The Murfreesboro Mosque: Built on a Foundation of Lies

Murfreesboro1.jpg53,000 Square Foot Mega Mosque, Under Construction, May 2012


The Murfreesboro Mosque: Built on a Foundation of Lies
by Eric Allen Bell

A huge grassy field in Murfreesboro, Tennessee – summer, 2010. My video camera was set on its tripod, ready to film the first shot in what would become over 300 hours of footage, for a documentary I was about to produce. This documentary was to be about how a small town, in the heart of the American Bible Belt, was reacting to the proposed construction of a 53,000 square foot mega mosque. I was standing on a plot of land that was to become the site of rushed construction of this massive structure, the subject of international media attention, lawsuits, an arson, vandalism, interfaith rallies, and press conferences. This plot of land was about to be highly politically charged and would even become the mysterious burial site of a human body.

And so I pointed my camera and I filmed my first shot: a huge red, white and blue banner, directed at the passing cars of local residents on a rural country two-lane highway. It was hard to know at that time if the banner was patriotic, a bit of public relations or a mix of both. It read: “Happy 4th of July from the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro”.

FOUNDATION:

I later learned about another sign that had stood recently in that same spot, one that was defaced, a sign that would become the poster for my documentary and provide its title as well. That sign had read: “Future home of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro” and across were spray painted the words “Not Welcome”.

The premise of “Not Welcome” was that, contained within this image of the defaced sign, was a story. And I felt that within the story of this defaced sign was the story of human civilization and our inability to peacefully coexist. I may have been a bit naïve, but I meant well. Coexistence seemed like a good idea. And Mufreesboro seemed like a microcosm of the world, and an excellent jumping off point to look more deeply and how and why we are divided as a people on this planet. Little did I know that I was going down a rabbit hole, for which there was no turning back.

A couple weeks later there was a rally and a march against the mosque, down Main Street in Murfreesboro. The anti-mosque marchers were met with counter-demonstrators, organized by college kids, who held up a big banner which read: “Coexist” – using the symbols of all of the world’s major religions. And it didn’t take me long to lose my objectivity and to take sides. I had a film crew embedded with the townspeople who were marching against the mosque. And I had a film crew embedded with the college activists, who were there to say that the Muslims were being picked on and that this was an issue of religious freedom. And given my Liberal leanings, I tended to see the Muslim community as the underdog and those who were fighting the mosque to be the bullies.

And so I did a lot of bad things, thinking they were good things. I helped a colleague at “The Daily Show” in their attempt to humiliate prominent members of the Mufreesboro Counter Jihad movement. I accepted the support of Michael Moore, to expose what I (wrongly) thought was a foaming at the mouth, bigoted Evangelical bullying of a minority group. I said and did things, in print, on the news, everywhere, which have consequences. And much of my work today is focused on correcting my mistakes and educating the world about what I now know to be the defining issue of our time: The grave threat of Political Islam.

BENEATH THE SURFACE:

Over the past few months I have written several articles about the threat of Islam and how the Left in America are suffering from a sort of “Islamo-codependency” – an unwillingness to even examine the possibility that, when it comes to the matter of Islam, that there might be more going on than what meets the eye, or what meets the press. In that spirit, I would like to say a few things about my experiences in dealing with key figures at the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, why I believe this is a victory mosque, part of a larger pattern of Stealth Jihad, built on deception and why it must be exposed and stopped. Allow me to begin with a meeting I had with one Dr. Essam Fathy.

Over 30 years ago, a young Essam Fathy was attending Middle Tennessee State University. He and a handful of other young Muslim students found that the city of Murfreeboro had no mosque, so they set one up in a tiny one-bedroom apartment. Over the years its location would change. He and his wife both graduated, became Physical Therapists and settled in the town, where later they and a few other Muslim families would eventually rent out office space to create the Islamic Center of Mufreesboro Tennessee.
When I filmed my interview with him, Dr. Fathy was the Mosque Board Member in charge of construction and planning for the new proposed 53,000 square foot mega mosque. He showed me all of the blueprints of what the “Islamic Center” would look like and he emphasized over and over that this dream, this vision, would take many years to complete. Construction was to happen in phases over the course of 10 years or more. And he added that he didn’t understand what all of the fuss was about. He indicated that the Islamic Center hardly had any money to cover this and it was mostly just a leap of faith to even get the process started. Just getting the land leveled, the foundation built and adding a parking lot would take one to two years. The prayer room another year or two. The banquet room another year at the very least. And the offices, the (palatial) house where the Imam would live, the park and the swimming pool, well this was so far off that it was impossible to know when it would be completed.

He used the word “cute” every time he gushed about how much he adored the little town of Murfreesboro, and manufactured a warm fuzzy smile every time I looked at him. He had mentioned that many of the mega churches had swimming pools so it was only fair the Islamic Center have one of their own. But more importantly, he added, “Our women are not allowed to be seen by men without being fully covered, even their heads, so they cannot use the pool at the YMCA. They never get to go swimming. This will be so nice for them in the Summer time”. And he flashed me another innocent smile.

At that time I did not know that this man was lying to me about everything and that, in fact, the mosque would be rushed into construction and that major buildings would go up very fast, or that in that entire huge field they had to build on, the structure would be so close to the neighboring Baptist church you’d almost wonder if it was architecturally giving the Baptists the finger. But I didn’t know any of this. I also didn’t know that Essam Fathy had major financial dealings with the Mayor, and that the Mayor had advised the County Commissioners that they all had to vote “yes” right away on the proposed mosque construction, or else everyone was going to get sued. I remember thinking that this man would be a much better spokesperson for the mosque than their current one, who ended up embroiled in a major public controversy. Her name was Camie Ayash.

Camie Ayash drove a brand new, big shiny beautiful Mercedes Benz. She had also just recently gotten out of prison for stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from her former employer. The court had ordered her to make restitution and she was in the process of slowly returning that money. Her husband, like so many of the Muslim men who attended this mosque, was a local used car dealer.

Murfreesboro2.jpgCAMIE AYASH – Spin Doctor for the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro


News broke in late August that there had been an attempted arson, on some construction equipment, after breaking ground for the new mosque. Mrs. Ayash was very pregnant at the time and had not yet been exposed in the Tennessean newspaper for her past criminal record. She called a press conference, which was held right in front of a partially burned tractor and told the media that she was very troubled and surprised by this kind of reaction to an innocent mosque. Not long afterwards, news broke that police had finally caught the man who had vandalized another mosque, in a town not far away. And as it turned out, he was a Muslim and a member of the congregation. In doing a bit of research, it turns out that this sort of thing happens more often than one might think. One begins to wonder if the story of being victimized is a manufactured narrative to support the false idea that Islam in America is the victim.

When the Tennessean finally broke their story about Camie Ayash and her criminal background, she issued statement, giving the timeline of when she was convicted, how much time she served and how she had, with the help of Islam, turned her life around. I had lunch with the Religion Editor of the Tennessean and we talked about this. He told me that his staff did a criminal records search and that Mrs. Ayash had lied about almost everything – the amount stolen, when, how much time she had served, when she got out, lots and lots of lies. Lying was clearly her strong suit. Apparently this pattern of lying was not a problem for the Board of the Islamic Center – that is, until Camie was exposed for it. At that time they decided to go with another spokesman, Dr. Selah M. Sbetany – one of the original founders of the mosque back in the day with Essam Fathy. He headed up the “Department of Engineering Technology and Industrial Studies” MTSU and would later be prominently featured in a highly sympathetic piece on CNN.

Soledad O’Brien breezed through town and did a quick hit piece for CNN called “Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door”. During the extensive segment, there was never any question about where the mosque was getting its funding, no attention paid to the second-class status of women in Islam, no questions about Sharia, the brutal Islamic Law that mosques are required to teach. She did not ask about the stoning of adulterers, the execution of gays or the death penalty commanded for all Muslims who leave Islam. Instead she portrayed this as a simple civil rights issue where the mean white people were picking on the super-super nice dark people. Roll credits. Islam good. South bad. The End.

The all American Muslim family whom Soledad put much of her focus on throughout the documentary was that of the Sbetanys. Camera crews followed Lema Sbetany, the all American girl, through a day at college, helping mom out at home and then donning a Hijab to teach the children about Islam at the mosque on Saturday. Lema was the sweet and harmless local face of Islam. So when a Muslim man in New York verbally attacked her on Facebook, for not covering herself like a proper Muslim woman should while on TV, I actually intervened on her behalf. I told this man that Lema was my friend and he should not speak to her that way. He responded by telling me that he would cut off my penis and stuff it down my throat and end my f-ing life. I made a screenshot of this and sent it off to FBI.gov where I never heard anything back. This was one of several occasions where I would end up having to report a violent Muslim man to the authorities for threatening me online – a pattern that continues to this day.

Lema worked as a Pharmacy Tech at Walgreens. While I was in production on my documentary, Lema came to me offering private and confidential prescription information about a prominent local anti-mosque figure. She wanted me to use it in my film to somehow defame this person. I didn’t want to know about it. The information had nothing to do with the documentary and struck me as somewhat cruel and vindictive. I should mention that Lema got her job working at the pharmacy through Abdou Kattih who was both a Pharmacist and the Vice President of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, TN.
The closer I got to the inner circle of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, the more Abou Kattih mentioned that they were willing to pay me a lot of money to help them put together a video, about all of the hardship they had encountered from while trying to get the mosque built. It was an obvious conflict of interest, but he did point out on more than one occasion that I could use that money to help fund my own documentary. I turned him down.

A year or so later, I did a complete 180 and became rather committed to Counter Jihad. For more on that, read my article “The High Price of Telling the Truth About Islam." I had also written an editorial about Loonwatch.com as a “terrorist spin control network”. Websites sprung up that were designed to smear me. Most of these have since been removed and an investigation is taking place. An interesting piece of information that keeps appearing on these sites is my private and personal prescription information – information about opiate pain killers I had filled in Murfreesboro, at CVS and Walgreens, when I injured my back. I wonder where they got that information from. Since my private medical information surfaced, when certain Islamist websites attempt to slander me in their articles they use phrases like “drug addled” and “pill popping” as an attempt to discredit me, to support their characterization of me as a “Jihad Watch Zombie” or a “Loon”.

The hardest interview for me to get on camera was with the Imam, an Egyptian cleric named Dr. Ossama Mohamed Bahloul, a graduate of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt – a university often said to be a hot bed of Islamist sentiment and a recruiting ground for the Muslim Brotherhood. Funny thing about this university, in 2007, Muhammad Sayyid Tantawy, then the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, drew allegations of stifling freedom of speech when he asked the Egyptian government to toughen its rules and punishments against journalists. During a Friday sermon in the presence of Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif and a number of ministers, Tantawy stated that journalism which contributes to the “spread of false rumors” rather than “true news” deserves to a punishment of eighty lashes to "those who spread rumors". He must have been wearing his “What Would Mohammed Do?” bracelet that day.

Anyway, some of the finer points of my many taped conversations with the Egyptian cleric include him stating that women could not be trusted with money, since they are irrational. This was in answer to a question I had asked about Islamic Law (Sharia) and why women only get half the amount of an inheritance men do. But the real shocker, the one where my cameraman and I tried not to make eye contact with each other and just look straight ahead, was when Sheik Ossama smiled, leaned forward and proudly stated that, “the Prophet only ever stoned one woman. One!” Well, when you put it like that it must not be so bad. I mean, she must have done something really bad, right? According to Ossama (not the one who was behind 9/11 but this one who follows the exact same holy books) the brutally stoned to death woman had committed the crime of extramarital sex.

But the most important thing I learned from Sheikh Ossama Baloul was this – and I had to watch this footage over and over to finally get what he was saying. There is no such thing as “moderate Islam”. There is only “modified Islam”. These are not his words, they are my own. But basically what he had to say with regard to the implementation of the brutal and often sadistic Islamic Law (Sharia) was that no one in America had anything to worry about. Why? Because Muslims are taught to follow the laws of the foreign land they are living in. This does not mean then that forced amputations or killing someone for leaving Islam, or even for being an enemy of Islam is against Islam – against his beliefs as the main Islamic spiritual leader in Murfreesboro. He never said that. Only that they would not do that here, if the law forbids it. The moral outrage that I feel, when considering the Sharia, didn’t seem to affect him in the same way.

Murfreesboro3.jpgSharia – the Brutal Islamic Legal System Which is an Essential Part of Islam


When I asked the Imam if he would condemn the brutality of the religious police in Iran he said he could not, because he had never been to Iran. I got similar answers when I brought up the Islamic theocracies of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Who is this Egyptian cleric? And why is he the one brought in, educated from the Harvard equivalent of Cairo, an institution crawling with those sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood, why is this the man chosen to build a 53,000 square foot mega mosque, in the heart of the American Bible Belt, in a town with such a small Muslim population? What is the end game here?

CONSTRUCTION:

Just recently, May 30th of 2012, Rutherford County Chancellor Robert Corlew issued a ruling, opining that there was insufficient public notice of the meeting where the site plan was approved and ordering a halt to the construction of the mosque. As for the time of this article, the Islamic Center is continuing construction of their 53,000 square foot mega mosque, in defiance of this court order. Meanwhile, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has ordered its lapdog, the DOJ, to intervene while working overtime to spin this story in the media as a civil rights matter – insisting that a higher standard for site plan approval is being applied to the mega mosque, simply because the backers are Muslim.

As someone who spent a considerable amount of time in Murfreesboro, I can tell you first of all that I have never seen so many churches in my life (I’m from California). But more importantly, it is well known that every single one of those churches was held to a high standard with regard to site plan approval. World Outreach Church – a massive mega church not far from the new Islamic Center, took years to get their plans approved.
Not long ago, the County rejected plans for a “Bible Park” to be located in Murfreesboro, because the ambitious construction plans, and the size of the facility were more than the even these mostly religious residents, in the heart of the Bible Belt, wanted in their small town. The standard for approval so was high that even a place called “Bible Park” in the heart of the Bible Belt could not get site plan approval. It was considered too disruptive and the Bible Park was rejected. Perhaps CAIR could put that in their hookah and smoke it.

The Rutherford County Commissioners stated in a court of law under oath, that just before voting on the site plan for the new mega mosque, they were instructed that they had to vote “yes” as any other vote would undoubtedly cause the county to be sued. This came straight from the Mayor. And some of the Mayor’s millions (he owns a large stake in a chain of nursing homes) come straight from Dr. Essam Fathy (who approves the eligibility of patients for these nursing homes) who had submitted the site plan for approval. But I’m not saying there is a connection. Just because the Mayor denied knowing Dr. Fathy in court, under oath, until it was proven that the two men had known each other for decades, doesn’t mean there was necessarily any fowl play. Maybe it was a simple matter of political correctness, and knowing that if they turned the Muslims down, the County could get embroiled in a highly publicized civil rights conflict, and made to look like a bunch of Southern racists. We may never know.

And thus the rush to bypass the usual systems, put in place for an ambitious project of this size, were bypassed, and the mosque was rushed into construction. So, the idea that the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro is being held to a higher standard because they are Muslims just is not supported by the facts. But facts have never stood in the way of the Council on American Islamic Relations when it comes to going after the enemies of Islam, by any means necessary. And that is exactly what this Hamas front group, CAIR, is about to do. The battle of the victory mosque in Murfeesboro, TN is far from over.

Murfreesboro4.jpg


DECONSTRUCTION:

The public relations policy of CAIR can be summed up pretty succinctly: “What would Mohammed do?” The prophet Mohammed, according to Islamic “holy books” was a slave owner, a war monger, a Jew hater of the highest order, ordered the stoning of a woman for extramarital sex, had poets beheaded for the crime of offending him, invaded foreign lands and allowed his troops to rape the women, and of course he married a six year old girl whom he had the decency to only engage in foreplay with until she was 9 years old. And so much more. And according to Islam – not “radical” Islam – just Islam, Mohammed is the “ideal man” - the one to be admired and imitated for 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide. So is it any wonder that CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the FBI’s largest bust ever of an Islamic Charity, which turned out to be funneling money to Islamic terrorist organizations? For further reference, look up “the Holy Land Foundation” and read all about it for yourselves. It’s all there. The information is available to all to discover… for now.

Around the middle of the 20th Century or so, the makers of Coca Cola and Pepsi and the entire industry of soft drink manufacturers learned a very valuable lesson: Supply creates demand. It’s a well known fact – if you build it, they will come. And speaking of building it… Did I mention that the mega mosque is to be 53,000 square feet and will serve only a few hundred Muslim families in the Murfreesboro area? Wonder what that’s about. Given that the number of new mosques constructed in the United States since the Islamic terrorist attacks on 9/11 has nearly doubled, could this be part of a 1,400 year history of building a victory mosque after Muslims attack a foreign land? If it isn’t, that would be the exception to the rule. A spike in Islamic immigration, whether to the US or Europe, plus a huge spike in the number of mosques being constructed, both serve to substantiate the notion of Stealth Jihad.

It should be noted that some studies have suggested that as many as 80 percent of the mosques in the United States are funded, in whole or in part, by Islamic governments which are hostile to America. Investigative research (see the documentary, “Undercover Mosque”) has demonstrated that in both America and Europe, what is being taught in so many of these mosques, is a hatred for Jews, a resentment of the West and Democratic values, and a desire to fulfill the mandate of Islam – that is to get the entire world to submit to Islam. And after all, the meaning of the word “Islam” is simply “submission”.

DESTROYING AMERICAN SOCIETY FROM WITHIN:

The Muslim Brotherhood is the largest Islamic organization in the world. Its most famous slogan, used worldwide, is "Islam is the solution." As Robert Spencer points out repeatedly, in many of his public talks and books, the Muslim Brotherhood is the direct forefather of both Hamas and Al Qaeda. This organization does not go by “The Muslim Brotherhood” in America. But perhaps you may have heard of some of its front groups: Muslim Student Association, Muslim American Society, Islamic Society of North America, Islamic Circle of North America, North American Islamic Trust, International Institute of Islamic Thought, and several others. And they were all listed in this Muslim Brotherhood “Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood of North America”, which states:

The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan (militant religious brotherhood dedicated to the purification and the unification of Islam) 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 so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.

HERE IS THE ORIGINAL MEMO IN ARABIC: http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/20.pdf

Many of these Muslims are immigrating to America and joining mosques:
Murfreesboro5.jpg
SOURCE: http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/

POLITICAL ISLAM: THE DEFINING ISSUE OF OUR TIME

Islam is thought of by most Americans as simply a religion. When they hear about proposed legislation to ban Islamic Law (Sharia) from our courts, it often strikes them as a form of religious persecution. To most of the media, ideas such as “Creeping Sharia” or “Stealth Jihad” sound like paranoid conspiracy theories. Attempts to stop the construction of any mosque are perceived generally as the work of Christian religious fanatics who don’t want to lose the home court advantage. Why is this? The answer is quite simple. Americans are not educated about Islam.

Organizations such as CAIR spin every one of these stories to look like a civil rights issue. Much of the media uses their press releases as source material for their stories, and this is where most Americans are getting their information. So the illusion that Islam is nothing more than just another religion is one that is maintained, paid for by Islamic petrodollars, and strictly enforced by the strong arm of the Hamas front group, the Council on American Islamic Relations.

But Islam is in fact a tyrannical political system, a brutal and sadistic legal system – thinly veiled in a theology which technically grants it the status of a religion, at least according to the US Department of Justice. Therefore, to oppose construction of a mosque is seen as a form of “religious persecution”.

In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. A Sharia-compliant mosque (which would basically be all of them) is antithetical not only to American values, but to American laws. A mosque, more times than not, is a place where treasonous ideas are taught, often times by people who are not even citizens of this country. The fact is that Islam and human rights cannot coexist. Islam and free speech cannot coexist. Islam and gay rights, women’s rights, the freedom to leave your religion without fear of being killed - these beliefs and practices, which are at the core of Islamic teaching - cannot coexist with freedom and liberty – the foundation upon which America was built.

Murfreesboro6.jpg


Every time a new mosque is built, it follows a pattern of 1,400 years of Islamic conquest. A foreign land is invaded by Islamists followed by the building of victory mosques. Do the math. We were attacked by Devout Muslims on 9/11 and since then the amount of new mosque construction has nearly doubled. This is nothing new, it’s just history repeating.
By the way, the reason I said we were attacked on 9/11 by “devout Muslims” and not “radical Muslims” is because, if the blood thirsty tyrant Mohammed were alive today (May Police Be Called Upon Him) he would have sanctioned the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. In fact, compared to the prophet Mohammed, Osama Bin Laden was a lightweight. The pedophile prophet was more like 100,000 Osama Bin Ladens. And every mosque in America teaches its followers that Mohammed is the man to imitate if you want to get into heaven. Does anyone else see where a 53,000 square foot shrine to this brand of lunacy might be a problem?

COUNTER JIHAD:

One of the Islamic smear sites against me included an aerial shot of a house I used to live in, complete with the street address. It also listed my last known cel phone number for tracking purposes while mentioning over and over that I was basically the enemy of Islam. Recently a Russian radio DJ, Sergey Aslanyan, was stabbed several times on his front porch by a man you yelled out “You are Allah’s enemy!” after Aslanyan had said, on the radio, that the prophet Mohammed was a pedophile (http://www.rt.com/news/journalist-slasher-muhammad-insult-477/). Given the things I’ve said in the media, I think of this often, especially when there is a knock at the door. But when I think of the courage of people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie, Geert Wilders, Ali Sina, Nonie Darwish, David Horowitz, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and all of those courageous voices - how they have stuck their necks out a lot farther than I have, and yet still remain committed to exposing the truth about Islam, I find the courage and inspiration to continue. They give me strength. But we cannot heap the weight of the Counter Jihad movement entirely on their shoulders. Each one of us must do our part. Violence is not called for here. Islam loves violence. It thrives on violence. It defines itself through violence. The truth is that the true enemy of Islam is information. Spread it!

