2005 is scanned newspaper and magazine articles converted to Word documents but retaining all photos, captions, and publishing info.

You, or anyone else at Jihad Watch, are welcome to these documents. Just let me know and I will run off copies and mail them to anyone who requests them. There would be no charge.

Be warned it will probably result in 30 or more gigabytes of information on DVD's so, you will need at least that amount of free space on your computer to import the information.

The good news is I categorized every article into multi-level subdirectories to facilitate finding common articles on a single topic.

Getting back to researching Islam, I have been doing it since the Shah of Iran fell (1978-9). Once I heard a so-called expert compare Ayatollah Khomeini to Gandhi I knew I had to do research on my own.

Regarding your question on whether I know about Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb and the other Arabic phrases you quoted, yes I do know about them and several more. Long ago, I created a dictionary dedicated to these phrases. I always make sure to update the dictionary if I come across a new term.

Regarding your question about whether I have read the Qur'an from cover to cover. The answer is yes. I use the Maududi version which I downloaded off the Internet. I only use this version because Robert Spencer recommended it as a good reference.

Interestingly, it is because of the Qur'an that I started subscribing to Jihad Watch.

I had read the Qur'an at that point but I was having trouble with it because of issues related to "An-Nasikh -wal- Mansukh".

I contacted Robert Spencer to find out if there was a colour coded version of the Qur'an such that abrogated verses would have a coloured background, demoted verses have a different coloured background and unabrogated verses have a normal background.

Robert guessed there was no such Qur'an but remembered a monograph written by a Qur'anic scholar back in the 1920's. He recollected it was a pretty complete list done in tabular form to make identification of abrogator and abrogated clear. He even offered to hunt it down for me (add mensch to the list of Robert Spencer accolades).

I declined so I wouldn't take up his time and eventually found the monograph myself. It was perfect for my needs.

So, now I am in the process of creating an HTML version of the Qur'an (hopefully with the Maududi tafsir intact). When I'm finished I will have a colour coded Qur'an and it will make the unabrogated verses stand out. It will also work from a desktop or laptop.

It is my hope that such a Qur'an will make toast of the taqiyya merchants because you will not only know if a passage has been abrogated but you will know which passaged did the abrogating.

Once I complete that project, you or anyone else at Jihad Watch are welcome to it free of charge. I would hope that anyone who got a copy would do me the favour of validating the accuracy of my colour coding. This is a big and exacting project on my part and I don't want to make even one mistake that would mislead those who use it.

By the way I also the Hadith's by
Sahih Bukhari (complete),
Sahih Muslim (complete),
Malik's Mulwatta (complete), and
Abu Dawud (partial).

I also have an electronic version of the tafsir by Ibn Kathir.

So, yup, I read up on classical Islam.

Yup, I know you are Australian and I count you as lucky. That puts you close to Australian beer which is supposed to be some of the best in the world. Go figure that Muslims would move to a place known for beer. I guess kangaroos or koalas must be Halal.

No, I hadn't read the article to which you pointed me but I have now. It is interesting but it basically confirms, what Robert Spencer has been saying for years so I accept the article as factual and worth putting in my database of articles.

As to how much the article speaks to the future; that depends on a number of factors including whether his followers even listen to him if he calls for it.

In fact, my recollection is he can't do that for an offensive Jihad. He can only do that for a defensive Jihad and the criteria for that would have be be met. If the Caliph ever returns I will be worried.

In any case, this guy's statement is anecdotal until you can link it empirically with Muslims in the West. Do they follow him now? If they do, will that mean in the case of war they will also follow him?

I'm not discounting what he says I'm just not going to act on it (at the moment)

The above also relates to your ending comments where you say

I vividly remember Surah 48: 29. And I remember all the verses that tell Muslims not to befriend or make alliance with the non-Muslims.

I will accept you remember these verses DDA, but for the argument that will not be the issue. The issue will be whether the majority of the Muslims remember these passages. I think in Canada they won't unless they are forced to because something has happened that leaves them no choice. [If we back them into a corner]

Regarding your not being surprised by September 11th, neither was I and neither were most of my friends.

We were aware that Muslim terrorists had tried to take out both towers back in 1993. The terrorists plan was to use a huge explosive in a Van to topple over the North Tower so it would bring down the South Tower.

If this plan had worked it probably would have killed all the people in both buildings and most of the people in the streets. A far greater disaster than 9/11.

We didn't need a Qur'an. That book can be used after the fact to explain why but it is useless as a prognosticator.