Peace,
Eric Allen Bell
Eric@BellMedia.org
http://www.Facebook.com/EricAllenBell

| 261 Comments
del.icio.us | Digg this | Email | FaceBook | Twitter | Print | Tweet

261 Comments

| Leave a comment

53000 sf! why so big? how many muslims can fit in a 53000sf?
just shows you their supramecy. that is all.
M

Mr. Bell,
I thank you from the bottom of my heart for having the courage to stand up to the enemy and not submit to their intimidation tactics like the majority of people. The brave people you mention above are very respectable company and purveyors of the truth about islam who need all the support they can get. I salute them, you and your courage.

I think you mostly nailed the mosque issue but I not only consider them "victory" mosques but barracks that function as any barracks would.

That said I very much enjoyed your article and hope you will continue to fight the good fight with us.

They're getting ready for the huge growth of Muslims in the area that they will encourage.

The mosque will draw them as immigration grows in the US.

They're getting ready for the huge growth of Muslims in the area that they will encourage.

The mosque will draw them as immigration grows in the US.

Excellent article, Eric.

By the way, anyone who's on Facebook should check out EAB's facebook page. It's pretty lively.

http://www.Facebook.com/EricAllenBell

i'm confused eric, did you change your mind about pulling out of the counter jihad movement and not doing your documentary? if so, what happened to change your mind?

Though we have disagreed, EAB, on certain matters (e.g., the Occupy Movement), on the matter of Islam we are very much in accord. I salute you for your capacity to change your mind about Islam, for your courage and for this article, which is a damn fine one. Hope you and those whom you hold most dear are doing well. And once again, welcome to the fight of fights in our time. You've already done more than your share. Take care.

this is insane. it really is.
M

Jaded Jade -

I have addressed my family's security concerns and am back on the battlefield.

And I'm just getting started...

Thanks :)

Eric

"And much of my work today is focused on correcting my mistakes and educating the world about what I now know to be the defining issue of our time: The grave threat of Political Islam."

One wonders, is the term "Political Islam" a synecdoche for Islam (you know, Plain Old Normative Garden-Variety Classic Coke Islam Straight No Chaser)...? Or is it meant to denote a careful distinction?

If the latter, one then wonders what is being bracketed out by this term: an Islam viably assimilable to the modern world and its modern virtues and values; and in that viable assimilation bringing along in its train hundreds of millions of Muslims whom we must embrace as partners in life? It would be good of Eric Allen Bell to clarify these questions.

I reasonably suspect, however, that I shall have to add that term -- Political Islam -- to my list of prefixes, suffixes, qualifiers and euphemisms (or, actually, cacophemisms) by which our "Age of the Great Inhibition" (as Hugh Fitzgerald put it) creatively insulates and protects Islam itself -- by multiplying artificial and detachable bogeymen separable from Islam itself -- from the criticism, and condemnation, it -- Islam itself -- so richly deserves.

And by the way, it's nice to see Bell again, after his long Spring vacation.

LemonLime,

I have mixed feelings about the term "political Islam" as well.

On the one hand, there is no clean separation between mainstream Islam and Islamic law. However, on the other hand, I believe that quite a number of people would immediately shut out information that says Islam is a problem. Some of those people would be open to information saying that political Islam is a problem.

It takes a great deal of research and study to reach the conclusion that the problem really is garden variety Islam. I think it's useful to use terms that can at least get people started.

There can be a 2-step process: First, conclude that political Islam is a problem. Second, discover that there's no clear-cut distinction between Islam and political Islam.

Lemon Lime -

My "mysterious disappearance" had to do with some security concerns.

As for using the term "Political Islam" - I make it quite clear in my article that Islam IS Political Islam and suggest that perhaps we might reconsider if it deserves First Amendment consideration as a "religion".

So glad to see you back, EAB. We need more true warriors for our cause.

Keep up the good work!

Regards,

CGW

eric: as a former muslim, I appluade your decision to fight back the islamists and the jihadists. I expeirineced and lived this evil called islam for the first 19 years of my life. I see the devastation that is being waged in my birth country Iran. and I also can see how they are bent on killing the west. stealth jihadists are 10000 times more dangerous that the ones who strap bomb! the momentum seems to be on our side and it also seems that the americans are finnally begining to get the picture. or at least I think. I do my part on a daily basis to make a difference. where I work, NYC and where I live, NJ, the task of convicing people that islam is the single biggest threat to our freedom is challenging to say the least. most people as you know around here are to the left and PC, and their argument is that we can all live together peacefully. we can not. Islam is not compatible with democarcy nor does it recognize democracy. this past saturday, I brought my 12 year old son to the navy ships(fllet week). he asked me if I could take him to see a mosque and I agreed. he asked what does it look like? and I said just a building. he asked if he is going to like it? I said it is going to stink to high havens! he said why? and I said: it is hot out side and muslims must take their shoes of in order to enter the mosque. sure enough the stench was disgusting and I think that had a lasting impression on him! keep up the good work!
M

Eric,
Excellent Article! This is a must read for everyone. You put into words that which many of us know but do not write down. Plus your insight into the "backroom" dealings for the construction approval of the Murfreesboro victory mosque were great. Keep up the great work.

Lemon Lime,
Political Islam = Islam

Islam is Islam

No moderate, radical, etc. Just ONE ISLAM

Nice one Mr Bell. I hope many others worldwide follow suit and grab the nettle.

Unfortunately--for those who will not read your entire article (or any other similar document)--the phrase "Political Islam" perpetuates the false notion of a (nonexistent)subset of Islam that so-called "moderate" Muslims are either not aware of or that is not a part of "their" Islam (think Irshad Manji, Zuhdi Jasser, Little House on The Prarie, and the Learning Channel's "All American Muslim" as but examples).

It's like telling an audience that the Qur'an contains special chapters for Muslim "extremists" alone.

When writting about its political and legal aspects, I suggest you adopt and use the term "Orthodox Islam".

PRCS

ISLAM IS ISLAM. THERE IS ONLY ONE ISLAM

Brilliant article, thank you.

'If you build it they will come', and they will keep coming...
If you don't build it, they will go
elsewhere...Elsewhere is a good place for them...

Mendacious, bigoted, manipulative, mysterious, unrepentant, and self aggrandizing.

I am warning you about this guy.

Mr. Bell please stay away from Robert Spencer, and Pamela Geller. These are people I admire a great deal, and they do not deserve you.

eric: what is this guy livingengine saying? i don't get it.
M

I am not going to start a flame war on this.

I have already made myslef perfectly clear on this.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/03/debate-tonight-is-islam-inherently-violent----eric-allen-bell-vs-nadir-ahmed.html#comment-871861

Remember what I told here.

Well done! I agree it was very interesting to get the inside scoop (literally) on the threats, the lies, the conflict of interest by the Mayor, the views of the Egyptian cleric, and the whitewash by big media.

Is there any way to get more info on the financial backers of this project? Obviously a couple hundred families from Murfreesboro, TN can't finance a project of this size on their own.

Also, you could do a documentary on these "mega" mosques cropping up in small towns and neighborhoods -- I just saw a strange story from Florida @ SW 111th Ave
Miami, FL 33165 WHERE SOME SEE AN UGLY HOUSE, MIAMI-DADE COMMISSIONER SEES A PLOT http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/23/2814455/where-some-see-an-ugly-house-miami.html#storylink=misearch#storylink=cpy

Larry Estavan has developed an unhealthy preoccupation with yours truly. He has contacted most of the prominent Counter Jihad figures to "warn them" about me.

An Islamic woman called in one night when I was on the Jamie Glazov radio show called, "Radio Jihad". She said she was a "moderate Muslim". I asked her several pointed questions, such as "Will you, right now, right here, condemn the prophet Mohammed for raping a 9 year old girl?" She said she would not because it was okay for him to do so. I told the woman, "Then you are not a moderate. You are a radical".

Larry was furious with how I spoke to her and has since been on the warpath. Really, singlemindedly for weeks now he has been focused on "stopping" me somehow. From what, I don't know.

I think it would take a court order to know for sure where the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro has come up with literally millions of dollars to very quickly build their 53,000 square foot mega mosque.

I believe that if we stay the course, we can secure that court order. This said, I have very little confidence in the attorney to who perusing this right now.

So my feeling is that, as we put more publicity on this, we might get more answers. But we will only get answers when the mainstream media starts to demand them or when a court orders it. So far neither has happened yet.

Well done! I agree it was very interesting to get the inside scoop (literally) on the threats, the lies, the conflict of interest by the Mayor, the views of the Egyptian cleric, and the whitewash by big media.

Is there any way to get more info on the financial backers of this project? Obviously a couple hundred families from Murfreesboro, TN can't finance a project of this size on their own.

Also, you could do a documentary on these "mega" mosques cropping up in small towns and neighborhoods -- I just saw a strange story from Florida @ SW 111th Ave
Miami, FL 33165 WHERE SOME SEE AN UGLY HOUSE, MIAMI-DADE COMMISSIONER SEES A PLOT http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/23/2814455/where-some-see-an-ugly-house-miami.html#storylink=misearch#storylink=cpy

Eric Allen Bell is hardly someone to call other people "unhealthy", or "unbalanced".

He has a long history of anti-social behavior, and it is not a dead issue.

Remember what I told here.

sorry. one more question: I just googled this guy up and do not seem to find too much about him. who exactly is he?
Thank you
M

This is the greatest journalism I've read in a long, long time! Give me more!

The scary thing about reports like this is that currently Muslims only make up about 1% of the U.S. population. With this miniscule population look how much progress they have already made infiltrating into so many areas of American culture. The average religious/ethnic group in this country has maybe one or two social organizations and a function hall, that's about it. Muslims on the other hand, have an extrodinary long list of alphabet soup organizations that seems to grow longer by the week, and as the report noted, nearly all of them fall under the umbrella of the Muslim Brotherhood. All this with just 1% of the population. Wait till they get up around 10%, goodbye America as we know it.

Two terms to always keep in mind when dealing with these people. Taqiyya and hijra. Taqiyya is an arabic word roughly translated means snow-job when talking to infidels about Islam. Hijra is a formal doctrine within Islam which means conquest through immigration.

one of the main reason for this 1% having so much pool is because of their oil money and our Dhmmi and corupt politicains. very simple.
M

Miriam Rove -

I don't really know much about him. He reached out to me and actually helped me write a couple stories in the beginning, by emailing me some facts that I did not know.

Then one night he called a radio show I was on and just ranted and raved like a person who'd gone off their meds saying "I don't like him!"

He thinks I follow this New Age kook called "Ramtha" who claims to channel a man who is 15,000 years old. And no matter what I say, he insists that I am secretly fronting for Ramtha.

So, I'd prefer we stand shoulder to shoulder and fight the greatest threat of our time, rather than bicker. Apparently he has a different set of priorities.

isntlam - Thanks :)

I am a private citizen. I am not a public figure, and I am not pretending to be.

I grew up in So Cal., and went to school with the Hollywood, Malibu, Beverly Hills types. I know LA people. I know the party/entrepreneur types. I have had my share of experience with narcissists. I think I have a good understanding of EAB.

Eric has surrounded himself with phoney gurus, false prophets, and people with degrees in Neuro Linguistic Programing - manipulators all.

I defy anyone to tell me what Eric did to Saba was not bigotry. Even more concerning to me is that NO ONE said anything about that.

This email business that Eric is referring to is revealing. Who I send emails to is a private matter between myself, and the recipients. He has no business telling me who I can send emails to, what I might say in them, or threatening, or defaming me in any way over this.

Right now Eric wants something, acceptance, I suppose. But, once he feels independent, he will return to his nature, and then, woe to the unwary.

Mark my words, and keep your ears, and eyes open.

"I defy anyone to tell me what Eric did to Saba was not bigotry. Even more concerning to me is that NO ONE said anything about that."

I never said anything because I would have said the same and much more to that supremacist witch.

Speaking nice to or playing nice with supremacists is as useless as spitting in the wind. I was actually surprised that the lefty EAB had it in him to to talk to the supremacist witch as she so richly deserved to be spoken to.

Sabah is a muslim. ALL muslims are bigots because islam is the most bigoted ideology foisted upon mankind. She got a taste of her own medicine from EAB, as far as I am concerned.

Sorry for the double post. It got hung up somewhere in cyberspace?

I do think most Americans would object to Saudi money coming in and redesigning and reconstituting their pleasant residential neighborhoods. I hope you can prevail and get to the bottom of this story.

It's a delicate issue to challenge these projects while also respecting freedom of religion and not discriminating against Muslim Americans out of opposition to Islam and sharia. We do have a Constitution and laws, they have rights but also responsibilities as American citizens to obey the law of the land. They know it.

So, when some Muslims override zoning and building regulations, disregard common decency towards their neighbors, and worst of all, respond with threats and false accusations of anti-Muslim bias and victimhood, then this is not a freedom of religion issue anymore. It's about their lack of respect for law and order.

Thanks for your commitment to the counter jihad!

I have to disagree with you.

The first priority of the Counter Jihad movement should be preserving things like the First Amendment, not abusing random Muslims.

People are free to have crazy, dangerous, and wrong ideas; Heaven knows Eric Allen Bell does. However, when these ideas become politically active, or when people try to implicate others in their folly, and bigotry then something needs to be said.

I know I am taking an unpopular position, it is not a lot of fun, but I am right, and that knowledge sustains me.

"There can be a 2-step process: First, conclude that political Islam is a problem. Second, discover that there's no clear-cut distinction between Islam and political Islam."

That's often true; in fact, I myself went through roughly the very same 2-step process you describe -- years ago. I'm just getting impatient with all the laggards in the West, most of whom are certainly intelligent enough to grasp what isn't rocket science.

I however, came to the conclusion a while ago that in fact a little shock treatment (quite mild, in fact, consisting of the repetition of incorrect words, phrases and ideas, no electricity or waterboarding involved) is a better way to wake our fellow Western sloths out of this ridiculous politically correct multiculturalist trance they are in, than continuing to coddle them and co-dependently enable their tyranny of thought.

It's an intuitive conviction, granted, and the seeming lack of results (or even the resistance aroused) may not satisfy one's immediate gratification; but I've a strong sense that the coddling way is going to take longer. Indeed, the latter may well reinforce the general retardation of progress in this regard. Meanwhile, Muslims are champing at the bit to mass-murder us, and I don't think the current strategy of drones, rare Muslim informants, and unofficial Muslim profiling hampered by official restrictions against it is going to hold the bastions against the water pressure for the sufficient time we need to prevent horrible terrorism like 911 and worse in the years, or decades, to come, as the front-line terrorists come to have more and more Muslims available within the West (beneficiaries of our open doors) to assist in various capacities.

At any rate, your 2-step process is the one which the vast majority of those in the anti-Islam movement (such as it is) are pursuing, so timid are they of the PC MC Beast that might snap back at them if they say the wrong things. Since I seem to have no effect on them (let alone the wider population), I can only hope it works in time to help prevent another 911, or worse.

Muslim supremacists who call in to radio shows to defend their indefensible bronze age arab-tribalism are not "random" and deserve all the abuse that comes their way for doing so.

Don't you DARE tell me how to defend my life, my family, my country, and my culture from these bronze age supremacists. "Abusing" supremacists IS within my and EAB's constitutionally protected free speech. You don't know what abuse is. What he said to that supremacist witch was not abuse. In fact, YOUR definition of abuse is lock step with the muslim supremacists' definition of abuse.

You may want to play nice with nasty supremacists. I do not and appreciate those who do not either.

If there are any kooks with kooky ideas that would be you. Stating things supremacists don't like to hear is not abuse.

Exactly what are you accusing Bell of doing, here? Just saying, "He's a bad guy & you'll see is not sufficient, at least to my standards. May I suggest that you get specific...or drop the personal attacks?

"I defy anyone to tell me what Eric did to Saba was not bigotry. Even more concerning to me is that NO ONE said anything about that." -- livingengine

Wow, what a wrongheaded thing to say. Then livingengine responds to Istanbulchick's demurrer by saying that he doesn't want us to flout the First Amendment -- as though assertive verbal challenges to Muslims to come clean about their unjust, evil and deadly ideology is going to harm our First Amendment!

The only fault one could conceivably find in Bell's doing that would be the hypothesis that Bell might have been posturing as robustly anti-Muslim, while in fact being as anti-bigoted as livingengine could otherwise hope for and oblige us all to be. If livingengine has unrelated reasons for condemning Bell, it's a shame he has to mush them together with precisely the wrong approach to Muslims and the unjust, evil and deadly ideology they continue to enable.

The Murfreesboro Mosque: Built on a Foundation of Lies
................................

And, really, on what other basis could you build a Mosque in the West?

More:

Not long afterwards, news broke that police had finally caught the man who had vandalized another mosque, in a town not far away. And as it turned out, he was a Muslim and a member of the congregation. In doing a bit of research, it turns out that this sort of thing happens more often than one might think. One begins to wonder if the story of being victimized is a manufactured narrative to support the false idea that Islam in America is the victim.
................................

Thanks for that information. The arson at the Murfreesboro Mosque site is *still* being touted as an "Islamophobic hate crime".

More:

POLITICAL ISLAM: THE DEFINING ISSUE OF OUR TIME
................................

It is indeed—as much as standing against Fascism or Communism was for earlier generations. Happy to have you on board in the fight, Mr. Bell.

I am disturbed—but hardly surprised—that you have begun to suffer the same spate of Muslim death threats that anyone who dares stand against the threat of Islam does.

You are a brave man—and in your willingness to reevaluate your premises, a very principled one.

Echoing what George said above, you need to clarify what your point is. Put up or desist.

Livingengine, I have always respected your comments.

I have to admit I am at a loss to understand your antipathy for Eric Allen Bell, here, though. I have read your comments on this issue on previous threads, as well.

I personally believe that calling pious Muslims out on some of the "Prophet's" horrifying behavior like his rape of 9-year-old child bride Aisha is *a good thing*.

I have always believed in the "big tent" approach to Anti-Jihad, in any case.

I would proudly stand beside both you *and* Mr. Bell against the threat of Islam.

Nicely, powerfully put.

Agreed, Lemonlime.

I don't know that anyone really KNOWS what approach will work best. I do know some people personally who would never be won over by the most "in your face" approach, but who have actually come to grips with some key facts with the slightly more gentle approach. However, of course it's quite possible that there are others who would be convinced more quickly with more of a brute force strategy. (Forceful language, that is.)

I think it's fine to have both strategies running at the same time, so that people who would tune out the harsher version can still assimilate some points from a slightly milder source. Not that a frank discussion of political Islam can be all that mild. But mild in the sense that they don't have to be afraid of becoming a "bigot" while they are learning some basic facts.

This goes for everyone.

I have said this before, and I will say it again. Show how what EAB did is not bigotry. This is a challenge.

Bring it, Wellington, or whoever.

I have explained myself in great length, and detail, even going so far as to break it down to second by second analysis.

If you can't see it, it is because you don't want to.

You get an "A" for fighting jihadis, and a "D" for common sense, and upholding American values.

After a careful reading of Bell's essay here (in which, by the way, I found numerous grammatical and syntactical mistakes and typos indicative of a hasty publication with little careful editing or proofing), I'm satisfied that his term "Political Islam" is, in fact, synecdochal for Islam itself.

However, I'm concerned about his conclusion, where, in explaining the Counter Jihad, he counsels that "Violence is not called for here." Ever? By anyone (i.e., the military, the intelligence and the police of Western governments defending us)?

If Bell is referring strictly to the Counter Jihad movement (I'd prefer to call it the anti-Islam movement) as the movement of members of citizenries working to wake up their own West to the threat of Muslims following Islam, then I agree. But it sounds like he thinks the Counter Jihad movement's main goal should be to defeat Islam through mere "truth-telling" to Muslims, as though Muslims are going to change their fanatical minds by anything we say. Rather, the Counter Jihad movement should be directing all its energies and focus on waking up the West, so that the West can defend itself from Muslims following Islam. And it is unreasonable to expect that this will not entail violence, simply because Muslims following Islam are going to continue to be violent against us, in tandem with their fellow stealth jihadists (which it is reasonable to assume includes the minions of ordinary Muslims) enabling the exponentially increasing ability of the terrorists plot their attacks calculated to weaken our sociopolitical system sufficiently, so they think, to open a breach for conquest.

I don't think Muslims will ever be able to succeed in conquering us. However, even in trying, but failing to succeed, they will be able to wreak untold mayhem and misery upon our citizenries. And no amount of mere truth-telling will stop that, as the rubber gets closer to meeting the road over the coming critical decades.

But, I suppose the West can eschew violence, until after, say, a million of us in various places throughout the West gets mass-murdered.

Is that acceptable to YOU? would be the politically incorrect Uncle Sam Poster for this new war we are in.

It would seem that Scary Larry's preoccupation with EAB is much like the torrid man crush Reza Aslan has on Robert Spencer. Don't let it creep you out too much Eric.

I looked up the word bigotry in the dictionary. It is, of course, based on the definition of the word bigot, which it defines as:

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Note the word "or" in the definition -- a conjunction which clearly indicates a choice among the items listed (group, religion, race, or politics), not their wholesale inclusion.

Thus one can even eliminate the word "race" from the definition, and still be a "bigot".

Count me in! I'm a bigot, because I am strongly partial to my own group -- we, the non-Muslims of the world who don't want Muslims to continue abusing, oppressing, torturing, raping and kiling us and trying to increase their ability to do more of the same -- and because I am rationally intolerant of Muslims who follow Islam which is the blueprint for their outrageously unjust, evil and deadly ideology.

But Islam is in fact a tyrannical political system, a brutal and sadistic legal system – thinly veiled in a theology which technically grants it the status of a religion, at least according to the US Department of Justice.


This short sentence captures the spirit and letter of Islam directly. Islam is nothing like a religion, but everything as a "brutal and sadistic legal system". When strong enough, meaning they have enough clout through numbers and money, it becomes a strong arm of Islam's world Caliphate ambitions. This ambition is destructive to our hard earned constitutional human freedoms, equality, and governance by just laws protecting freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and personal human rights. In short, it is a hostile theo-political-tyranny structure wholly opposed and destructive to our American way of life, of our inalienable right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Throughout the whole world where Islam flourishes, these rights are eroded and people made to suffer, impoverished and persecuted, where equality of gender, rights of belief and freedom of worship, of unimpeded social achievement is denied non-Muslims. It is clearly spelled out in their "holy books" that non-Muslims are inferior. Anyone with a clear and inquisitive mind can read Koran for themselves and see what is written there, a must read for everyone.

We have no friends in Imams, nor da'wa at the mosque, nor in the nicey smiley spokesmen and women fronting Islam. As all conquered peoples who fell to Islam's 1400 year of Jihad had learned the hard way, they had no friends; same as all people oppressed by Islamic persecution today, they have no friends. Most suffered terribly at the hands of their Muslim overseers, through genocide, enslavement, torn families, punishing taxation, humiliation, and onerous cruelty. Sharia is the tool with which Islam presses its heavy boot over-structure on the masses, crushing the human soul by making itself supreme, oppressing all who are conquered by it. In truth, Islam is a war machine, every bit as dangerous as any totalitarianism produced under Communism or Nazism. To give this war machine "religious status" is a shameful act of ignorance, and woeful official incompetence. Read their book, and understand that all our natural human rights are at stake. Murfreeboro mosque, same as the New York World Trade Center mosque, are where this menace to all humanity must be taken down. No, this is our "line in the sand".

The only fine line of distinction that can be drawn here, since we are all human beings, is to not hate the sinner, but to hate the sin. Even Muslims are trapped within the odious cycle of power oppression, fear, threats, and ultimately murders. They even kill their young. You have to have been hiding in a dark cave deep in the forest to not know what Islam and Jihad represent, that it is a brutal machine to impose Sharia. Sharia is the great impoverisher, where the human freedom to seek truth and beauty is heavily suppressed, punished for even trying as "blasphemy", making their whole world sad and destitute. Forget the beauty of the arts, of music, of free personal expression, of women allowed their feminine conscience of the soul, of parents educating their children with love and affection, of morality true to the Golden Rule universal for all. These are all forbidden in Islam. Muslims are as oppressed by this as anyone, a big reason why they flee their Islamic countries for the West, why they hope to give their children a new start in life, why they come here. But in the end, in their tow drags the oil-money-funded mosques and Imams who must answer to Saudi Arabia, the self-appointed keeper of the two "sacred" sites, Mecca and Medina, enforced and perpetrated by the long arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and their ilk. They are as oppressed as all people conquered by Islam, and having succumbed to its evil powers have now become infected, blinded, so they themselves have lost the will to resist. Though they do not understand this, Muslims are the first victims of Islam. Let it not be that we are the next. There is no nice way to put it, but forget the "moderates", they don't exist. Nor is there any legitimate way to roll back centuries of civilizational achievements, of science and technology, of our legacy of intellectual and artistic greatness, our great cities, our democratic principles, and our goal of excellence; all the things that had made us great. Our gains in our modern freedoms are not negotiable, they're not for sale, nor are they to be trampled on. Truth is, Islam must be stopped. Anyone who claims otherwise is either a fool or a liar.

Stop Sharia, and stop building the mega-mosques. They are NOT welcome here.


[Eric, great job, kudos for writing this important essay on this ill intentioned mosque.]

LemonLime -

It's easy to criticize from the sidelines, isn't it?

I wrote the article in a few hours after the news broke that a judge ordered the mosque to stop building and the mosque defied his orders. So, if you were inconvenienced by some grammatical errors, feel free to produce your own expose of the situation. We can use all the help we can get.

As for my statement about not needing violence - note that this is under the heading of "COUNTER JIHAD". In other words, since one really never knows if the next Andres Brevik is reading, I wanted to emphasize that those of us in the "Counter Jihad" movement can be most effective with information.

We can change laws, if we first gain public consent. It wouldn't be the first time. Islam, as a sadistic and brutal political and legal system, does not deserve protection as a "religion" under the First Amendment.

First however the public needs to be educated as to what Islam actually is. If we can accomplish that, then we can start to escalate investigations, tax mosques, demand greater transparency, make arrests where necessary, bring in Child Protective Services whenever an Imam teaches that having sex with a 9 year old is okay, etc. We can charge many of these clerics with treason and start to clean this mess up and reverse a very disturbing trend.

So if you want to do your part, send the link to this article to everyone in the TN media you can find online. Or, you can sit there with your Anti-Muslim Jersey and a beer and yell at the players on the field.

Eric

Substitute "Neo-Nazis" or "KKK" members for "Muslims." Still have a problem with a broad-brush approach? You see, it really makes no difference what hateful ideology people adhere too. Once they do they are all fair game for criticism PRECISELY because they adhere to a hateful ideology. Or do you dispute that Islam is a hateful ideology?

I have not criticized your article, EAB. Indeed, I praised it. But I must tell you that under present American law there is zero chance that Islam will be denied First Amendment protection as a religion. And I can see nothing in the foreseeable future, judicially or legislatively speaking, that will alter this.

A mistake that so many make, an understandable mistake but a mistake nonetheless, is in thinking that for a religion to be a religion it must be good or at least harmless. Not so. A religion can be malevolent and still be a religion. Islam is such a religion. And as a religion, nefarious in many ways though it is and inimical to liberty though it be, it has full First Amendment protection. And remember, Nazism and Marxism, secular totalitarian ideologies as opposed to the spiritual totalitarian ideology Islam is, are also legal in America and protected by the First Amendment. What's not protected is action upon belief which runs counter to Constitutional or statutory law, but this is a different matter from seeking denial of First Amendment protection to belief systems.

The route to defanging Islam in America, as is the case with all totalitarian ideologies, does not lie in trying to deprive them of First Amendment protection. Rather, shaming them into marginalization, making adherents of them come across for what they are---confused human beings at best, wicked members of our species at worst---is the best, really the only route that can and should be taken. Again may I compliment you on the fine article you wrote about your "travails" respecting the Murfreesboro mosque project.

LemonLime,

Stay with us here in the present, man. Did Breivik do good or harm to the counter-Jihad movement? I hope we would agree he did harm.

How about Robert Spencer? I would vote that he does good.

Even if you aren't concerned about any moral issues of using violence, just purely from a practical standpoint, non-violence works better. And I would hope that we on the pro-freedom side would have a strong moral preference for peaceful means as well.

As for whether there could hypothetically come a time when a violent defense is warranted... let's prevent that eventuality using peaceful means, shall we?

Wellington -

Wouldn't you agree though that marginalized cultures tend to act up and act out?

I'm in LA and that is the story it seems everywhere I turn. There are a few underclasses here who nonetheless seem to have taken over the culture and trashed nearly the entire LA basin, bringing it down to their low standard.

They already feel ashamed and second class. Our jails are already overflowing with such people. Our schools cannot teach as so many of the kids do not speak the language. Many of these same kids beat up those who were born here. It's a third world country in LA. It's a mess.

Similar problems exist in Europe in many Islamic neighborhoods. I am concerned that over time this will happen to Murfreesboro. I don't mind being wrongly labeled a racist. But there is a long pattern of first cousin inbreeding in Islam. Consequently we see high levels of agression and overall lower IQs.

So I'm not trying to challenge you so much as to seriously seek your input. What do we do? Looking ahead, in your estimation, how do we deal with the growing Islamization of America?

Thanks,

Eric


For the record and just for clarity... for what it's worth...

I am by no means a pacifist. I just recognize that, too much of the time, violence brings more violence.

I am especially opposed to initiating violence and opposed to violence that is directed at the innocent.

But sometimes war is necessary and it does appear we may be heading into a world war with Islam. I sure hope not.

I don't think that the solution to our culture war, here at home needs to involve violence. Again, information is the biggest enemy of Islam.

The information age presents us with a golden opportunity. It will take time, but I do feel it is a realistic goal that people would feel ashamed to be a Muslim.

I am not "tolerant" when I meet Muslims. I ask them if they will condemn the prophet for child rape and murdering civilians. If they will not, I kindly let them know that they are part of a violent supremacist movement and that I don't need anyone like that in my life.

Sometimes it is not safe for me to say anything. I am finding that to be the case for me more and more these days.


Wellington, because for most Muslims Sharia and Islam are not really separable permanently (except perhaps by some kind of agonizing and deadly vivisection), Islam, as a religion, severely tests and ultimately threatens the First Amendment and the Constitution. Seen as a religion, which it is, Islam appears to be protected by the First Amendment. But seen as a treasonous and seditious movement, which it is, to overthrow the constitutional order of the United States, it seems its adherents should be subject to charges of treason and sedition -- or at least to some kind of legal challenges and requirements.

The American system thus seems destined to vivisect Islam in two, or be destroyed by it. The U.S. seems fated (perhaps after a major WMD disaster happens) to try to carve American Islam into religious components and political ones, the latter to be discarded as offal into the hazardous waste bin. But a huge monster will not yield easily to vivisection, even if Westerners (raised on "Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, to God the things that are God's," and, "My kingdom is not of this world,") feel it rather natural to have some kind of distance between religion and state. Whereas in Islam, politics and religion interpenetrate finely, down to the capillary level, and to separate them is not natural, and can only be temporary.

To switch metaphors, Islam has a cancer, but the cancer is in all the vital organs, so how can America operate to save the patient? How can the noxious theocratic seditious elements be removed without killing the patient? Yet the American legal system, as it currently is, may try the hopeless operation in a time of mortal crisis. The First Amendment may make it difficult to pull the plug on the ideology as a whole. But how can an operation be successful in the case of Islam? The removal of the theocratic tumor from Shinto in Japan was successful after World War II, but Islam is a different story. The tumor has metastasized aggressively throughout the ideology almost from the beginning. Islam will likely not be saved by the scalpel. It will probably die, as it lived, by the sword.

Teri,

I think if you re-read two of my paragraphs in the comment you were responding to, you'll see I'm not advocating vigilantism:

I'm concerned about his conclusion, where, in explaining the Counter Jihad, he counsels that "Violence is not called for here." Ever? By anyone (i.e., the military, the intelligence and the police of Western governments defending us)?

If Bell is referring strictly to the Counter Jihad movement (I'd prefer to call it the anti-Islam movement) as the movement of members of citizenries working to wake up their own West to the threat of Muslims following Islam, then I agree. But it sounds like he thinks the Counter Jihad movement's main goal should be to defeat Islam through mere "truth-telling" to Muslims, as though Muslims are going to change their fanatical minds by anything we say. Rather, the Counter Jihad movement should be directing all its energies and focus on waking up the West, so that the West can defend itself from Muslims following Islam. And it is unreasonable to expect that this will not entail violence, simply because Muslims following Islam are going to continue to be violent against us, in tandem with their fellow stealth jihadists (which it is reasonable to assume includes the minions of ordinary Muslims) enabling the exponentially increasing ability of the terrorists plot their attacks calculated to weaken our sociopolitical system sufficiently, so they think, to open a breach for conquest.

The violence that the West's self-defense will "entail" will be (and already is -- cf. Obama's drones)... -- see the first paragraph's parenthetical phrase: "the military, the intelligence and the police of Western governments defending us".

addition in bold:

"will be... done by... the military..." etc.

I don't know Eric Allen Bell, but what I've seen so far I've found pretty darned admirable.

I haven't read the article yet, but intend to do so when I have a few minutes.

This movement certainly needs allies with some liberal sentiments. Center-left and center-right folks need to come together to resist Islam. If we don't hang together, as Ben Franklin said...

I might not like Nancy Pelosi's ideas, but I'll fall down and worship her compared to the Muslim Brotherhood. We have to keep things in perspective. Harry Reid might be a somewhat noxious nuisance with somewhat destructive ideas (but many politicians on the Right are no better); Islam is not just a somewhat destructive nuisance. Islam is this.

Good comment overall. I'd point out that our successful extraction of Shintoism from the Japanese and their culture was not unrelated to the horrific bombings we were forced, by their maniacally mass-murderous fanaticism, to inflict upon them.

What I seem to be hearing is that it's OK to be a bigot if it's Islam.

Well, just so you know, I have been in touch with Robert Spencer, and this is not his message. It is not the message of Pamela Geller. It is not the message of Greet Wilders.@ 6:10 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZDHgQJQXPM

It's not the message, people, and you know that.

One of the nice things about the counter-jihad movement is you don't have to become a White supremacist, or something. You don't have to demean yourself like that.

One more time, here it is.

Repeated calls for Sabah to condemn Muhammad.

29:38 "will you condemn the prophet for killing people, this is a yes, or no question."

30:50 again asking for condemnation of Muhammad

31:27 "I'm not labeling you. I'm giving you an opportunity to present yourself for who you really are."

31:40 again asking for a condemnation of Muhammad

31:56 labels her a Nazi - "you're the equivalent of a Nazi sympathizer."

36:40 again asking for a condemnation of Muhammad

39:40 yelling "She's 9 years old!"

44:55 "stop being a Muslim", and "snap out of it"

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/radio-jihad/2012/02/29/the-jamie-glazov-show

As I said before, compare what EAB does with what Jamie Glazov does. Jamie Glazov is communicating, he is not venting his spleen. He is not asking her to stop being a Muslim.

EAB is hypocritical, intolerant and religiously bigoted, and I'm not the first person to notice that. The people in Murfreesboro have said much the same thing.

But, you don't see it.

Do you suppose that all that time EAB spent with phony gurus, Ramtha heads, fortune tellers, Deepak Chopera, etc, that he learned thing or two about manipulating people?

I don't know I'm just throwing it out there.

What I am asking for is that EAB not implicate Robert Spencer in his nastiness.

If he should happen to share a platform with Robert Spencer, and decide to blow his stack again that he make it clear he speaks for no one but himself.

That is just basic respect.


Livingengine,

I heard EAB's appearance on the Glazov show, and I am willing to grant you that he blew his stack a little.

But, this one incident isn't indicative of his overall personality, as least as I've come to understand it thru relating to him on Facebook.

And I'm also willing to accuse you of blowing your stack when you called in, condemning EAB and actually yelling. I thought you were very rude, completely took over the show, and I wished Jamie had cut you off long before he did. So, you've both committed wrongs.

You thought you were in the right because you took offense at EAB's interaction with Saba, but EAB, in turn, thought he was in the right, because he knows what Muhammad is reputed to have done, finds it reprehensible, and is tired of so-called "moderate Muslims" who refuse to condemn a 54-year old man marrying a 6-year old and raping her when she was 9. Or refusing to condemn him for anything; the murders, the torture, the theft, etc., etc.

Where is your outrage for the pedophile murderer, and the millions who think he's an excellent example of behavior?

Here's the show where Livingengine, or Larry blew his stack. Judge for yourself:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/radio-jihad/2012/03/07/the-jamie-glazov-show

Larry condemnation of EAB dominated the show from about 4:15 to about 21:15.

Larry Estavan -

I realize this is really, really hard for you - but I've got a mind of my own. I don't need to be in perfect lockstep with any of your heroes to be sincere. And I also don't need your approval.

You obsession with me has now gone on for months. PLEASE go back on your meds.

As for telling a Muslim to stop being a Muslim, that is exactly what I said to Saba. I might say the same thing if a Nazi had called in. When you're on the radio you can do whatever you want. If you don't like listening to me on the radio, don't listen.

Muslims who refuse to condemn the prophet Mohammed for murder and rape are radicals and need to be told as much sometimes. We need to stop giving people who call in to promote their brand of lunacy a pass, just because they call it a "religion".


That's right that is the show. It is also the show where EAB lies about being New Age.

It is also the show where he says he will abuse Muslims again, and he will do it again.

He will also abuse women again, and if he thinks he can get away with it, he'll test you, too.

I do not agree with your characterization of me monopolizing the show. I read my statement, said I was done, Dr. Glazov kept asking me questions. I actually wanted get off so I could hear what other people had to say. I did not monopolize the show.

I mean if you don't like showing off. What do you think Eric did the previous week? He was talking tough to a woman over the telephone to impress you. It took no courage to do what he did.

Hooray for Hollywood!

He can take this the hard way, or any way he wants, but I don't ever want to hear him talk like that again, especially around Robert Spencer.

Eric,

Welcome back. Thanks for the fascinating report and, as a result, relevant commentary by JWers.

Never falter; never give up; be safe.

Islam: where freedom ends and slavery begins.

Thanks for writing about this. My family and I live about 20 minutes from where this mosque is being built and drive by frequently to get to Murfreesboro. Just the other day we were about to pass it and my mom said my dad to her there was a ruling to temporarily stop construction. As we got closer, we saw they were building like normal.

As anyone familiar with the rumor that it is being built on what used to be a hog farm?

Mr. Bell, that was an excellent, and very informative article. Thank you for writing it.

Mr. Bell asked the muslimah to condemn the paedophile mohammed. She refused to do so. Is it your contention that because he called her out on this vileness, that makes him a bigot ?

I know nothing of Mr. Bell's (according to you) New Age propensities, but I would suggest that your sneering at them *is* bigotry.

How's this for a conspiracy theory: Bell and Livingengine are actually colluding together. I managed to find a recording of their secret meeting (it was left behind by Jim Phelps in an auto supply store off Hollywood & Vine, who due to a senior moment, had failed to verify that it had actually self-destructed in 10 seconds, Jim):

Bell: Hello?

Livingengine: It's Christopher Columbus.

Bell: The geese are flying out of Capistrano.

Livingengine: So, the plan is, when you reappear on JW, I will try to take over the comments thread, and make ludicrously ridiculous accusations that you are a "bigot" for standing up to that Muslima, Saba, on the Glazov show.

Bell: That's right. And make it look good. Really go over the top.

Livingengine: Check. That way, they'll think I'm the nut for abusing the term "bigot" --

Bell: -- and it will help beef up my anti-Islam bonafides among the JW crowd.

Livingengine: Right. And should I bring up the New Age stuff too?

Bell: Yes, you'd better -- since some of the readers probably know by now that's your other hobbyhorse against me.

Livingengine: Right -- it would look strange if I didn't.

Bell: Exactly -- but remember: don't talk too much about the New Age stuff, and emphasize my "bigotry" against the Muslima, Saba.

Livingengine: Loud and clear.

Bell: You better go now. And make sure to trash your prepaid cell phone.

[garbled sound, followed by a series of beeps, then silence...]


Mr. Bell thank for the article, I thought it was informative.

Livingengine - I've always enjoyed your postings, but something is bugging you, it appears to me to be something really personal about Sabah. You commented about Mr. Bell abusing women to me sounds too much of a generalization. I think it was a coincident the person who phoned was a woman, I am 100% sure Mr. Bell would have said the same had it been a man.

As the saying goes, there are more than one way to skin a "goose". I like to read Mr. Bell's more of this kind of stuff. Our aim is to deprive Islam of oxygen - making people aware of what Islam really is. We all agree to that. It is also interesting that not a single practicing Muslim condemns anything whatever is reported about Mo did and said. That makes them all every bit extremists as Binladen & Co aka Al'Quiada.

Muslims believe that everyone is born a Muslim. They kill any Islamic apostate. There is no doubt in my mind that Islam is humongous genocidal system that has apparently over billion followers. Thought I doubt that figure, because the Islamic lands with any significant population are clueless about the number of people they have. They are not educated to carry out a reliable census.

One thing Mr. Bell could improve on stop calling the criminal dude a Prophet.

I'm listening to that Glazov radio show where Livingengine called in. Not done yet.

Thus far, Glazov has patiently and clearly asked LIvingengine -- twice -- whether assertively confronting Saba about her making excuses for Mohammed's evils was defensible.

Both times, Livingengine does not answer the question, and in place of a responsive answer, emotionally veers off to assert that Bell's unrelated sins render him unworthy of confronting Saba.

One has some difficulty discerning whether Livingengine's judgement is so clouded by emotion he cannot see he is not answering Glazov's question -- patiently and clearly asked twice -- or whether Livingengine is expediently using the charge of "bigotry" to add another smear to Bell, which he hopes will resonate with his listeners.

If those listeners care about defending the West from Islam and from the Muslims who follow Islam, that smear will obviously not resonate with them; which further calls Livingengine's faculties into question. Also, it was not a little amusing, and oddly disconcerting, that Livingengine near the beginning of his rant solemnly quoted from J.S. Mill's On Liberty concerning the proper comportment and virtues of a loftier demeanor in public dialogue and debates -- then proceeded to flout nearly all of Mill's counsel.

When I spoke of marginalizing Islam in America (and hopefully throughout the West), what I meant was that I hope that Islam eventually becomes as unacceptable in the collective consciousness of America as has fascism and Marxism. I did not mean it in the sense that we will have entire no-go areas that are Muslim controlled as has become the case in countries like France and Sweden. In short, marginalizing Islam, as I envision it, is psychological and not geographical. Eventually what would be ideal is that many Muslims become disillusioned with Islam and leave it and the vast bulk of non-Muslims finally see Islam for what it is---a totalitarian ideology which is antithetical in sundry ways to traditional American ideals and values, just as has happened to other totalitarian ideologies.

As for any group in America who feel ashamed and second-class, the route out of such a hellhole is through a strong family structure, core values which honor hard work and character and probably too a significant amount of faith in an enlightened religion. Neither you nor I are religious, but good religions are, I would contend, a necessity for society as a whole. Christianity is such a religion. Islam is not. Let's face it, devout Christians are far, far less likely to commit crimes, develop a victim-oriented mentality, have children out of wedlock (presently functioning as a disaster for black Americans) and are definitely more likely to be productive, act upon a true Golden Rule for all and be law-abiding and patriotic Americans. As I've written before here at JW, I counsel those who are non-religious not to become anti-religious as well. The former is defensible while the latter is not wise.