The terrorist attack in 1993 made it clear that the Trade Center was a major project for jihadists. It also made it clear that a car bomb just wouldn't work. Something bigger was needed.

Just prior to September 11, the French secret service got wind of one of the terrorists taking flying lessons in the US. They did their homework and found he was only taking the flying part not the landing part. This particular terrorist was being hunted by the French secret service because he was suspected of planning the attempt to take out the Eiffel Tower with a plane. The French secret service warned the FBI but the warning was ignored.

The French didn't need a Qur'an either. They just needed to be good at investigation.

Regarding this comment: As for your accusations of 'polarising'...it is Islam, classical orthodox mainstream Islam, that polarises the world.

That confuses me because you were the one that called me a spindoctor or someone in denial. Doesn't that statement strike you as falling into those categories. By the way, this type of reply is classified in debating as contradiction. Debate requires arguments that disprove an assertion. Contradiction is merely saying the opposite and asserting it as truth.

Islam cannot polarize you DDA, only you can do that to yourself.

For example, in the USA, as I see it, the Democratic Party and the Republican party have become totally polarized. There is absolutely no way that debate on issues can really happen. They just contradict. The Democrats didn't polarize the Republicans, they did it to themselves. The Republicans didn't polarize the Democrats, they did it to themselves.

Regarding the topic of polarizing it wasn't even close to an accusation. My specific words were:

The reason I gave examples that excluded Muslims was to handle the possibility that you have become too polarized in your way of thinking vis-a-vis the problems with Islam in the West.

I specifically stated that my examples were made exclusive of Muslims just in case she is polarized in her way of thinking about Islam. If I had been trying to accuse Jan of polarization, my phrasing would have been "to handle the fact that your have become too polarized".

By the way, your reaction seems to be that being polarized means something bad. It is not necessarily pejorative. It is a state of being, neither closer to God nor farther from God. It can have some nasty consequences from time to time but that is another issue.

Yes, your prediction about the Canadian Muslim population may be correct. I have never disallowed that as a possibility in my logic. You are right in one sense though. I do have flat feet; but you are wrong about me getting caught flat footed. That post of mine that you copied is a very small part of my plan for handling the situation you anticipate LONG before the boiling point is ever reached.

Regarding your final ad hominem, No, I am not a Muslim, I am a non-practicing Catholic. Part white, part Canadian aboriginal if that matters.

Yes, I will be running interference but for the side of Western culture and values. No, I don't anticipate wearing a mask if I am forced to fight for my country.

By the way, I would have appreciated had you not put my surname in single quotes. That is my name and always has been. There is a strong indication based on your last ad hominem and your single quotes around my surname that you are implying I'm lying to hide the fact that I'm a Muslim. Wrong again! You are once more on the other side of the Universe to the truth.

One last point regarding the following statement

Canada doesn't have the same problem as the UK or France, because Canada doesn't yet have a big enough or strong enough Mohammedan presence. YET.

Yup, that is a possibility but it is a risk at this moment I am willing to take and I think most Canadians are willing to take. If things change so will our tolerance.

Actually, this is the first time that your reply to me (this one and your original long one) has finally gotten on topic.

This all started off with me challenging pokermutt to prove his statement that multiculturalism was a failure. He offered no argument, no fact, no reference. That was my bone of contention and I made that clear. I did give examples of what I saw that make be believe indicated that it was working.

In reply I got a number of disparate facts from you that had no specific connection to what the actual topic was. I could see you wanted them to be but they weren't. I did system analysis work for 18 years and I know when something is logically connected and when it isn't.

Now that I've got that off my chest, let's go back to your statement. You have as much as admitted that the Muslims are quiescent in Toronto at the moment. You are only explaining the reason for the quietude in different terms. That is okay by me.

So, how can pokermutt argue that multiculturalism is a failure? There is nothing for him to point a finger at unless he is using the Toronto 18 as his yardstick. I don't think anyone would accept that as proof of anything except terrorists exist in Toronto. It says nothing about multiculturalism one way of the other.

I have decided to remove the third segment of my reply to you because of its size. I get the feeling I might be wasting my time if I include it as a separate post. So I will consider this a Roger, Over and Out moment unless you reply and indicate you have some interest in seeing it.

By the way, if you want a copy of all my database articles etc you can let me know. Also, if you want me to notify you when I finish creating the colour coded Qur'an so you can get a copy let me know.
There will be no charge for either.

My email address is mhorram@rogers.com

Take care.