Of course, Islam can have some of the same positive effects on people as does an enlighteded relgion, but it comes at an enormous cost to America because no devout Muslim can also be a patriot since Islam is devoid of the concept of the separation of church and state and this runs directly counter to a fundamental pillar of the American Republic. Moreover, Islamic doctrine looks upon non-Muslims as inferior human beings in this world and no ideology which treats with any group of human beings as inferior, saddled with all kinds of liabilities here on earth, should ever be admired. Certainly any such ideology runs directly counter to what America at its best stands for. Islam also insures other things that an enlightened religion like Christianity does not, two of them being a tendency to whine and a conviction that everything is willed by the deity, thus creating a fatalism about life which makes it much more diffcult for society as a whole to be productive (one only need look at the desultory conditions of Islamic nations for partial confirmation of this). Finally, and quite in contrast to religions like Christianity and Buddhism, the more thoroughoy a Muslim imbibes his faith, the more likely he is to be prepared to act violently in the name of his faith. Some 19,000 documented Islamic terrorist attacks worldwide just since 9/11 versus, let's see, around none committed by Christians and Buddhists serve as a damning indictment of Islam. And, as you and so many others have noted, the character of the founder of Islam is putrid while the same charge cannot be made of other religious and ethical founders.

Well, EAB, I've just touched upon a few themes and didn't want to go on too long. Hopefully, though, what I've written will give you a clearer idea of where I'm coming from and what I think best for America as we advance into the future. Take care.

Then there's the apparent bifurcation of the focus of Livingengine's indignation vis-a-vis Bell's confrontation with Saba the Muslima:

1) it was bad, because it was "bigotry" against a Muslim

2) it was just "grandstanding" on Bell's part (Livingengine says this in his response to Glazov who, for the third time, has to patiently ask him the same question he keeps evading). Livingengine also implied this above in the comments here where, ensconced within his larger charge of "bigotry" against Bell, he almost parenthetically describes Bell's confrontation with Saba as "showing off" which "took no courage to do" -- ending with a sarcastic "Hooray for Hollywood!" which obviously implies that Bell was not really sincerely confronting Saba but only pretending.

Which leads the listener and reader to wonder: well, which is it? At any rate, Door #1 is not going to win hearts among those who are long past being fed up with Muslims and their evasive maneuvers about their evil ideology (when, that is, they are not being candid about their evil ideology).

A good question to put to Livingengine -- if he were capable of answering in the spirit of J.S. Mill, that is -- would be:

What if Livingengine were a guest debater on Glazov's radio show, and a female caller called in who announced she was a supporter of Bell's purported New Age belief system and then proceeded to defend Bell? I doubt Livingengine would be able to restrain himself from confronting her as assertively as Bell confronted Saba.

1. "Muslims who refuse to condemn the prophet Mohammed for murder and rape are radicals and need to be told as much sometimes."

That is not correct, and exposes a fundamental ignorance of Islam and a Muslim's obligations therein. They are literalists (as Islam expects of Allah's every slave) who, as Wellington notes, should and must be shamed into marginalization, making them come across, to the rest of us, for what they are---confused human beings at best, wicked members of our species at worst, who, each and every one, without exception, is a member of a belief system which is both antithetical to democracy and runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution and American law.

That shaming and marginalization will not come about in Western nations so long as our neighbors and friends continue to be told that devout, compliant Muslims are "radicals" or "extremists" They need to told instead that—unlike the freedom of conscience enjoyed in Western societies--Islam is a complete way of life which to this day prohibits scrutiny and criticism of its teachings, by both Muslims and non, and that apostasy remains punishable by death.

2."We need to stop giving people who call in to promote their brand of lunacy a pass, just because they call it a "religion"."

I agree. But I don’t think that your harsh treatment of Sabah caused her to rethink her membership in the ummah.

Livingengine wrote:

This goes for everyone.

I have said this before, and I will say it again. Show how what EAB did is not bigotry. This is a challenge.
....................................

If calling a Muslim on the "Prophet's" mass murder and pedophilia is "bigotry", then count me in.

Here's a cartoon I did critical of Muhammed's massacre of the men of the Banu Qurayza tribe:

http://s478.photobucket.com/albums/rr144/gravenimageartist/?action=view¤t=BanuQurayza.jpg

And two that were critical of his rape of little 9-year-old Aisha (Warning: second image somewhat graphic):

http://s478.photobucket.com/albums/rr144/gravenimageartist/?action=view¤t=JWswing.jpg

http://s478.photobucket.com/albums/rr144/gravenimageartist/?action=view¤t=AishasWedding-1.jpg

I believe we need to be able to speak about the terrible actions of Islam's "perfect man"—and not just to praise them as pious Muslims do.

As for whether Mr. Bell is "New Age" or not—and if so, to what degree—I have to admit I don't care much one way or the other. I confess I find a lot of new agey stuff fairly silly, but I have *never* known anyone into new age present the aggressive threat that Islam does—and I'm around a lot of new agey people here in the San Francisco Bay Area.

We've had a couple of Wiccan and other new age posters here at JW before, and they were solid Anti-Jihadists.

In fact, having an antipathy to "New Age" could be considered "bigotry" as well, I suppose.

In any case, this seems like a red herring.

As I've said, I consider you a fine poster, Livingengine. But, respectfully, I think you're off base here.

In fact, I'm not sure how one can be Anti-Jihad at all without making a value judgment that Jihad and Shari'ah—including mass murder and child marriage—are bad things.

Well, traeh, as I wrote above, what one believes here in America is almost without exception protected by the First Amendment but many actions based on certain beliefs are not. What causes me chagrin is not so much that Islam exists in America (though it would be lovely if it didn't) but that so many non-Muslim Americans still do not understand this religion. A well-informed society is a well-armed society against those forces which would destroy or transform that society. In short, knowledge is power.

I fully agree with you that there are aspects of Islam which are indeed seditious toward our nation. These aspects of Islam, for instance certain doctrines found in Sharia, simply cannot be allowed to become operative. State legislatures like that of Kansas disallowing any law which is not compatible with the American Constitution and American statutory law is a sound first step in the right direction. Eventually, Muslims must be put on notice, just as Neo-Nazis, KKK members, anarchists, Marxists, etc., that you can believe what rot you want but if you break American law you in turn will be broken. I would add here that find whatever pretext one wants and limit severely Muslim immigration to America. For those Muslims already here, it is important to put them on notice that they believe in a religion which is not compatible with basic American values and ideals. If Muslims feel stigmatized by this, good. They should. They're the ones who are wrong and not those who beleive in such things as freedom of religion and freedon of speech, two of many freedoms that Islam knows nothing about.

The real problem still remains and that is that Islam is still looked upon as a positive or no worse than a neutral by too many Americans, including the previous President and the current one. This is what has to end. If this occurs, then curtailing Islam in America will follow as a matter of course. Not there yet. Hope you're doing well.

Listening now to Bell's confrontation with "Saba". Saba comes across as a very young, shy and passive female, with a markedly girlish tone of voice. However, she is clearly evading not only Bell's relentless interrogation, but also Glazov's more polite pressing of the same points which Bell insisted on.

If Saba were exactly the same and saying exactly similar things in defense of Hitler or the KKK, Livingengine would not call it "bigotry" to confront her as Bell did.

Two things seem to be clouding Livingengine's judgement in this regard: his condemnation of Bell's other, unrelated, sins; and Saba's extremely demure and girlish demeanor -- which, were they serving to defend the Holocaust or the KKK's guerilla war on blacks and Jews, I doubt (I hope) that Livingengine would tolerate for one minute.

Wellington -

The illegal alien Mexicans who are destroying LA at an astounding rate have very strong family structures and are very Catholic.

And yet our jails are overflowing with them. Their abundant offspring have destroyed our schools. They have driven up rents in the city, since now it is a luxury to live in an English speaking neighborhood, one without incredible noise pollution, one that does not literally smell like shit everywhere you go, one that is safe and free of Spanish spray painting on the walls. Such a neighborhood in LA is for the wealthy now only.

So, whereas I do agree with much of what you are saying, here we see an invasion of a foreign culture. And although all people have intrinsic value and no race is superior to another, this is an inferior culture which is dragging the rest of our culture down, negatively influencing the youth into thinking that wearing your ignorance on your sleeve or having done time is a badge of honor. Not all illegal Mexican immigrants fit this description, but overall as a group the do.

So if the population of Muslims is to increase with this boom in new mosque construction, what should we expect the future of certain cities in America to look like?

Should we not use the legal system to restrain this now? Stricter immigration laws, reconsidering at the Supreme Court level whether or not Islam is a religion, protected by the First Amendment?

Your thoughts?

Still listening to the Glazov show with the Muslima caller Saba.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/radio-jihad/2012/02/29/the-jamie-glazov-show

Glazov, in his comparatively more polite pressing of the point with Saba, at one point tries to articulate a way for her to redeem her "Inner Moderate" by suggesting to her that perhaps she's "torn" between her conscience and her continued support of Islam. Saba however persists no less stubbornly than an Imam Rauf or a Tariq Ramadan would -- yet oh so girlishly and shyly all the while -- to evade Glazov's patiently insistent logic; until Glazov loses patience at one point, not so much in his tone of voice, but in his content, adverting vividly to how the clitoris of little girls is "ripped out" often with glass shards in the practice of FGM, and challenging Saba to see how calling this "cultural" (as, of course, she had) is no defense of such a vile horror.

Of course, Saba continues to evade, even after that, as she had with regard to other evils Mohammed preached and practiced, thus tacitly defending them. Bell was utterly right in being less patient with her. Frankly, I'm beginning to wonder if Livingengine is not a Muslim convert himself.

"The illegal alien Mexicans who are destroying LA at an astounding rate have very strong family structures and are very Catholic."

The ones who are very Catholic are not doing the destroying; it's the ones whose Catholic values (similar to, for example, right-wing El Salvadorean death squads who raped and killed Catholic nuns among other crimes; or left-wing Nicaraguan or Cuban guerrillas; or the various criminal gangs and drug cartels that riddle Latin America and Mexico) have eroded for various reasons who are doing the destroying.

That's why Equivalencism is flawed: When we survey Muslim pathologies in various regions, we can -- for reasons massively documented on this very blog over the years -- point directly to their Islam as the source. As Wellington suggests, it is quite the opposite problem with regard to Christianity and Christians who happen to be indulging in practices precisely not preached in their churches.

OK, so here is what you call bigotry, and my responses:

Repeated calls for Sabah to condemn Muhammad.
--If Mohammed engaged in grossly unacceptable behavior, that normal humans would condemn, then why not ask Saba to condemn him for this behavior? This is very confrontive, but not bigoted, IMO.

31:27 "I'm not labeling you. I'm giving you an opportunity to present yourself for who you really are."
--Seems fair, in a confrontive sense.

31:56 labels her a Nazi - "you're the equivalent of a Nazi sympathizer."
--Why is this not a fair statement? If Mohammed committed atrocities comparable to the Nazis, and Saba sympathizes with them, then why is she not equivalent of a Nazi sympathizer? Again, it's very confrontive, otherwise no problem.

39:40 yelling "She's 9 years old!"
--The yelling part I could do without, but why not emphasize the age of Aisha?

44:55 "stop being a Muslim", and "snap out of it"
--I will agree this is over-confrontive. Not my style.

Overall, I think EAB was being extremely confrontive. I will agree that he was too confrontive in this instance for my taste. I will agree that I think Jamie Glazov's style was nicer and probably more effective. I would not feel comfortable sending out a link of this recording to many people for these reasons.

However, there is nothing in here to indicate bigotry, unless it is bigoted to hold Mohammed to the same standards we hold others.

On the other hand, I really didn't understand what problem you have with New Agers. You seemed to have a problem with New Agers on the basis of their beliefs, without specifying how this is a problem for you. So if anything, I thought YOU were expressing yourself in a bigoted manner.

You have, several times, alluded to EAB's history. If you know something relevant we don't, you can share it, although if it's just a matter of being a New Ager then I don't think that will help your case.

Incidentally, I have met a lot of NLP-ers who are very nice and basically good "normal" people. I have never experienced NLP-ers, as a group, to be especially confrontive. Perhaps more toward the opposite. Are you also bigoted towards NLP-ers? I know there are some bad ones out there, as well. If you have had a bad experience, I wouldn't hold that against all people who are trained in NLP. I don't think EAB's style in this instance bears any resemblance whatsoever to anything I have encountered with my NLP-er friends.

Teri,

I hope you saw my post which I posted last night in which I took the time and trouble to respond to your concerns about my position, and in which I demonstrated that you had misread what I had written. I wouldn't bother to raise this if the misreading weren't a matter of implying that I was arguing in defense of a Breivikian response to the problem of Islam, which is rather a serious implication. It'd be nice to know that you read my response, and that you either see how you had misread me before, or somehow continue to have concerns about my position.

To continue on a bit in response to Livingengine:

First of all, I basically like EAB and support his work under the "big tent" philosophy, and I do not agree with you at all that EAB is a bigot.

However, I do think that EAB seriously bungled his communication with Saba by being so aggressively confrontive. It is a basic principle of group dynamics that in a conversation taking place in front of an audience, if one party is seen as disrespectful or "picking on" another, then a significant portion of the audience will sympathize with the one being "picked on". I believe that EAB was sufficiently aggressive toward Saba that he probably caused many in the audience to sympathize with Saba. I'm guessing this was not the effect he was going for. I don't think I know anyone who would not have been put off by his style. I think his points were all fair, it's just the style that was way over-the-top. Had he made the exact same points in more of Glazov's style, then I think it may have been effective.

That said, I can make exactly the same comment toward you, Livingengine, except I don't think all of your points were fair. You were so aggressive toward EAB that I suspect most of the audience was wishing Jamie would cut you off. So all in all, I found the show to be something of a bust.

Now, I personally don't see any point in continually bring up this one interaction over and over again. I think it would behoove us all to learn what we can from it and move on.

LemonLime,

Thank you for taking the time to respond, and to clarify that you are not supporting a Breivik-style approach. I do think it is advisable to err on the side of caution any time violence vs. non-violence is discussed, since there are unhinged people out there.

Be well.

Toward the end of the Glazov show with the Muslima caller Saba --

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/radio-jihad/2012/02/29/the-jamie-glazov-show

-- an anti-Islam caller calls in and says to Saba "I can tell that you have a loving heart" and then goes on to assert that there are "a lot of Muslims, just like Christians" who are ignorant of their own faith.

So Saba is let off the hook because she has a disarmingly girlish tone and passively sidesteps repeated calls to condemn Islam, this indicating she has a "loving heart", whose innocence is further preserved by her putative "ignorance" of Islam which the caller has not a shred of proof for, other than her disingenuous evasions couched in phrases like "Wull, I don't know fer sher if that [Valley Girl intonation here] is what the teaching really says..."

This taped conversation with Saba is actually devastating in its testament to precisely the problem we face with Muslims who seem harmless but who are persistently -- in the face of patient reiterations by Glazov over and over

and over
and over
and over
and over
and over
and over again

-- doing yoga gymnastics of defending Islam every which way but loose. And it's infinitely depressing when anti-Islam individuals like that caller (and innumerable others I have encountered) are so sincerely obtuse as to find a way to defend the likes of Saba, rather than robustly and unstintingly condemn her. (I only exempt Glazov and his "tender" approach to her because it served excellently, better than Bell's more aggressive method, to expose her.)

"Hate the sin, love the sinner" -- sure, if we're talking about sinning.

When, however, we are talking about enablers of terrorism which may kill countless hundreds or thousands of us in the coming years, this Evangelical bromide upsets the stomach, insults the intelligence and, more importantly, weakens the defense of our men, women and children. Unacceptable and shameful.

Thanks Teri for responding. I appreciate your related concern.

On the topic of Saba, you wrote:

"Had he made the exact same points in more of Glazov's style, then I think it may have been effective."

And Glazov was effective -- devastatingly -- in exposing Saba as, for practical purposes, a hopeless and hapless fanatic co-dependently enabling an ideology that is not only horribly ruining the lives of countless of her Islamic sisters around the world, but more importantly, increasingly endangering the lives of Westerners with each passing decade. I only hope that Glazov's feat is going to help make a difference in how the West conducts itself with respect to this problem. Had he not intervened and just let Bell continue to browbeat Saba, I'm not sure we wouldn't still be in the same pickle we're in anyway. But I suppose one has to have faith that each drop helps, when stillicide is the only way to get through thick skulls.

LemonLime,

The anti-Islam caller who said Saba had a loving heart is a case in point. Behaving aggressively toward Saba ensures that someone will sympathize her and come forward to defend her.

Had EAB and Glazov both used a soft manner, while making the same points, it is unlikely that there would be anti-Islam callers coming to Saba's defense. (Some) people are passive because it works. Saba worked it. EAB did not respond effectively. Oh well. On to another day.

"Frankly, I'm beginning to wonder if Livingengine is not a Muslim convert himself."

Or married to one.

I was thinking the same thing myself. His definition of bigotry and harping on it is exactly the same twisted definition of and harping of it of every garden variety muslim supremacist: if it's something we don't want to hear than it's bigoted/slander/racist. Even if it's the truth.

EAB's style with Sabah was angry and confrontational. Bigoted? Not by a long shot. He simply kept asking the supremacist if she would condemn mo the putrid for his unethical, inhumane, and disgusting practices. Maybe I'm an idiot, but for the life of me I cannot see the bigotry in that. Calling her a nazi is not bigoted and is a very fair comparison. He didn't call all muslim supremacists nazis, just that particular one who refused to condemn her bronze age fuhrer.

I understand his angry and confrontational approach. I'm the same way with muslimas who use the same excuses as nambla kiddy diddlers to defend child marriage in islam.

If hating such an inhumane ideology and THOSE WHO PRACTICE IT, AND OR DEFEND IT and getting angry with their passive-aggressive defensive attitudes about it is bigoted then color me pink and call me Queen Bigot of the Universe.

Teri,

Not to belabor this point, but the caller who said Saba had a loving heart did not merely experience Saba in the context of Bell's method, but also Saba in the context of Glazov's method -- which lasted much longer, and clearly exposed her. If a person is going to experience both methods, and be swayed only by Bell's, while apparently completely ignoring Glazov's, it's reasonable to assume that person is not firing on all cylinders. He also seemed to have the prejudice that such Muslims exist -- and all he needed, it seems, to reinforce his prejudice, was to hear her disarmingly young female voice continually being passive; I don't think one can say that Bell's method caused him to defend Saba any more than Glazov's entirely different method -- since the caller heard both. And again, for him to be selectively swayed by Bell's, and ignore Glazov's and what Saba said -- at length and ad nauseam -- during the much longer Glazov portion, is simply obtuse and inexcusable. Particularly for an anti-Islam person.

Istanbul_Chick,

Also, what triggered my thought there was how Livingengine defended Saba on the radio show, saying things to Bell like "she's infinitely more dignified than you!" in a very emotional and angry tone of voice, and the like.

And for the record, Bell repeatedly, and rather wittily, corrected Livingengine on the radio show by saying, "No, I didn't say she was a Nazi -- I said she was worse than a Nazi..."

Which, of course, is an unremarkably accurate statement. Livingengine got all unglued and couldn't maintain rational distinctions during his long call-in session. I don't know where all his emotion about Saba's innocence and the "bigotry" of any condemnation of her is coming from. Either from some colossal mountain of evidence he has that Bell is some monster and the frustration that nobody will heed his warnings; or as I said, from a more Islamic sensibility of offense against a Muslim woman. All I know is, if I don't see a persuasive argument soon (which necessarily includes credible evidence and not dot-missing inferences emotionally confused with facts) from Livingengine backing up his "New Age" attacks on Bell, I can't respect him or his position. This is the case regardless of whether he cares about what I think.

I'm in agreement, EAB, with LemonLime's 11:37 A.M. post to you, to wit, that it's not the devout Catholic Hispanics who are the problem. In fact, I would argue that the more traditionally Catholic an Hispanic person or family is, the less likely such a person or family will engage in any criminal behavior, especially violent criminal behavior. And I'm also in agreement with LemonLime respecting the extraordinarily major difference between Christians and Muslims and conduct by these two groups. Specifically, when Christians behave badly, they are invariably violating the tenets of their faith. When Muslims behave badly, they are often fulfilling the directives of their warped religion, for instance death for apostasy or death for criticizing or mocking Islam or Mohammed or only extending the Golden Rule to other Muslims and not to all.

I am in full agreement with you that our immigration laws have to be implemented completely and if more are necessary then so be it. No nation should be expected not to control its borders. It is one of the most sovereign rights any nation can have. As for the Supreme Court ever deciding that Islam doesn't deserve First Amendment religious protection, I think the chances of this happening are as close to zero without being at zero as one can get.

One last thing and that is that I am exceedingly tired of multiculturalism, which is a giant lie. It maintains that all cultures are equal and deserving of equal respect. What nonsense. For instance, ancient Greek culture was superior to any culture ever developed in sub-Saharan Africa. Not even close. What compounds this giant lie of multiculturalism is that those who embrace it most fully hypocritically make one exception to their all-cultures-are-equal mantra. The exception is Western Civilization, which enthusiastic multiculturalists pillory with great zeal, pointing out its faults, ignoring its virtues, all the while praising societies that clearly fall far short of the greatness which Western Civilization achieved and with very little or no condemnation of these societies' many faults. Disgusting but all too common in this Age of Nonsense in which we live.

Good communicating with you. Take care.

Let's be clear about who Saba really is:

The leader of a Muslim Student Association and therefore connected to the Muslim Brotherhood.

I was just recently informed that on another call-in radio show, she refused to condemn Hezbollah and Hamas as terrorist organizations.

So Larry Estavan - who are you working for?

We are way off topic here, and Livingengine has effectively derailed another conversation.

But, I'm gonna continue off-topic for one second here, too.

Livingengine seems to assume that being "New Age-y" is bad, in and of itself.

The New Age is merely a convenient label for a great many beliefs and practices, some I find useless like biorythym, crystals, talking to the dead, and astrology, and some that I find perhaps useful and actually based in reality, like acupuncture, Tai Chi, concerns about the enviroment.

Can you tell us what is so very, very wrong about being New Age-y, and be specific? And if you can't, how is that not bigotry on your part?

Let me take a minute to clarify the facts regarding a person you are talking about here by the name of Saba. I have not read all of the posts and responses, but this I know first hand for fact. I was a guest about 3 weeks ago on a radio show. Saba called in to ask me some questions.
Q. I asked her on public radio: If she would renounce Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations, yes or no.
A. She would not answer me with a yes or no. She went on talking about the organizations, but would not condemn them as terrorist organizations.
Q. I then asked her if she thought Israel had the right to exist as a sovereign state, yes or no
A. She would not give me a yes or no

Then it came out that she was the PRESIDENT of her college MSA Chapter. WOW
I said Saba, if you were not only involved with MSA but rose up through the ranks to become president, then you know exactly what the goals for the Muslim Brotherhood are here in the United States.
She responded, not really, we just really sat around and had pizza parties!
What a line that is Saba.
Someone not willing to publicly renounce Hamas or Hezbollah as terrorist organizations and is a past president of an MSA chapter, is not a patriotic American. And does want to see the fall of our constitution, freedoms and liberties.
Saba is the enemy.

""Frankly, I'm beginning to wonder if Livingengine is not a Muslim convert himself."

Or married to one."

Some how I was beginning to think like that too. Perhaps he is in love with one.

I'm sorry to see that this thread has been diverted by Livingengine's animosity towards Eric Allen Bell. I would note here that in my 8:04 P.M. post from yesterday I put a simple and direct question to Livingengine, asking this person if they dispute the contention that Islam is a hateful ideology. I did not receive a reply to this question from Livingengine. Not yet anyway.

hogrider,

For what college or university is Saba the MSA president?

I've asked Livingengine pointed questions at least twice if not more, in those previous Bell-Threads. Never got a reply from him.

I think you are completely mischaracterizing me.

Some of this you and I have already gone over now three times before in emails, and two separate posts at JihadWatch.

You never mention that I said EAB asked Saba, who was a guest, a series of suggestive questions that led to a predetermined conclusion, that Saba is a Nazi.

This is an insult to the listening audience.

This business about calling people, and things they don't like "Nazi" is a Left wing cliche.

Again, this is something we have talked about at least twice before, and you never even do me the courtesy of acknowledging my position.

EAB repeatedly demanded Sabah renounce Muhammad and submit to him. One has to be pretty nasty to think of something like that, to say nothing of doing it in front of an audience, and in front of Robert Spencer, no less.

It was much more revealing of him than of her, and she knew that. She made him look like a fool.

We have also talked about EAB cracking wise, and calling Robert Spencer "not so smart".

Not only is this gratuitously hostile, it is about as ridiculous as him telling people to take their meds. Eric Allen Bell has been in a mental hospital. Except to visit a friend, I have never been in a mental hospital.

No one seems to care that Eric Allen Bell comes with an enormous amount of baggage, and an anti-social streak a mile wide, and we are not talking ancient history.

No one seems to care about what other people have said about EAB.

" Then last week, almost out of the blue, an article shows up on the David Horowitz site titled ‘The High Price of Telling the Truth About Islam’. What then follows is an incredible tale of what took place here in Murfreesboro through the eyes of Eric Allen Bell having somewhat recently changed his position entirely."
http://www.davidchristopher.net/2012/02/eric-allen-bell-and-discernment/

No one seems to care that EAB is repeatedly rude to women; including: Nonie Darwish, Laurie Cardoza-Moore, and of course Sabah.

I am not just talking about politeness, but a kind of sly abusive talk that I associate with narcissists, and I am calling him out on it. I would suggest you do the same, for his own sake.

The topic of the New Age came up because I wanted to show that people are allowed to have silly, even dangerous ideas such as Eric's New Age beliefs, including his promoting the work of Ramtha, and that he was being hypocritical.

He then lied through his teeth, in front of everybody, and said he is not New Age, and does not support Ramtha.

I have not only shown that he was lying, I left a crater.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/03/debate-tonight-is-islam-inherently-violent----eric-allen-bell-vs-nadir-ahmed.html#comments

He is New Age. He does promote the work of Ramtha, and he lies about it.

Why he lies I don't even know, but it is further evidence that he is not a leader, and should give up his pretensions of being a public figure.

We all know about Hespy. He has crossed the line here more than once, but to see otherwise decent, and intelligent people like Wellington, and Gravenimage embrace bigotry is very depressing. In view of this, I do not think I am off base, but am speaking to the core of what the CJM stands for.

Calling me a Muslim is about as legitimate as the Left calling people they don't like Nazis. I am not a Muslim. I have never been a Muslim, will never be a Muslim. I stand by my record here at JihadWatch. There is no reason for you to do that, and I would like an apology from you on this.

Here is my reply.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/the-murfreesboro-mosque-built-on-a-foundation-of-lies.html#comment-882687

I am sorry about diverting the thread. It is something that is important to me.

The detail about Saba being MSA is interesting to me, but it is beside the point.

I don't think EAB knew that Saba was a member of the MSA, if he did, he didn't tell anyone. So, assume he thought she was a random Muslim. He would have done this to any Muslim who called.

And so, here is the point, look at what an opportunity was wasted. What if EAB had asked her if she belonged to the MSA, instead of asking her to renounce Muhammad?

To me the fact that Saba may be MSA is much more interesting than knowing she won't submit to Eric Allen Bell, and renounce Muhammad.

Do you see what I am saying?

LemonLime wrote:

For what college or university is Saba the MSA president?
..............................

LemonLime, a Saba Khan is president of the Muslim Student Association at the University of Michigan-Dearborn.

I can't be absolutely certain that this is the same Saba, of course.

Certainly, Dearborn—infamously—is the center of the largest concentration of Jihadists in the United States.

Excellent discussion between Spencer and Glazov talking about the dispute between Livingengine (aka Larry) and Eric Allen Bell, beginning at about the middle of the March 6 Glazov radio show:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/radio-jihad/2012/03/07/the-jamie-glazov-show

Spencer: Last week, I thought, gee, Eric's being awfully aggressive with this Muslim caller.

Glazov: So you agree with Larry...

Spencer: No, I don't. I understand where Larry's coming from. I understand how he feels. But I think we've allowed ourselves to become complacent and defensive. And so, it's all very well to be polite -- I'm all for being polite; and I generally am. But the reality is, Saba was excusing evil.

Glazov: Right.

Spencer: She was fronting for evil. She was carrying water for the oppression [of], and for the trampling on, the human spirit. And so, it was perfectly right to call her on it. It was perfectly right to call her out. And even to be sharp about it. I wouldn't have done it that way myself -- but that's why we have different human beings in this world. And I certainly have no trouble with him [Bell] having done it that way.

Glazov: Okay wait, what is it you've just said that you've never confessed before...?

[Spencer earlier had prefaced this by saying he was about to say something he hadn't ever quite said before]

Spencer: Just that. That I was a little bit surp-- I didn't say anything last week, when that was going on. I didn't say "Hey, you're being a little rough on her" -- but I did think that initially. And that's why I say I understand what Larry thinks, what Larry--

Glazov: You mean that -- okay, your point is also that we've become so brainwashed into having to be nice all the time, that when Eric actually stands up in these ways, our instinct is to think that he's being rude; is that what--...?

Spencer: Yes. Because we're just used to... I mean, in a sane world, somebody calls up and is excusing honor killings and the murders of apostates, and the subjugation of non-Muslims and all these other things, people would say: This is monstrous!

[Amen!]


Livingengine,

I read your comments, and I want to say that I saw the film "What the Bleep?" and found it very entertaining, but that doesn't mean I support Ramtha.

I believe that supposedly channeling an entity from Atlantis is ridiculous nonsense, but there were many people interviewed in that film, from flim flam artists like JZ Knight, to actual scientists. Just because I saw the film, was entertained, and might even post video segments on my FB page doesn't mean I whole-heartedly endorse every single word of the film.

But even if he enthusiastically supported Ramtha, you don't intend to make us believe that that even compares to how dangerous Islam is (as far as following as an ideal of behavior a person who murders, rapes, robs and tortures)?

Really?

I am asking you to look at the language EAB used - asking a Muslim to condemn Muhammad, not his acts, but Muhammad himself. And, this has to be in the form of a yes, or no answer. Over, and over, and over, until finally she's a Nazi.

It told us nothing about her, and so much more about him.

I don't think EAB knew that Saba was a member of the MSA, if he did, he didn't tell anyone. So, assume he thought she was a random Muslim. He would have done this to any Muslim who called.

To me the fact that Saba may be MSA is much more interesting than knowing she won't submit to Eric Allen Bell, and renounce Muhammad.

Do you see what I am saying?

-- Livingengine, from a post above.

Hypothetical scenario:

Airport Security Chief Livingengine: It's been confirmed that there may be a terror attack in the next 24 hours somewhere in this airport?

Security Personnel: Yes sir.

Airport Security Chief Livingengine: All right. Make sure you screen all Muslims who belong to the MSA -- but do not ask any random Muslims to be searched: that would be insulting to their dignity. Understand?

Security Personnel: Yes sir.

LemonLime: Um, excuse me... where can I get a refund on my plane ticket? I'm outta here!

Thanks gravenimage. I thought, however, I heard her say on that radio show that she's living in Oregon.

I am sorry, but you are not reading what I am writing. You make no mention of Eric's lying about his website.

Thanks.

Frankly, I'm beginning to wonder if Livingengine is not a Muslim convert himself."

Or married to one.
......................................

I don't believe that. Livingengine has a long posting history here at JW as a very solid Anti-Jihadist.

I believe he is off-base here, but that *is in no way* the same thing as his being a Muslim apologist.

Thank you for your reply, Livingengine. Look, I want to be as fair and impartial here as is possible. This is my starting point.

Having said this, I don't quite understand why you didn't direct any criticism you had to the specific article that Eric Allen Bell wrote above, the subject of this thread and an article that I personally thought was right on point many times over. Forget New Age stuff and EAB's manner of querrying a female member of the MSA. What EAB wrote about the shennanigans related to the construction of an obnoxious mega-mosque in the heart of the Christian Bible Belt is the topic du jour (and to everyone I would note that the possibility of constructing a mega-church in the heart of the Islamic world is possessed of no possibility, this in and of itself condemnatory of the most intolerant religion on earth).

Something else. Even assuming that EAB's questioning of the Muslim woman, Saba, was not done well, so what? Would you pose an objection to someone not most efficaciously putting questions forward to Neo-Nazis, or KKK members, or anarchists or...? To the extent that your criticism of EAB in relation to the questioning of this Muslim woman is valid, it seems pale in comparison to what this young Muslim woman adheres to. I myself think of Islam as a kind of spiritual Nazism. Am I a bigot for thinking so? Again speaking personally, I think all Muslims should be challenged for their admiration of Mohammed and for their admiration of a religion which is replete with doctrines inimical to liberty and equality under the law. What do you say?

I don't even know what your saying.

Livingengine,

Are you nuts? Mohammed should be richly and roundly condemned. Whether he existed or not (pace Spencer's book), he is worse than Hitler and Stalin put together, because he has inspired Muslims to subjugate, humiliate, oppress, torture, enslave and massacre millions of people from the Philippines to Morocco -- from the 7th century right up to the present moment right now while you're reading my words on your computer screen. Anyone who doesn't condemn him is either a few flagstones short of a patio, or a Muslim. There is no third explanation for such a monstrously immoral lapse.

There has been a "Saba Ahmed" posting on EAB's Facebook page recently. I don't know if that's the same Saba, although it seems likely.

Livingengine,

You say "EAB repeatedly demanded Sabah renounce Muhammad and submit to him."

And submit to him?? What's up with that? I never heard any invitation to join a new cult or anything.

Why is it a problem to challenge someone to condemn or renounce Mohammed? Why shouldn't Muslims be confronted with the fact that by supporting Mohammed they are supporting a pedophile? That's a fact that is plain as day.

(I did find EAB's style objectionable, but not the substance of his message.)

However, I agree with you that Saba's membership in the MSA is irrelevant to this discussion because it was unknown at the time.

Eric Allen Bell is a topic of conversation. This is not my fault. He likes it that way, he likes attention. Therefore, it is legitimate for me to bring it up here. That is my only defense.

" Would you pose an objection to someone not most efficaciously putting questions forward to Neo-Nazis, or KKK members, or anarchists or...? "

He didn't do that Wellington, that is the whole point. Instead, he showed us how tough he is. I have said this repeatedly, compare him with Jamie Glazov. Jamie Glazov is not a Left wing freak, and it shows.

" Am I a bigot . . .?" If you are demanding Muslims renounce Muhamad, and submit to you then the answer is yes, at the very least.

" I think all Muslims should be challenged for their admiration of Mohammed and for their admiration of a religion which is replete with doctrines inimical to liberty and equality under the law. "

I absolutely agree with this statement.

A good model to follow is Jamie Glazov. A good example of what not to do is Eric Allen Bell whose entire career in the CJM is based on error, including putting my name out, and accusing me of things he has no intention of backing up.

BTW- As far as me "working" for the other side, I give Pamela Geller 20$ every month. I am going to do it right now. I suggest all concerned do the same.

I don't know how much money I have given JihadWatch, certainly more than 100$.

So, to those who are going to call me a Muslim like Left wing jerks crying "You're a Nazi!" I ask, "how much money have you given here?"

Following a line of reasoning which LemonLime just wrote above in his 5:34 P.M. post of today, I would ask you just what do you think of Mohammed, irrespective of whether he was real, fictional or a composite? Specifically speaking, how do you assess the character of Mohammed? I think this guy's character is putrid. What say you?

And you have not yet answered my query to you of yesterday, to wit, do you refute the claim, the contention, that Islam is a hateful ideology? Your turn and, please, answer the questions directly if you will, with no more references to Eric Allen Bell.

Livingengine,

You said, "This business about calling people, and things they don't like 'Nazi' is a Left wing cliche."

Maybe, but then you like Pamella Geller and until recently she called liberals she didn't like "libtards" or "leftards".

In addition, if EAB comes from a liberal perspective, wouldn't you expect him to use a left-wing cliche now and then? What, do you want to make sure we never have any liberals joining the counter-Jihad?

So aside from whether it is a left-wing cliche, how was it inaccurate to compare Saba with a Nazi sympathizer? A Nazi sympathizer made excuses for atrocities committed by Nazis. Didn't Saba make excuses for atrocities committed by Mohammed? I don't get why this is such an outrageous comparison.

Well, two EAB videos I found in a matter of seconds on YouTube pretty much solidly put him in the New Age category. If he were a musician, he'd be in the CD bin (when there were CD bins -- dating myself here) in the same section where John Tesh, Yanni and Enya may be found.

I watched most of these two videos (and that's some 20 minutes of my life I'll never get back; but I digress...). The first one, titled "Meditation on Being", is missing only spacy sitar music and a bong full of hash while the viewer sits cross-legged on the floor to facilitate his Oneness with the Cosmos (I just hope those letters spinning hypnotically round and round in the video are not Arabic):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH2xUmSJUis

The second one is a long interview with someone who pointedly calls herself "Dr." -- Dr. Guldar Caba on her show "Are You Awake?" (a rhetorical question which makes one want to answer, "hell no thank you very much!"); someone who's relaxed tone of voice is a bit too relaxed, and peppered with New Agey expressions which almost sound like a parody.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny6EEvycLf8

Interestingly, after EAB informs the good doctor of his mind-changing odyssey from thinking the Murfreesboro Evangelicals were bigoted hate-mongers (cf. Livingengine's Lexicon of Correct Terminology for the definition of "bigoted") against the poor Muslim community there, to his realization that it is the other way around -- Dr. Guldar Caba pauses for a station break and takes the opportunity to "process" what EAB has said into a broader message she finds more important than the horrible human rights abuses perpetrated in the name of Islam around the world which her colleague and friend, EAB, has just articulated to her.

And what is that broader message Dr. Guldar Caba of which wishes to remind her viewers, as some cheesy Pop Meditation music begins to play in the background?

Conditioning in and of itself has been [sic] the beginning of time. This type of hatred against one thing or another has always been there -- whether it's in Islam or any other religion. If we look through our history, it shows up in its own way, over and over. It shows up in our political environment right now, and -- maybe not to that degree, but the messages are still clear, of who's in charge. Right? Who's in charge: Who gets to decide what to do with another person's humanity, and their existence. And that keeps coming. What becomes also important is, you know, what is fundamentalism, what do people practice, where did this begin? There are so many layers to what you're saying! And I'm really curious about how that concept of conditioning affected you personally.

So, I just threw a lot out there, you threw a lot out there... Let's take a deep breath, take a break, and we'll be back in just a moment. Thank you Eric Allen Bell; stay tuned.

Gee, thanks doctor for clarifying the "real" issue here.

Cut to an infomercial about Dr. Guldal's method of "finding wellness", the "InnerPathic Process" which her line of "InnerPeace" products will help facilitate.

After the station break, EAB to his credit tried in a gingerly yet adroit way to bring the doctor's exalted focus back on track from the Spiritual Ether to the actual human rights abuses Muslims are causing around the world. The doctor, however, after calmly listening to EAB, keeps nudging the discussion to the higher ground of spiritual generalities where one doesn't have to worry about how dangerous and unjust Muslims following Islam are.

You asked Livingengine:

"A Nazi sympathizer made excuses for atrocities committed by Nazis. Didn't Saba make excuses for atrocities committed by Mohammed? I don't get why this is such an outrageous comparison."

It's become clear that Livingengine is incapable of giving a straight and substantive and satisfactory answer to that elementary, and most crucial, question.

100% agreed, LemonLime.

Your narration of what the so-called Dr. Gulda Cabar (a doctorate in what exactly I would ask) had to say, replete with music which, well, wasn't of Mozart quality I'm sure, was eminently humorous---much needed after all the serious stuff that has appeared on this thread. My compliments, LL.

Two terms to always keep in mind when dealing with these people. Taqiyya and hijra. Taqiyya is an arabic word roughly translated means snow-job when talking to infidels about Islam. Hijra is a formal doctrine within Islam which means conquest through immigration.

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


This is good to know. Thank you.

From Wikipedia: on the 2009 Swiss referendum to ban the construction of new minarets:

Egerkinger committee

The Egerkinger committee is made up of members of the Swiss People's Party and the Federal Democratic Union. The committee opines that the interests of residents, who are disturbed by specific kinds of religious land uses, are to be taken seriously. Moreover, it argues that Swiss residents should be able to block unwanted and unusual projects such as the erection of Islamic minarets. The committee alleges, inter alia, that "the construction of a minaret has no religious meaning. Neither in the Qur'an, nor in any other holy scripture of Islam is the minaret expressly mentioned at any rate. The minaret is far more a symbol of religious-political power claim [...]."[6] The initiators justified their point of view by quoting parts of a 1997 speech by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (later Prime Minister of Turkey), which stated: "Mosques are our barracks, domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets, believers our soldiers. This holy army guards my religion."[8] Ulrich Schluer, who is one of the Egerkinger committee’s most prominent exponents, states in this respect: "A minaret has nothing to do with religion: It just symbolises a place where Islamic law is established."[9] The members of the Egerkinger committee included, among others, Ulrich Schluer; Christian Waber; Walter Wobmann; Jasmin Hutter; Oskar Freysinger; Eric Bonjour; Sylvia Flückiger; Lukas Reimann; Natalie Rickli.

It would be a refreshing change if perhaps the comments here were not so much focused on whether or not I'm "new age" (whatever that means) but on the content of the article itself, the issue of Counter Jihad and how we can spread this information far and wide.

Just a thought... ;)

Eric

In this thread D. disappears, but something called Livingengine appears and does the same thing of taking space. Them both (or is it one person ) are very good at
hijra, lol, onvading JW by immigration.

I would not have said that if most of the livinengine verbiage wasn't provocative and insulting.
I urge some of you to be aware of such transformations and breathe before you decide to jump into a long reply to a provocative post.

You must have noticed that most of the veiled and not so veiled accusations at you deflecting the topic came from the livingengine posts.

Read a provocative post. feel the indignation. Imagine the desire of the "author" for you to reply and feed his ego. Ignore it.
Read. Identify. Ignore.
We are not here to provide shadenfeude to emotional parasites who have no means to entertain themselves in a productive way.
We are not entertaining people bored to death and depressed from mental starvation and stagnation.
We are having a mutually enriching discussion, at least that would be the goal.

Of course it is. You mean to tell me in the three years I have been coming here you haven't read anything I have written?

Tell me what you are driving at?

I think you are falling apart, and starting to make no sense.

The story of Muhammad is a horror show. I was scandalized for weeks after learning the details.

But people can believe in Muhammad, or praise him, or love him.

When they start trying to get you to become a Muslim then that needs to be confronted.

Anyone who discards this basic principal in exchange for talking tough is a poseur.

What I'm driving at is trying to figure out what you've been driving at. EAB wrote a good article about all the deceptions and lies attending the construction of a gargatuan mosque in the heart of the Bible Belt. Why bring up what was said to some Saba person and any New Age allegiance Bell has. So what?

Livingengine,

So a belief in Mohammed is only a problem when a Muslim is trying to convert you? I disagree.

Ultimately, I believe the best solution to Islam is a mass apostasy movement. Otherwise, when we have billions of people believing that Mohammed is the perfect example of moral conduct, there are bound to be problems. As there are.

We can defend ourselves against Islamic expansion, but if Muslims begin leaving Islam in droves, we don't have to. Confronting Muslims about Islam is one of many tactics that can support an apostasy movement.

(This is assuming you have given up hope for a meaningful reform, which I have.)

Because he implicated Robert Spencer in it. Because it is part of a pattern. Because he said he will do it again. Because he says he wants to be the leader of the Left wing Counter Jihad Movement. Because people are already proudly proclaiming themselves bigots. I hope that's a joke.


I have already talked about the New Age business. I brought that up expecting him to defend his beliefs. Instead, he lied through his teeth. I don't know why he did that.

I also don't know why he called Robert Spencer "not so smart".

I want him to stop doing it.

Thanks Wellington, and Teri.

Brandon: yes and no. Obviously, I wouldn't have spent all the time I did in various responses to Livingengine if I agreed completely with your argument. I never did understand why people seem to think a comments thread is some kind of sacred space that has to be, as Yahweh saith to Moses, "ON TOPIC". Why can't it also be a place conducive to the opportunity for a fellowship of discussion that has some flexible elbow room and space to breathe, without some Thread Nazi telling them they are straying "off topic" and thus "helping the enemy". Pish posh.


This is a debate about how serious the threat of Islam is.

One side argues that Islam will not survive the advance of the 21st century, mentioning Muslim girls getting a High School education, and rejecting Islam as a result, as one example.

On the other hand, Robert Spencer argues that it doesn't matter if they fail over there, because they are coming over here.

http://www.actforaustralia.com/articles/great-debate-david-goldman-vs-robert-spencer-%E2%80%94-jamie-glazov-show

This book is priced at 0.01$ I like his plan.

http://www.amazon.com/Defeating-Jihad-terror-spite-ourselves/dp/192865326X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338697430&sr=8-1

JUST FOR CLARITY -

Since I seem to be misquoted a lot here...

- I don't not want to be the "leader of the Left Wing Counter Jihad Movement". I don't consider myself "left wing" and I am not qualified to lead something which I am only beginning to understand.

- I would never call Robert Spencer "not so smart" as I look to him in many ways as an intellectual mentor on the subject of Counter Jihad. It was he who reached out to me, provided guidance and continues to help open my eyes.

- If hosting a blog with 27 million visitors (www.GlobalOne.TV) around subjects such as meditation and yoga is "new age" then I stand guilty as charged.

- Any Muslim who tells me that they will not condemn Mohammed for raping and killing, or will not condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations, is going to hear my point of view whether they like it or not. Such a person is worse than a Nazi and I will not hesitate to say so.

- Larry Estavan, please seek some psychiatric help. Your obsession with me is unhealthy. Your recollection of details is wildly distorted and your comments after my articles do nothing to help support the cause, only to bring paranoia, false accusations and division.

Thanks,

Eric

Livingengine,

I slogged thru the comments at the other threads you linked herein, and I have to say, the more I read what you write, the less I care. You have built tiny details, imho, into a blanket condemnation, that you are obsessed with. I hope you don't come after me, because you're tenacious and, frankly, seem a little unbalanced.

New Age or not, so what? I think part of this was confusion between the meaningless label "New Age" wherein almost anything mystical, pseudoscientific or offbeat is lumped together, and EAB's wanting an actual "New Age" of expanded consciousness (maybe if he used "Era" instead of "Age" when meaning an actual time period, would clear things up?)

I saw "What The Bleep?", knew who JZ Knight was, but was still entertained (quantum mechanics & consciousness being two of my non-jihad-related passions), and would honestly still maintain I don't follow Ramtha.

Finally, I support asking Muslims hard questions about their faith. Do they think it's OK to rape a 9 year old? Do they acknowledge Israel's right to exist? So, maybe we should do it with a less strident tone, I agree, but I still think it should be done, over and over and over. Confront them with the facts of their Prophet, make it uncomfortable, hell yeah!

Now, back to the article; I wish there was more explicit connections to terrorism made here, because I forwarded it to the only person I know in Tennessee, and he said it was propoganda, because while some particulars seemed fishy, he "didn't smell terrorism."

Plus, I wish there were more stuff about the financing. Are there records that show foreign investment, or any evidence that that might be happening? That would make it more clear in ordinary people's minds, I think, that this isn't simply a bunch of people trying to make a house of worship.

I have more information about the Murfreesboro Mosque and will be sharing it soon.

It just keeps coming in. But it takes time to fact check everything.

I forwarded it to the only person I know in Tennessee, and he said it was propoganda, because while some particulars seemed fishy, he "didn't smell terrorism."

One wonders what it would take for this person to smell terrorism. But, I guess we have all the time in the world, and I'm sure no big plots are being planned as we speak, in various places we may not be able to predict...

It's so nice to be stuck in a time capsule, so relaxing, that halcyon late summer day of 9/10/01, still summery, lasting forever on a time loop we can maintain blissfully with the mere touch of a finger on the snooze button; and just the slightest tang of cool in the morning air of a premonition of an autumn yet to come...!

And no smells of terrorism!

That was a good article.

Keep digging, mate, keep digging. Worry away at it. That's what good journalists do. That's what good documentary film-makers do. I think you're only just now finding your vocation.

Look for the loose threads, the loose ends, the things that don't quite add up; pull on them and keep pulling and watch everything start to unravel.

In Iraq, one time, somebody noticed a wire sticking out. They followed the wire and it led to a newly-built school for girls. They kept following the wire and it led to a whole bunch of bombs that jihadi infiltrators on the work squad, most likely, had literally *built into* the fabric of the building.

The wire was the detonator fuse.

Find those wires, sticking out where they oughtn't to be, and follow them to where the bombs are buried.

And by the way: re Nazis. Only the other day in a public hospital I had a sharp little exchange with a doctor who identified himself as being from Iran, and who loudly and a touch defensively identified himself as 'a proud Muslim'. (I had noticed his nametag and had asked him where he was from, and whether he was a Muslim or a Christian; the name was a bit ambiguous).

Right then and there, I - wearing my little celtic cross pendant - felt about as deeply unsafe as a Jewish woman who had read 'Mein Kampf, coming to a hospital in the Netherlands or Austria in 1933 and being expected to trust a doctor who identified himself as 'a proud Nazi'.

(Thankfully, in my case, all the other people directly responsible for my care were - much to my relief - NOT Muslims).

Well done, Eric. Glad you are writing here again.

On the "New Age" off-topic item, re Eric's interests in meditation, yoga, and consciousness, I am not sure why this is so objectionable to some commenters. We have Christians on here making appeals for people to pray, and who believe in miracles, the devil, etc. That Eric's interest in consciousness etc. is supposed to warrant ridicule and derisive comments, but far more extraordinary and extravagant claims made by Christians* almost never do on this site, does not seem warranted.

I thin there are three main sources for this apparent discrepancy:
1. Most Christians themselves don't see prayer etc. as absurd and ineffectual.
2. Most of the non-Christians who don't believe in prayer etc. nevertheless, perhaps out of a kind of political correctness, or subservience, or special deference to the Christians, show selective "respect" to Christians in this regard that is sincere (though erroneous).
3. Most of the non-believers who think this prayer business is absurd and misguided hold their tongues (or keyboards) in a pragmatic or prudent attempt to avoid instigating yet another feud between the believers and non-believers on the site, which results in a comment thread becoming a "train wreck" and at least annoyance between the two camps.

*Example: Praying for someone in the Islamic world who is persecuted by Muslims is worthwhile and will actually have the effect imagined and intended.

Interestingly, in all the years I've been in JW comments threads, I've never once seen anyone write any New Age-ish sentiments nor couch them in terms of "here's some New Age wisdom that's good for you" -- or even do so without labeling it as "New Age". Nor have I seen anyone defend New Age thought; nor claim (proudly or otherwise) that they are New Age.

Not once. In years; and hundreds of threads. This includes EAB, who not only has never proselytized New Age on JW, he also affects a disingenuous "what's New Age?" stance when the issue has been (very rarely, though that's obscured by the copious white noise of one particular commenter in this regard) raised in his direction (which is, incidentally, one of Livingengine's specific beefs -- granted, not clearly conveyed through his jungle of emotional dot-missing charges -- with EAB; the other being a more generalized and amorphous charge that the New Age movement and those in it are somehow dangerous hucksters).

My sense is that, in a venue such as JW where most people are probably not New Age, if there are any regulars (or anyone approximating being a regular) who is New Age, they may feel a little embarrassed about admitting it, knowing that normal people are at best wryly amused by that subculture or, at worst, hostile to it (the latter more or less in a Livingenginite way).

Analogous to Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart -- who famously said of hard-core pornography that, while admittedly difficult to define, "I know it when I see it" -- I find it similarly easy to know New Age when I see it (or hear its cheesy music); and find puzzling, at best, or disingenous at worst, protestations otherwise.

When one has, for example, a back problem and one has embarked upon massage therapy and has picked out a therapist from a list of cold calls or referrals, then shows up at the appointment for some pragmatic therapy on one's physical problem, it doesn't take one long to determine whether the practitioner is a normal person, or is immersed in a subculture with a whole rich variety of distinctive, and wryly amusing, terminology and colloquialisms all its own (not to mention various claptrap one might see gracing the walls and shelves and mantles and -- of course -- the cheesy music which, granted, can be at times soothing and relaxing; though frankly I'd prefer some soft Brazilian sambas or some cool flute jazz by Herbie Mann in that context myself).

In Answer to Lemonlime,
Saba WAS the MSA president on her campus when she was in college. I didn't ask her which college she attended.

[edit]: "I [think] there are three main..."

Just for the record, I'm into Old Age. I didn't plan it this way and even allowed myself at times to think an exception would be made in my case. Damn, it wasn't.

Thanks hogrider,

How do you know it's the same Saba? Same voice?

Actually, I can easily imagine someone being into some "New Age" things without thinking of themselves as "New Age".

There are many, many things under the "New Age" umbrella. A person could think that breatharianism, Ouija boards, chakra balancing, and channeling extra-terrestrials are all weird, but yoga and meditation are fine. So then they might not describe themselves as a "New Ager"so as not to be confused with folks who are into breatharianism, Ouija boards, chakra balancing, and channeling extra-terrestrials.

In fact, I suspect there is a vast number of people who are into some things that you would consider "New Age" without going in hook, line and sinker, and without self-identifying as "New Agers".

LemonLime,
I did not hear the interview with EAB and Saba. But all of the descriptions here match the Saba I spoke with on the air. Saba Ahmed is the person I am referring to.

Thanks hogrider,

The one detail you provided earlier, about Saba's deflection about "pizza parties", also sounds like it's the same person. :)

Eric Allen Bell wrote:

I have more information about the Murfreesboro Mosque and will be sharing it soon.

It just keeps coming in. But it takes time to fact check everything.
...............................

I'll look forward to seeing it, Mr. Bell.

@20:39 EAB lies about his New Age beliefs.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/radio-jihad/2012/03/07/the-jamie-glazov-show

Look - He never told us he branded his site as New Age.

"Global One TV: Online Spiritual Television for a New Age"
https://www.google.com/search?q=Global+One+TV%3A+Online+Spiritual+Television+for+a+New+Age&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

And, believe me, I could go on, and I did over here. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/03/debate-tonight-is-islam-inherently-violent----eric-allen-bell-vs-nadir-ahmed.html#comments

Why does he lie, and tell such obvious lies, too? I am sure only a doctor can say.

@24:21 He tells us we need to accept him, or we will never get out of "first gear".
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/radio-jihad/2012/03/07/the-jamie-glazov-show

He clearly wants to be a leader, and I think may be getting groomed.

If that's the case I am interested in him, not obsessed. I am curious about things that interest me. So, I look at him, and I find he lies, he is a crackpot, and is trouble where ever he goes.

Being ignored at JihadWatch is not a new experience, but I know what I am saying, and I'm right.

He does dumb, hostile things, says dumb, hostel things, and nobody calls him on it because . . . I don't know why.

Maybe it is magic spells.
http://liveweb.archive.org/http://www.globalone.tv/profiles/blogs/the-healing-power-of-water

Remember Murfreeseboro.

"People like Eric Bell need to be exposed. They are given entirely too much credibility. I hope that I have demonstrated at least one way to break their arguments apart. "

" In the end, I deemed the viewpoint of Eric to be hypocritical, intolerant and religiously bigoted – the very terms he and most of the crowd he had gathered were so eager to throw around. "
- David Christopher 2010
http://web.archive.org/web/20100921110652/http://www.davidchristopher.net/dc/node/12


Good to know! I look forward to your future revelations.

Just as aside, I gave my FB friend the link to this story:

http://www.aina.org/news/20101007113358.htm

Which has the information about the ICM member and his pro-Hamas views on MySpace, and the ICM reading list that had extremists on it, and guess what; he deleted my post on his FB!

Maybe that was really too close to smelling terrorism for him!

I'm officially ignoring you now. Don't care.

Talk about almost literally ANYTHING else, and I might give you an audience.

Otherwise, consider yourself ignored.

Teri, I agree; however, EAB is not merely into yoga and meditation and health foods. He's also into the more, let us say, amusing stuff that to me smacks of being smack dab in "New Age".

re your FB contact:

Wow. Talk about head in the sand. Or, you never know, he may want to do more, without a "paper trail" for now. One can only hope...

Decide for yourself...

This is my blog and my livelhood:

http://www.GlobalOne.TV

With 27 million visitors in the past couple years, most of the content deals with Vedic knowledge, such as Yoga and Meditation.

No crystals or fairies or unicorns or dream catchers or aura reading going on here... which is what I think of when someone says "New Age".

That said, it's not important to me whether anyone approves or disapproves of my personal approach to spirituality. What matters to me here at JW is that we find ways to stand, shoulder to shoulder, and neutralize the growing threat of Islam.

Thanks,

Eric

I have decided for myself, I went to GlobalOne, and it is completely legitimate to call it New Age. In fact, to characterize it otherwise is misleading.

I really don't like this aspect of Eric's character.

Being New Age in and of itself is not my objection, but there are bad people in the NAM.

So, I looked to see if Eric had any connection to some of the bad element. My heart dropped when I saw him touting "What the Bleep". That was exactly what I didn't want to see.

Here is an article from Salon.com, not a Right wing group if my understanding is correct, showing what is wrong with the movie, and identifying it as "an infomercial" for Ramtha. http://www.salon.com/2004/09/16/bleep_2/


EAB has nothing to say in his defense. He just lies there.

RE: "What the Bleep"

Great documentary. Some good ideas, some kooky ideas, some ideas I'm not yet sure what to make of. Overall it is an interesting look at where the field of quantum physics and metaphysics (mysticism) possibly meet to form of new science of consciousness. I highly recommend it.

As for one of the many interviewees who appear in it, a nutcase called simply "Ramtha" I am no fan. She claims to be channeling a man who lived 15,000 years ago. Literally, she says he talks through her to teach everyone the meaning of life. I do not follow this person, despite how emphatically Larry Estavan says that I do.

Larry, either you are mentally ill and suffering from both delusions and a very unhealthy obsession, or someone has put you up to the task of attempting to discredit me. My sense is that this has more to do with your mental health.

If there is no part of my article on the Murfreesboro mosque that you object to, and you have nothing constructive to contribute, perhaps you could be using this time by calling your health insurance company and seeing if they cover emergency psychiatric.

Eric

I would be very interested to know if EAB has a degree, or certification from the Maharishi.

The Maharishi is an important figure in EAB's life, and EAB also praises Deepak Chopra, and John Haglin.

It would be interesting to know if he has ever been to the Maharishi's university, or done any course work in connection with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.

Eric, thank you for having the courage to share your eye-opening experience with Islam. I saw your documentary when it first aired, and so much of what you say now only proves what I then suspected. (I blogged about "Unwelcome" here: http://icefalcon58.blogspot.com/2011_03_01_archive.html )

Keep up the good fight!

Eric, thank you for having the courage to share your eye-opening experience with Islam. I saw your documentary when it first aired, and so much of what you say now only proves what I then suspected. (I blogged about "Unwelcome" here: http://icefalcon58.blogspot.com/2011_03_01_archive.html )

Keep up the good fight!

He is lying.

I can give you multiple examples of him promoting the ideas, and people from WTB, which is a Ramtha movie.

Go look how many of his friends at GlobalOne like Ramtha.

Eric has no problems with Ramtha.

I would also like to hear more about his connections to the Institute of Noetic Sciences.

Livingengine -

YOU are the reason why I don't post on this site more often. Why your hysterical paranoid accusations are tolerated here I do not know. Anyone coming to Jihad Watch for the first time, have clicked on a link to my article, will read these comments and likely come away wondering if the scene here is a bit whacky.

And it is not whacky, but you are presenting that impression.

You hurt this movement.

Eric

"I won't bore you with a long story, but when I was 14 years old I became a born again Christian. By the time I was 15 years old I was leading the Bible study behind my high school. There were a few dozen people in attendance and the numbers were steadily growing. I would say a prayer, give a short inspirational sermon and then ask everyone to spread out and preach the gospel to as many people as they could on campus until lunch was over. My school, Fountain Valley High School, was the largest campus west of the Mississippi and every week more and more students were "giving their lives to Christ".

I would say in retrospect that my intentions were good. I could not bear the idea of all my fellow schoolmates burning in hell fire for all eternity when all they had to do was to say this little prayer that was photocopied onto all these little tracts we were handing out. My heart was sincere and my naïve ignorance was real. And then one day I just sort of snapped out of it.

And this was a tragedy, because when I lost my dogmatic belief in my religion I also lost my faith, my connection to a sense a higher power. What followed was a severe spiritual crisis which came to define the years that followed.

A couple years later, after spending time in Juvenile Hall, a mental hospital and then finding myself in a group home for troubled teenage boys, I started to have a bit of a revelation.

I had come home from school having stopped on the way back to meet a few friends and smoke weed – something I did a lot of in my teenage years but is not a part of my life today.

When I got back to the boy’s home I was very stoned. I turned on the TV set and found myself watching the channel 18 on UHF. For several hours a day this station showed nothing but talks given by the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi." - Eric Allen Bell

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:5RJ-4jUmGzAJ:www.ericallenbell.org/xn/detail/6365949:BlogPost:16+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Looks like I struck a nerve. I would like to hear more about the IONS, and Maharishi connection.

EAB,

Trying to stay on topic, here:

1. You wrote: "I make it quite clear in my article that Islam IS Political Islam..."

Unfortunately--for those who will not read your entire article (or any other similar document)--the phrase "Political Islam" perpetuates the false notion of a (nonexistent)subset of Islam that so-called "moderate" Muslims are either not aware of or that is not a part of "their" Islam (think Irshad Manji, Zuhdi Jasser, Little House on The Prarie, and the Learning Channel's "All American Muslim" as but a few examples).

It's like telling an audience that the Qur'an contains special chapters for Muslim "extremists" alone.

When writting about its political and legal aspects, I suggest you adopt and use the term "Orthodox Islam".

2. "Muslims who refuse to condemn the prophet Mohammed for murder and rape are radicals and need to be told as much sometimes."

That is not correct, and exposes a fundamental ignorance of Islam and a Muslim's obligations therein. They are literalists (as Islam expects of Allah's every slave) who, as Wellington notes, should and must be shamed into marginalization, making them come across, to the rest of us, for what they are---confused human beings at best, wicked members of our species at worst, who, each and every one, without exception, is a member of a belief system which is both antithetical to democracy and runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution and American law.

That shaming and marginalization will not come about in Western nations so long as our neighbors and friends continue to be told that devout, compliant Muslims are "radicals" or "extremists". They need to told instead that—unlike the freedom of conscience enjoyed in Western societies--Islam is a complete way of life which to this day prohibits scrutiny and criticism of its teachings, by both Muslims and non, and that apostasy remains punishable by death.

3."We need to stop giving people who call in to promote their brand of lunacy a pass, just because they call it a "religion"."

I agree. But I don’t think that your harsh treatment of Sabah caused her to rethink her membership in the ummah.

Without regard to who she is or her background, I wonder what her response would have been, as an American Muslim, if you had simply asked her where on the planet the amputation of a thief's hand(s)is morally acceptable to her--today. Or the amputation of a hand and a foot on opposite sides. Or the death penalty for apostasy. Etc.

In 2012.

Responses to questions about Aisha have great wiggle room, as you know.

Loved your blog entry, icefalcon! You hit on some awesome points, and I, too, cringed when I saw that hit piece on CNN. And I shouted "liar!" at the Muslim woman who denied the wife-beating verse existed.

Livingengine,

I'm officially throwing down my gauntlet and issuing you this challenge:

POST *ONE* COMMENT ON THIS THREAD THAT IS ON-TOPIC AND NOT ABOUT EAB.

If you cannot, then I say that is evidence that you are clinically obsessed and really could use professional help.

I will not respond to one more trivial accusation of yours, and I urge everyone else to ignore him.

This might be my final post in response to you.

OK, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

I said "might be my final post", but look; you couldn't provide an on-topic comment, and that says something about your state of mental health.

Please stop dominating this thread with your trivializations, please?

I trust that EAB has roughly the same opinion about the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (died 2008 btw) that John Lennon, also initially charmed by that snake-charmer, woke up to. At one point, as Beatles fans know, when the Beatles were in India at the Yogi's retreat, Lennon had heard rumors that the Yogi was having sex with actress Mia Farrow (among many other women), so one morning he and some or all of the other Fab Four marched over to the Yogi's tent and confronted him. I'm not sure if the Yogi gave him a straight answer or whether Lennon confirmed the rumor otherwise, but that was the end of his "inspiration" and he would soon thereafter satirize him in the song "Sexy Sadie" (the title referring to the Yogi himself).

Paul McCartney, more level-headed than John, said years later that he himself never trusted the Yogi anyway and just enjoyed the Indian cuisine while he was there. Also, the famous nihilist atheist author Kurt Vonnegut recounts wryly how his own wife and daughter became smitten by the Yogi's charms, and he makes it clear he wouldn't ever be so gullible himself (and he noted the amusing oddity of the Yogi always wearing a dazzlingly expensive gold watch).

While I prefer and favor the attitudes of Paul and Kurt in this regard, when it comes to the problem of Islam, I wouldn't care if EAB likes the Maharishi still (nobody's perfect), as long as he makes clear, as he does, that he condemns Islam and as long as he does good work for the cause. And while the "Big Tent" philosophy is generally sound, of course we wouldn't want to admit anyone who is (or who claims to be) anti-Islam -- such as for example a current neo-Nazi or a KKK member or, I dare say, someone who insists repeatedly that we have to respect the sensibilities and dignity of lying Muslims enabling their unjust, evil and dangerous ideology.

I know you have seen this from the Wall Street Journal about how politically active the Maharishi is.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119932860523364137.html

I am curious if Eric has gone to the Maharishi's university, or has a certificate from the Maharishi.

"I am curious if Eric has gone to the Maharishi's university, or has a certificate from the Maharishi."

It wouldn't matter to me if EAB had gone there -- as long as he is robust in his condemnation of Islam and of Muslims who enable Islam. And I don't know what a "certificate from the Maharishi" means. Did the old Yogi hand out certificates himself?

"Just got my email about Global One being up for sale. Eric has been an inspiration. May the right buyer rise up soon to take the leadership" - http://www.globalone.tv/profiles/status/show?id=3026128%3AStatus%3A184062

I don't think I am wacky. I think this is wacky, and there is a ton of this kind of thing GlobalOne.
http://www.globalone.tv/video/the-illusion-of-reality-consciousness-quantum-theory

If there is no reality, there is no morality.

Check out Ramtha @3:50, and @8:26
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaZLyVzbnC0

There is nothing critical of Ramtha at GlobalOne.

Hi LemonLime

>>It wouldn't matter to me if EAB had gone there -- as long as he is robust in his condemnation of Islam and of Muslims who enable Islam. And I don't know what a "certificate from the Maharishi" means. Did the old Yogi hand out certificates himself?
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

And on that point would you be so supportive of him if he took the same attitude with every other religion as well?

If you look at his posts on Global One TV he accuses anyone of believing in Christ of being unable to think, and that when they do think the quality of their mental output is relegated to nonsense!

His site is based upon self publicity, both for him and those who post, being a member grants you access to a board where you may accept "Gifts" or give them.

Unlike Mr Spencer who reports factually and often with scholarly articles there is absolutely nothing of a memorable nature to be had from his site, however experientially his members trot out their New Age or New Era dogma's.

Since this type of belief system is subject to "creep" and is based upon Human Faith as against Divine Faith i am against it, not because of what people believe but because people can be made to believe anything an idealogue or a charismatic teaches, many people in this New Age movement have been decieved.

It spans a realm of thought which is embedded in religious and atheistic thought, its cult is always brought to others by someone who describes himself as a "divine" but many statements from these people are based in conspiracy theories and outright mythomania.

Their real objective are always hidden

I think Livingengine may actually have a point in warning Mr Spencer from the interview with Saba, because in no interview I have heard has Mr Spencer used techniques that pressure the audience, irrespective of how well Jamie Glasov tried to extricate a fact (which we all know will not be addressed )

My view is that Livingengine has a point, and just because EAB has contributed a good post, does not make him a sound ally, then again it does not make anyone else a sound ally either.


MV

No, *you* are wacky. Or at least, so fixated on what you think are the iniquities of New Ageism, as to be quite unbalanced.

You say:

''If there is no reality, there is no morality.''

I'm not quite sure exactly what you mean by this, unless perhaps you are implying that if people are interested in theories about 'what is reality', they are ipso facto incapable of moral judgements, which doesn't logically follow.

Certainly not in Mr. Bell's case; he has made moral judgements about the evil and vile paedomohammed, islam, and in the article above, has found out some very disturbing facts about this mosque. Can you say the same ?

You seem to have such a loathing of what you term New Ageism, that you appear to be blind to the fact that Mr. Bell has taken a stance directly *opposite* to that of the majority of his fellows on the Left, ie, his realisation of how vile and evil islam is, and has had the courage to come out and say so *in public*, thus earning the scorn and vilification of people he had thought to be his friends and colleagues. Brave, and *moral*, I think.

And now he has to put up with it from people like you, who nastily and creepily say things like ''Eric Allen Bell has been in a mental hospital. Except to visit a friend, I have never been in a mental hospital.'' I don't know whether this is true, or a figment of your fevered imagination, but even if it is, so what ? My next door neighbour suffers from clinical depression, and has been in a 'mental hospital' - that doesn't make her a lunatic.

I also don't understand your rage against Mr. Bell for what he said, and his tone, to that muslimah on the radio programme. He directly pressed her to condemn her disgusting 'perfect man' for his crimes, *including raping a 9 year old girl*, and when she refused to do so, he very rightly, in my view, told her exactly what he thought of her. I would have done *precisely* the same. If that makes me a 'bigot', good; I'm proud to be one.

By the way, thanks for the link to GlobalOne: not really my cup of tea, but I didn't find it to be evil, or find any of the horrors you evidently did. An eccentric like Ramtha isn't going to cut your head off, hang you, cut out little girls clitoris's, or rape them or stone them. In fact, some of it was daft, some of it moderately interesting, and some quite thought provoking.

Mr. Bell said:

''That said, it's not important to me whether anyone approves or disapproves of my personal approach to spirituality. What matters to me here at JW is that we find ways to stand, shoulder to shoulder, and neutralize the growing threat of Islam.''

And *that* I agree with *100%*. Like gravenimage's ''big tent.''

Almost forgot to add that I saw a follow-up piece on CNN with Soledad O'Brien on the occasion of the judge's ruling that the mosque didn't have the right permit.

She said it seemed that opponents of the mosque were just "throwing things against the wall to see what would stick", and bluntly asked one of the plaintiffs something like (I'm paraphrasing here):

"All this talk of permits and community input is just a smoke screen, and you're really against this mosque just because you don't want Muslims in your neighborhood. Isn't that true?"

She did let the mosque opponent speak, but near the end of the piece there was a weird edit, like whole section was missing and then the segment was over.

It has been my experience that the number one repellent, in keeping new people away from joining us in the world of Counter Jihad, has been the monopolization of the debate on the part of Evangelicals who cannot tolerate anyone who does not follow Jesus into this small community.

That said, I have found most of the Christian people in Counter Jihad to be warm and welcoming. But those who are not, who cannot accept that I don't believe as they do, are harming this movement.

To me Counter Jihad is about Liberty and Human Rights and NOT the superiority of one religion over another.

If asked to speak on a religious program or write for a religious blog, so long as the topic is Counter Jihad, I keep my own spiritual point of view to myself, as I do not find it to be relevant to the subject at hand.

As I have become even semi-public in speaking out, I face an inbox every day of emails concerning my articles. Most of what I receive is encouraging, some of it is hate mail, and some takes the very condescending view that I have not yet fully seen the light with regard to Jesus and that the sender will pray for me.

I'll stand shoulder to shoulder alongside anyone in this fight who shares my concerns for Liberty and Human Rights. But the constant obsession with my own spiritual views, that becomes a huge issue, every single time I post on JW, is really a major drag.

Thank for taking the time to read this. Rejecting those who reject Jesus is counter productive in the world of Counter Jihad.

Eric


I agree. To jihadists, we are all kuffar, whether we be Jewish, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, etc., etc.

And those who aren't "People of the book" don't even get the option to submit according to many jihadist; it's either convert or die.

So, we are all in this together!

"If you look at his posts on Global One TV he accuses anyone of believing in Christ of being unable to think, and that when they do think the quality of their mental output is relegated to nonsense!"

Well, JW regular commenter "Kinana of Khaybar" has pretty much the same opinion, even if (supposedly) unlike EAB, he substitutes a more normal modern skeptical rationalism for such "backward" religious thinking -- see his post above (not the first time he has expressed various aspects of his opinion on this issue):

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/the-murfreesboro-mosque-built-on-a-foundation-of-lies.html#comment-882945

However, although my position on Christianity is more like Wellington's, who defends it as a positive good for society and as based in and reflecting a wealth of respectable traditions intellectual and cultural (far outweighing in intellectual integrity and substance -- not to mention artistic avhievements -- the silly New Age movement), this particular aspect doesn't bother me so much about Kinana of Khaybar. Rather, it's his, in my estimation, less-then-robust condemnation of Islam and the Muslims who enable Islam that has come to nag at me with a little concern in the back of my mind. Still, Kinana more often than not does good work that is effectively synecdochal for rationally condemning Islam and all Muslims who enable Islam, whether he might realize it or not, LOL.

So EAB's New Age beliefs and his self-promotion thereof -- and even his denigration of other religions that may not meet his exalted standards of a "higher consciousness" and the Chi Vibrations it attunes Itself and the Cosmos in Transponic Oneness to -- still don't bother me, as long as the sound instincts to condemn not only Islam but also a given Muslim enabler, which I heard loud and clear on that radio show when he confronted Saba the Muslima, are sincere, which I have (present tense) no reason to doubt.

Wow, 191 comments.

Come on, guys, we can reach 200! Like the Livingengine That Could...!

Eric writes

It has been my experience that the number one repellent, in keeping new people away from joining us in the world of Counter Jihad, has been the monopolization of the debate on the part of Evangelicals who cannot tolerate anyone who does not follow Jesus into this small community.
First of all I can assure you I am no Evangelical however I can see that you need to portray me as one, because now you have been found out as having your own agenda, you seem have a hatred of Christianity and you have made it very clear on your website.
That said, I have found most of the Christian people in Counter Jihad to be warm and welcoming. But those who are not, who cannot accept that I don't believe as they do, are harming this movement.
Most Christian people are very tolerant and know that the issues will affect even their offspring its not about being religious or belonging to a particular religion its about being part of a humanity that has a rational grasp of their own environment.
To me Counter Jihad is about Liberty and Human Rights and NOT the superiority of one religion over another.
Exactly but individual members of any religion are allowed to follow their own conscience, therefore if the Pope himself were to pass an edict that obliged me to go against my conscience, I would be within my rights to excommunicate myself, and if that edict were to cause a loss to faith I and others could resist and obstruct him, from within and without, that is freedom of conscience, on your website you write that you “follow your EGO” that is not the same as following your conscience, it is a matter of conscience to resist Islam, not EGO.
If asked to speak on a religious program or write for a religious blog, so long as the topic is Counter Jihad, I keep my own spiritual point of view to myself, as I do not find it to be relevant to the subject at hand.

But you have come with baggage, how can you run with the hare and hunt with the hounds.

As I have become even semi-public in speaking out, I face an inbox every day of emails concerning my articles. Most of what I receive is encouraging, some of it is hate mail, and some takes the very condescending view that I have not yet fully seen the light with regard to Jesus and that the sender will pray for me.


I'll stand shoulder to shoulder alongside anyone in this fight who shares my concerns for Liberty and Human Rights. But the constant obsession with my own spiritual views, that becomes a huge issue, every single time I post on JW, is really a major drag.

Then you must examine your spirituality, (conscience) is it fit for purpose, were you to do very much more public speaking you would be lambasted by your opponents because of what you have written on your website could be called Christophobic hate speech.

MV


http://www.globalone.tv/forum/topics/your-own-personal-jesus

Anything a person says about the true intentions of Jesus are pure speculation. He never wrote anything down. NONE of us have any idea what he actually said, what he meant. You can make Jesus into absolutely ANYTHING you want to believe him to be. But that does not make it true.

More people have died in his name than any other.

Christianity has caused more suffering that it has comforted. It's time for us to snap out of it and to really inquire instead of just believe.

Anything short of true, deep and radical inquiry is just wishful thinking. It's an addiction that our civilizations can no longer afford.

We can make Jesus say, do, like anyone or anything. But it doesn't mean any of it's true. If you're serious about inquiry then it is critical that one is honest with themselves. The fact is you don't know if Jesus said anything at all, did anything or even lived. Until one is willing to come to terms with that and to deeply inquire about the nature of consciousness, all one is left with is a placebo. Never discount the potential power of a placebo, but it is a placebo nonetheless. Having an imaginary friend who knows the way is not the same as knowing the way yourself. The fact is that we know what Gandhi said. As time passes new things are surfacing about the more human side of Gandhi, his moods, his personality flaws, his sexual hangups - or so those are the assertions being made. With Jesus there is about zero credible evidence that this mythological figure ever historically existed
That's kind of how I see the Buddha - as an excellent mythological figure - a story worth telling, as long as one does not need it to be historically true. The Buddha story, and in some ways the Jesus story, illustrate bigger principals when taken as metaphor and not reduced to something literal


Marveloouchi,

You say of (or to) EAB:

"But you have come with baggage, how can you run with the hare and hunt with the hounds."

That's a nice phrase, "run with the hare and hunt with the hounds". However, one would have to demonstrate with actual evidence whether it applies to a particular person or not.

Secondly, EAB represents the phenomenon of someone who has ostensibly "come over the other side" -- from the Leftist milieu that routinely defends Islam, to the side that has become alarmed by Islam and its dangers.

In respect of the New Age movement and its general anti-Christian bias, EAB may or may not have "come over" away from that, but I did find evidence that he took his message of the Counter-Jihad to the "lion's den" as it were, which I discussed in a post above, referring to:

...a long interview with someone who pointedly calls herself "Dr." -- Dr. Guldar Caba on her show "Are You Awake?"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH2xUmSJUis

Dr. Guldar is exactly that kind of New Age person who looks arrogantly askance at "organized religion" and has anti-Christian and anti-Western (and anti-American) feelings which she channels (pun intended) into her worldview of a "higher consciousness" -- BUT: In that long interview -- particularly after the "station break" which Dr. Guldar -- EAB should be credited for going on at length about his realization that Islam is inspiring and perpetrating human rights abuses, and he persists even after his host (apparently a colleague and a friend) tries to re-direct his focus onto a more comfortably New Age vagueness, to bring the discussion back on track.

Unsurprisingly, she continues to veer off away from his topic, but at least EAB gave it a solid good try, twice in that interview. While Dr. Guldar likely won't be able to free herself from her conditioning in this regard, such a spectacle of a respected colleague and friend of hers coming on and going on at great length about how bad Islam is -- with specifics about the Murfreesboro mosque problem -- may have some good effect on some of her viewers who might be more open-minded than she is, and who may be incipiently prompted to begin the long journey outside their reflexively anti-Western pro-Islam instincts.

So, at least I found actual evidence that EAB firmly, if respectfully and gently, presented his (and our) case to someone from "his world".

I haven't yet seen evidence to the contrary. And that long quote of his you found about Jesus could just as well (with of course emendations for style and substance) have been written by Voltaire or Rousseau or Diderot or Bertrand Russell or Sigmund Freud or Kurt Vonnegut or any number of the students of the Bible scholar Adolf Von Harnack who went on to become religion professors or Bible scholars themselves, or innumerable other mainstream Western writers or thinkers. While that quote reflects a hard-core dose of skepticism about Jesus and, by extension, Christianity, it's neither culturally remarkable for the West of the past 200 years (unless one has been living in a cave) nor is it by itself evidence that EAB is "running with the hounds" per se.

LemonLime,

Once again, you are an inveterate and malicious liar attempting to cause problems for me at the site by misrepresenting my views.

You quoted another commenter: "If you look at his posts on Global One TV he accuses anyone of believing in Christ of being unable to think, and that when they do think the quality of their mental output is relegated to nonsense!"

I'm not sure what Eric has actually said about this, but you then you brought me into this with your bogus allegation:

"Well, JW regular commenter "Kinana of Khaybar" has pretty much the same opinion, even if (supposedly) unlike EAB, he substitutes a more normal modern skeptical rationalism for such "backward" religious thinking -- see his post above (not the first time he has expressed various aspects of his opinion on this issue)"

In fact, I've never accused Christians of being unable to think, and have never dismissed anyone's (Christian or not) output as nonsense unless there is in fact a substantive reason to do so.

While most people don't respond to LemonLime/Hesperado perhaps because they don't have time to bother, it is worth noting how he responds to disagreement (with his supposedly "mature, intelligent" comments):

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/can-we-shut-down-the-tsa-now-al-qaeda-doctors-trained-to-implant-bombs-in-humans.html#comment-879291

As usual, LL, you make good points, this time to Marveloouchi. Personally, I think New Age stuff is pseudo-religion and full of psychobabble. It certainly has no Thomas Aquinas or Maimonides to sustain it (never will I predict and boy is this an easy prediction to make).

On the positive side, however, New Age suicide bombers are kinda' scarce and this, in full Martha Stewart mode, is a good thing. I do recall that EAB on a different thread months ago here at JW called religion "retarded" and I chastised him for this (how effectively remains to be seen). But EAB has fully come to realize how inimical Islam is to liberty and other positive things and, also to his great credit, he has put himself out there, as has Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, Geert Wilders and others with no disguise as to who he is. In this respect he has done more than you, I and so many others who post here regularly at JW under pseudonyms. This shouldn't, this can't, be overlooked. He is to be applauded for this.

Besides, we need as many folks in the Counter-Jihad as we can get and if liberals like EAB who "get" Islam are shunned for holding views which are, well, liberal, then this just isn't smart because it is ordinarily best to fight one fight at a time, something which Livingengine appears oblivious of. Take care.

Thanks Wellington; I agree wholeheartedly with your post, all good points and counsel.

Excellently well said, Wellington.

I can't believe how far OT this thread has veered.

The BOTTOM LINE for all involved in the counter-jihad is that, face with the imminent danger posed by islam and its influence, we need to fight it vigorously, with all that we have and with whomever is willing. All of this petty infighting in counter-productive and pointless.

In this case, The enemy of my enemy IS my friend, and I am willing to overlook differences not crucial to the accomplishment of the ultimate goal, which is the eradication of islam.

Once the clear and present danger has been eliminated, we can sort out the rest of our differences later, without the threat of people who would SLAUGHTER us for them.

Hi Jan,

Thank you for your cogent comment. I would like to use it as an opportunity to clarify my position.

But first, some levity. If you are going to insist in calling me wacky, could I ask that you call me a wacky, insane, secret Muslim, Nazi, Bellophobe? Thanks.

Now on a more serious note. I like what you said here about being in a 'mental hospital' not making one a lunatic. I agree with that, and that may be the case with Eric.

But, this is a glass house where he should not throw stones. Criticizing Eric Allen Bell does not make one wacky, insane, or a Nazi, or anything like that.

I am obviously not making myself clear about my objections to Eric, and the New Age.

It is not that Eric is New Age that I object to. People are free to make their own mistakes.

It is also not that Eric is with the creepy New Age element like IONS, Deepak Chopra, Hagelin, What the Bleep, Ramtha, etc.

It is not that he is promoting the views of the New Age predators, although that greatly arousing my suspicions.

What bothers me is that he lies about it. He lied to me in front of an audience saying he didn't know where I was getting this stuff from, and that I was misrepresenting his views.

This sent me to DefCon4. He IS New Age. The website IS New Age. IONS is New Age. There are no two ways about it.

When he says there are no unicorns at GlobalOne, although his readers are clambering for them, he is telling the truth with the intention to deceive.

He is not forthcoming about his branding the website New Age.

He doesn't mention postings like this one http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/03/debate-tonight-is-islam-inherently-violent----eric-allen-bell-vs-nadir-ahmed.html#comment-868836

There are no unicorns mentioned here either, but it goes on at length about the New Age is, what its plans for the future are (syncretism is among their plans), as well as, names of people who are involved, including JZ Knight.

There are no caveats from Eric about any of this. This is where he is coming from. These are his people. I detect a resonance between this, and what IONS is talking about.

So what does this have to do with anything, with jihad?

It has to do with Eric. We really never got an introduction to him, but it is clear to me that he has ambitions for leadership. That is why he is continually telling us we must accept him, or we will never get out of first gear.

I am not sure where second gear is, but I think it means in part being given authority over people; he gets to set the tone, the direction, receive status, he gets to share a platform with Robert Spencer, gets to pat Robert Spencer on the head, and we are all supposed to just look on in stupefaction at the Gods at play.

Please don't critise the great man or you'll wound him, and he will declare you an enemy of movement.


I can not believe we are talking about Christianity!!! ..While it is not the issue here ....Who cares who or what people believe in or not believe in, as long as It is NOT Allah and it's book Quran ...the book of death that it is soaked with blood of the innocents.

We care about the next time beheading happen to an convert or an apostate done by the poison Islam ...

We are on the same side ... I hope we remember that more often .


LL responded to

"But you have come with baggage, how can you run with the hare and hunt with the hounds."
That's a nice phrase, "run with the hare and hunt with the hounds". However, one would have to demonstrate with actual evidence whether it applies to a particular person or not.
Secondly, EAB represents the phenomenon of someone who has ostensibly "come over the other side" -- from the Leftist milieu that routinely defends Islam, to the side that has become alarmed by Islam and its dangers.

That is not at all true it is very easy to tell people what they want to hear Islamists are aware that we know of Taqqiya but lies are universal statements to deceive.

In respect of the New Age movement and its general anti-Christian bias, EAB may or may not have "come over" away from that, but I did find evidence that he took his message of the Counter-Jihad to the "lion's den" as it were, which I discussed in a post above, referring to: ...a long interview with someone who pointedly calls herself "Dr." -- Dr. Guldar Caba on her show "Are You Awake?"... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH2xUmSJUis Dr. Guldar is exactly that kind of New Age person who looks arrogantly askance at "organized religion" and has anti-Christian and anti-Western (and anti-American) feelings which she channels (pun intended) into her worldview of a "higher consciousness" -- BUT: In that long interview -- particularly after the "station break" which Dr. Guldar -- EAB should be credited for going on at length about his realization that Islam is inspiring and perpetrating human rights abuses, and he persists even after his host (apparently a colleague and a friend) tries to re-direct his focus onto a more comfortably New Age vagueness, to bring the discussion back on track. I cant follow your point as this link leads to a dialogue from EAB Unsurprisingly, she continues to veer off away from his topic, but at least EAB gave it a solid good try, twice in that interview. While Dr. Guldar likely won't be able to free herself from her conditioning in this regard, such a spectacle of a respected colleague and friend of hers coming on and going on at great length about how bad Islam is -- with specifics about the Murfreesboro mosque problem -- may have some good effect on some of her viewers who might be more open-minded than she is, and who may be incipiently prompted to begin the long journey outside their reflexively anti-Western pro-Islam instincts.
I can’t follow your link because it leads to a dialogue by EAB
So, at least I found actual evidence that EAB firmly, if respectfully and gently, presented his (and our) case to someone from "his world". I haven't yet seen evidence to the contrary. And that long quote of his you found about Jesus could just as well (with of course emendations for style and substance) have been written by Voltaire or Rousseau or Diderot or Bertrand Russell or Sigmund Freud or Kurt Vonnegut or any number of the students of the Bible scholar Adolf Von Harnack who went on to become religion professors or Bible scholars themselves, or innumerable other mainstream Western writers or thinkers. While that quote reflects a hard-core dose of skepticism about Jesus and, by extension, Christianity, it's neither culturally remarkable for the West of the past 200 years (unless one has been living in a cave) nor is it by itself evidence that EAB is "running with the hounds" per se.


Forget the fact that EAB seems to have come from beyond the pale in his condemnation of Islam is Livingengine correct, and remember he has compromised his intellectual honesty in not providing facts for his ambiguous statements that EAB is a liar.

This is the issue New Age (Era) is a real problem it does not accept the truth, which is that every action has an equal and opposite reaction, in relation to sin (think commandments) and that they can be overruled by an ability to control the mind, this cannot be so. as the mind or more specifically the CONSCIENCE will never let go of a fact that is not validated by Authority, this is the Spirit of Truth, not the Church.

To get a more insightful view we should look at the post that Livingengine placed about Ramtha (of which EAB describes as a lunatic woman), these people are involved in a scam to fleece vulnerable people .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaZLyVzbnC0
The tragedy of these people is that they are being fed a line that no matter how evil the position is that they have come to innocence or guilt does not matter, there is a way into heaven by your own intellect., this is not a compatible ideology to Christianity neither is it something that can tackle Islam because it would COMPLETELTY exonerate it.

In defence of EAB there is nothing to associate him with Ramtha, not a thing , being objective I must ask Livingengine if he has confused himself with this group (he has been silent by the way) .

If you look up Micael E Ledwith
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ledwith
you will see that he has endorsed Ramtha on his website the only thing that I can see that could motivate such a response must be money or the possibility that he could become a pastoral representative , this is doubtful because Ramtha and the prelates beliefs are opposites and by acquiescing to the role of Ramtha on his website he is actually a accepting his apostasy.
Nevertheless EAB can not expect a free ride even as to the friend of my enemy is my enemy and the enemy of my enemy is my friend , this does not bode well for a situation of trust, DOES IT .
There is also no rush from me to accept EAB or Livingengine as strange bedfellows because i want to see unambiguous posts, not posture.


MV

LemonLime wrote:

...While I prefer and favor the attitudes of Paul and Kurt in this regard, when it comes to the problem of Islam, I wouldn't care if EAB likes the Maharishi still (nobody's perfect), as long as he makes clear, as he does, that he condemns Islam and as long as he does good work for the cause. And while the "Big Tent" philosophy is generally sound, of course we wouldn't want to admit anyone who is (or who claims to be) anti-Islam -- such as for example a current neo-Nazi or a KKK member or, I dare say, someone who insists repeatedly that we have to respect the sensibilities and dignity of lying Muslims enabling their unjust, evil and dangerous ideology.
.........................................

That's pretty much my take on things, too, LemonLime.

MV -

What absurd nonsense. My distaste for Christianity is something that several people on this thread seem to be trying to coax out of me.

I don't like theology. I personally feel that faith is more time than not the absence of reason.

Teaching children that they will be cast into a lake of hell fire for all eternity, if they refuse to believe that Jesus died for their sins is insane, it is brainwash and brainwash is child abuse. My "inability" to go along with that is not "baggage".

More importantly, how can we work TOGETHER to educate the masses about the threat posed by Islam and to advance legislation that identifies Islam as a totalitarian political system, instead of a "religion" protected under the First Amendment?

Thanks,

Eric

That should be "the Counter jihad Movement". My mouse slipped over the publish button.

ning about criticism? Preposterous. I guess there is an objective reality.

Eric said

What absurd nonsense. My distaste for Christianity is something that several people on this thread seem to be trying to coax out of me.
: Then you do have a "distaste", thats not hard to fathom because most of what you say on your website is unreasonable, personal diatribe.
:I don't like theology. I personally feel that faith is more time than not the absence of reason.
You are quite right you wouldn't profit by theology, because the absence of time diminishes the use of reason
:Teaching children that they will be cast into a lake of hell fire for all eternity, if they refuse to believe that Jesus died for their sins is insane, it is brainwash and brainwash is child abuse. My "inability" to go along with that is not "baggage".
It is not relevant to any discussion that such an outcome as "hell fire" is the destination of the non beleiver, REASON defends the consciense even from the unscrupulous cleric, because if God is no better than a fearful man made construct, then God would not be worthy of his title ,that is GOD.
:More importantly, how can we work TOGETHER to educate the masses about the threat posed by Islam and to advance legislation that identifies Islam as a totalitarian political system, instead of a "religion" protected under the First Amendment?

By reason, just because people believe in God does not make them inferior people, but they through reason will not tolerate tyranny whether it is political, ideological, or from any psuedo science.


MV

Hello,

My objection to EAB, and Ramtha are based on things like this.

EAB posts segments of What the Bleep, a movie made by Ramtha students, for Ramtha, promoting her views on his GlobaloneTV site.

Including this segment that is the interview with Dr. Joe Dispenza, a master teacher at Ramtha School of Enlightenment.
http://www.globalone.tv/video/i-create-my-day

Here is what he says -
"An excerpt from Dr. Joe Dispenza's interview from "What the Bleep Do We Know" on creating my day and setting intention. If you want to know more or understand fully what he is talking about I suggest you watch the film "What The Bleep do We Know." - Eric Allen Bell .

Do you see any qualifications here, or any warnings about Ramtha?

Joe Dispenza is a master teacher at Ramtha's School of Enlightenment.

"What the Bleep" is a well known New Age scam of long standing.

This article exposing "What the Bleep" is nearly 10 years old. EAB is, supposedly a professional film maker, and he doesn't know any of this? Makes no mention of it at GlobalOne. Science of Consciousness?!

All of this is in harmony with the New Age think tank Institute of Noetic Science give credence to "What the Bleep", Ramtha, and Dr. Emoto.

Here is their study guide to the movie "What the Bleep".
http://media.noetic.org/uploads/files/Bleep_Study_Guide.pdf

As I said before, go to GlobalOne, and look how many people "like" Ramtha.

There is nothing critical of Ramtha at GlobalOne. She is welcome under the "big tent".

BTW - here is what Salon said about, Ledwith and "What the Bleep".

Knight’s role as the voice of Ramtha is the most striking — but hardly the only — omission of the film, which could easily be interpreted as a full-blown infomercial for Ramtha. Two other on-screen experts are not identified as Ramtha associates: Dr. Joe Dispenza, chiropractor and mystic, listed as a student on the Ramtha Web site; and a man identified only as “Dr. Miceal Ledwith.”
Ledwith (at one time Monsignor Michael Ledwith) was once on track to be the next archbishop of Dublin, but the theologian stepped down as president of Maynooth College in 1994, after a complaint that he had sexually harassed a young seminarian. It was later revealed that Ledwith had allegedly paid an six-figure sum to a man who accused him of sexual abuse. Ledwith has maintained his innocence but left Ireland for the more placid confines of Monterey, Calif. On the “Bleep” Web site, Ledwith’s relationship with the Catholic Church is only alluded to in a claim that he was once “charged with advising the Holy See on theological matters,” but he is not identified as ever having been a priest, or even as a lecturer at the Ramtha school. According to a Ramtha Web site, Ledwith has joined “Ramtha’s core of appointed teachers.” (The Ramtha school and Ledwith have not responded to requests for interviews. The “Bleep” Web site recommends that journalists contact an independent publicist, but the movie previously listed as its P.R. contact Pavel Mikoloski, also director of public affairs for Ramtha’s school.)


Livingengine


You have still not exonerated yourself from the accusations you made of EAB you have either to apologise for your behaviour or produce a reasonable defence because you have made it look like your behaviour is totally unreasonable, some might say sudden mental illness.

At present you have some credit with JWers but that is becoming diminished answer us why did you attack him, what was the real reason.

MV

Can you please be more specific?

Agreed. New Age is pseudo-science, pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-spiritualism, pseudo-logical, pseudo-quantum physics, and though much more benign than Islam's equivalent, it is also pseudo-religious. Unlike all the evils perpetrated and noted on Islam, New Age is relatively harmless, if you don't overdose on 'crystal soup'. If they were building a New Age temple in my neighborhood, I might be amused, but don't think I'd go out and petition it stopped. Unlike the Murfreesboro temple to the pseudo-god-Allah of Arabian 7th century primitive mystical superstitions, which is potentially malevolent in promoting a truly putrid ideology, I would just pass if off as a laugh. No chance of New Agers strapping bombs and blowing up shopping centers nearby. If anybody is into that stuff, hey, it's their stuff, not mine. And if it makes them a nicer person, more benevolent and compassionate to others and animals, and plants and crystals, more power to them. What's the harm if they want to chant and play nice? EAB likes that stuff? Good, let him explore the pseudo-natural. But take Islam, and that is a war-horse of a different color. These bastards are out for our souls and freedoms with their pseudo-theo-political religion, and they must be stopped.

Well, EAB, not having the distaste for Christianity that you have, I guess I'm guilty of trying to inculcate in you an appreciation for it, even though I am not religious myself. I'm reminded here of what a devout Christian, and no mean judge of the human condition, one Fyodor Dostoyevsky, is reputed to have said and that is that without God anything is possible. This, of course, was not meant as an upbeat statement. Here's the way I would put it: Man may be pathetic with religion but it is quite possible that he would be even more pathetic without it. If so, then this would function as a classic case of being careful what you wish for because you might get it. (I'm mirroring Benjamin Franklin's assessment here, another highly substantive and shrewd human being, like the great Russian author.)

Respecting theology, you probably already know that Thomas Jefferson, an extraordinary man by any standard, refused, upon his founding of the University of Virginia, to have a department of theology because he considered theology to be nonsensical. Thought you'd like to know this if you hadn't already.

Finally, I would ask you not to be disillusioned by negative comments towards you on this thread. They are as nothing (this is easy for me to say but still true). The larger issue, which to your credit you have come to understand quite well, is defeating what Islam has in store for all of us if only we let it. Compared to this most important of fights, other differences pale in comparison unless we let our egos conclude otherwise. My best to you and yours. And be sure to come back here. We need guys like you.

I thought that I had made myself clear a couple times already, but see now that I have started something, and I'm going to have to finish it.

So, here again -

What Eric did was to ask a series of leading questions, constrained by "yes", or "no" answers, leading to the predetermined conclusion that Saba was a Nazi.

He was asking her to renounce Muhammad, and submit to him. No Muslim will do this, they wouldn't be a Muslim if they did.

And, I think that was his thrust. He said, "stop being a Muslim".

This was a fool's errand, and it told us much more about him than it did about her. He lost, and he still doesn't know what hit him.

When I confronted him the following week, he was unrepentant (remember what Ramtha said about being sorry), and said he would do it again.

When I tried to show how hypocritical he was being considering his wacky beliefs, to my completely astonishment, he didn't defend himself, he lied. He said those were not his beliefs, he said he didn't know where I was getting this from.

He called me liar before an audience, and in front of Robert Spencer.

I cratered him on Jihadwatch here.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/03/debate-tonight-is-islam-inherently-violent----eric-allen-bell-vs-nadir-ahmed.html#comment-868836

What does this have to do with anything? As I said before, it has to do with Eric. We never got a proper introduction to him. So, I look at him, and I see he is a full-on crackpot, mercurial, and has a history of anti-social behavior.

I listen to him crack wise to Robert Spencer saying he's "not too smart". And, I'm not supposed to say anything when he implicates Robert Spencer in public. What is he, our guest from the Left wing, New Age dimension?

He is a topic of conversation, and I think I have stayed within bounds, if not I'll apologize.

But, there is no reason to threaten me. This is not my website. I am not in the clique. You can ban me if you want. What can I do about it?

You want me to stop talking about Eric, I will do it. I think I have had my say. I am repeating myself. Few people read me anyway. I think I may be getting tried.

If you need me to explain myself any further I'm here for the rest of the night.

There is an objective reality, you better believe it.


Kool and the Gang are not just Muslims they are Nation of Islam. EEeeeewwww! F their Prophet F their Prophet F their Prophet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YK-cvcw3ngM

Yee Hah!

Larry Estavan -

Look up "rapid cycling" and enjoy your Kool and the Gang.

Look up Narcissistic Personality Disorder and enjoy yourself.

Larry, I was going to look that up, but I looked myself up instead ;)

I looked up dictionary in the Dictionary, and it said "What are you, some kind of an a**hole?"

Hijra does NOT mean conquest through immigration! A Muslim ideally would want to be in a Muslim land-that is not America! Hijra means immigration or flight. When spoken of in modern Islam, it usually refers to reverts who leave their non Muslim lands and move to one that is primarily Muslim-in Arabia, Asia or N. Africa. Leaving what is easier and more comfortable to be able to worship freely was what those first Muslims had to do-hence "flight" as Muhammed and his companions fled Makkah and the pagans so that they could worship without danger.

If you were really Muslim for 19 years-why didn't they TEACH you anything?

Mr Bell

I liked the article. Clear, plain, and to the point. Some things we knew already but quite a few we didn't...and those we didn't did not, however, surprise us in the least, for they chime with Islam's known modus operandi.

The million dollar question is this: just how many *other* mega-mosque projects, all over the Western world (the Islamic revivalist movement Tablighi Jamaat has a HUUUGE and rather scary mosque project in the pipeline in London at the moment, for example) and indeed *beyond* the West, in places like Russia, or India, or majority-Christian southern Africa, or even in northern *Thailand* would, if investigated in the way that you have been able to investigate *this* one in Murfreesboro, turn out to be just as suspect, in terms of the mysterious financing, the shadiness of at least some of the people involved - Muslim *and* non-Muslim - and the ways in which these massive projects are being forced down the throats of the local non-Muslims.

*That* was the thought that went through my mind when I finished reading your article.

By the way: if you have never read M Scott Peck's interesting book 'People of the Lie', I recommend it. Islam and Muslims were not even a blip on his radar screen, yet a great deal of what he says in that book - which contains an attempt to figure out what it is that human evil *is* and how it works - is very helpful for those of us who have spent time here observing the Islamic texts and the conduct of Muslims, past and present.

I have been reading at this site since late 2006, and a good deal else besides, and more and more I have become convinced that if ever there was a 'Religion of the Lie', and a People of the Lie, it is Islam, and the Ummah. It is, indeed, Islam's permission and active *encouragement* of the use of treachery/ deception/ deceit (including self-deceit)/ concealment and just plain old nonsense and lies, that revolts me even more than the incessant ultra-violence practised by so many of its adherents.

So in speaking fo the Murfreesboro Mosque as being built 'on a foundation of lies' you are placing your finger on *the* point that matters.

Wherever there is Islam, you will find lies and liars. Oriana Fallaci once interviewed Yasser Arafat. Her description of him is chilling, for to me it describes what happens to a person who spends their entire life telling lies; one loses contact with reality altogether. I think it was *that* which Dante meant, when - as Dante and Virgil enter 'Hell' in the 'Inferno' - he had Virgil state that 'here you will meet the miserable people/ who have lost the good of the intellect' (or, 'the intellectual good').

The only Muslim with whom I have ever had much to do was the most accomplished liar, cheat, fraudster and deceiver I have ever met in my whole life. I thought it was just her, at the time; now I know, looking back, in the light of greater knowledge than I had at the time, that it is highly probable that she was, quite simply, a *Muslim* liar: a person who had grown up in a culture so suffused with falsehood that lying and manipulation had become second nature, as easy and unconscious as breathing. Many other people posting in this forum have had similar experiences, or worse.

Hi Livingengine

It is becoming clear that your relationship to EAB is flim-flam, by that i mean that you and he are in collusion to your own self aggrandisement.

I am certain that others (including Mr Spencer) also know this, because you can only fool some of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all the people all of the time.

I've lost interest in you and Eric...

Bye

That is the million dollar question indeed. If the one new mega mosque project I looked into has this many red flags, what about all of the many, many other new mosques under construction or in the planning stages at this time?

In today's political climate, to even raise the question bring with it allegations of "racism" and "Islamophobia".

Shelly wrote, replying to blinker:

Hijra does NOT mean conquest through immigration! A Muslim ideally would want to be in a Muslim land-that is not America! Hijra means immigration or flight. When spoken of in modern Islam, it usually refers to reverts who leave their non Muslim lands and move to one that is primarily Muslim-in Arabia, Asia or N. Africa. Leaving what is easier and more comfortable to be able to worship freely was what those first Muslims had to do-hence "flight" as Muhammed and his companions fled Makkah and the pagans so that they could worship without danger.
..............................................

This is just false. America—and other parts of the West—are often descried as "Dar-al-Hijira", just as the Muslim world is "Dar-al-Islam".

There is a Dar Al Hijirah Mosque in northern Virginia, in one of the biggest Muslim enclaves in the United States. This Mosque is a center for Jihad terror. The Dar Al-Hijrah Times is a newspaper for the Somali Muslim diaspora in Minnesota.

Many Muslim clerics have made it clear that the mass immigration to America and other parts of the West is indeed a new Hijira.

Just as Muhammad used Medina as his base to Islamize Arabia—and from there to launch conquest of many other parts of the world, so Muslims are establishing enclaves in the West, which they often succeed in turning into "No Go" Zones—especially in Europe—just as Muhammed did Medina.

In fact, this issue is *very* apt for this story. The *enormous* Murfreesboro Mosque is a bulkhead in the Hijira, and, if built, will draw many more Muslims to an encampment in the middle of America's Bible Belt.

As for Western "reverts" going the other way, this also happens. The most common thing is for a new "revert" to go to Dar-al-Islam to train and to wage Jihad in some hell hole like Iraq, Afghanistan, or Somalia.

But then, all too often, they return to the West to wage Jihad here.

I’m gonna’ wade in here right at the end. I’ve read the article and all the comments, as well as the links vis a vis the bizarre “livingengine blog fiasco”.

By the by; LL makes a very good observation regarding the need for “elbow-room” in the comments section. I tend to agree. Conversation takes wild twists and turns – we shouldn’t shut it off or restrict it, simply because it has strayed a bit, or a bit too much; but that is Spencer’s decision, and “guidance” will come when it needs to, I’m sure.
___________________________________________________

Eric? Please understand at least this one, critical point: there’s no such thing as “political Islam”. The “term” is curiously missing from the rhetoric of Muslims, themselves.
If there were such a thing, people would vote on it. But people vote for candidates – not religions. “Political Islam” is an invidious, linguistic aberration, exactly like the term, “political correctness”. But no such things exist.
Chivalry, manners and being “Islamically correct” or not are not politics. Politics is votes and voting.
“Politically Correct” is lousy, misleading lingo made up by the Bill and Hillary Clinton crowd to hide their agenda of stifling commentary while he “smoked cigars” in the Oval Office and suffered efforts at impeachment. “Political Islam” is an identical, false construct.

Religion cannot be directly associated with politics because we can’t vote on religion. It’s as basic as that, and I defy anyone to refute my simple argument.

And “Mexicans dragging our culture down”, illegal or not? Well, we had better talk about the Africans and Indians too, hadn’t we?

Welcome to the fight, Mr. Bell. Just remember to remember (exactly) who it is you’re fighting, young man. It’s the Muslims who want to kill us – not the Mexicans.

And politics?

All politics is Philosophy and pragmatism, continually at odds with one another - but Religion should be considered outside of the discourse.

Just 2 or 3 questions, if you please:

1.Do you or do you not still support any and all “Occupy” movements?
2.Will you vote for Obama in November? Why or why not?

Best Regards,

DMDowse Zacaton 6/4/12

David Dowse,

I too was put off initially by that term "Political Islam" -- but the article itself if you read further dispels the concern. Also, on the radio show discussed in the whole "Larry" embroglio, EAB clearly says that "radical Islam" is simply "Islam". So I'm satisfied that he gets that point.

That said, however, I would rather that any public communications from writers and speakers in the anti-Islam movement eschew such truncation-terms altogether -- unless they immediately qualify them synecdochically.

This discussion section has gone to #224 and counting? Great! Let's review some salient points and concerns expressed on the merits, demerits, of this Murfreesboro mosque, ignoring Livigengines OT 'New Age' vindictive sideshow and rebuttals (which took far more bandwidth than it needed to):

* Mr. Bell points out the fishy goings on 'beneath the surface' of Dr. Fathy and his proposed mega-mosque, and unsavory personalities involved, like the shifty Camie Ayash spokesperson, the questionable (out-sourced?) foreign construction financing of mysterious origins, garnished with Sharia apologist like the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar calling for stifling free speech criticism, and CAIR's subterfuge activities to build this 'victory' mosque - "What would Mohammed do?" - in short the gist of what is going on in this Murfreesboro mosque construction.

* Expect "huge growth" of Muslim population in the mega-mosque enclave, projected by carpediadem.

* That "political Islam" is a redundancy, by LemonLime and others, there is only Islam, which is intrinsically political.

* Inside the mosque 'malodorous shoes' problem, per miriam rowe, an insider's view.

* "Build it and they will come" syndrome, once mosque is built in the small Muslim community of mere 200, per du_swami.

* Jamadagnii's White washed media coverage of the supremacist mega-mosque, and conflict of interest by local Mayor.

* "Takiyya and hijra" concerns by blinker and others, obfuscating and infiltrating middle America.

* Possible Saudi money helping "Muslims override zoning and building regulations", per Jamadagnii.

* Preserving our First Amendment priority, as noted by Livingengine (good post, response to Istanbul_Chick's noting Islam's "bronze age supremacists" atavism).

* Muslim 'death threats' are standard op when criticizing such mega-victory mosques, as noted by gravenimage.

* Islam not religion but "brutal and sadistic legal system", concurs BoT.

* Wellington reminds that per our First Amendment, Islam cannot be de-categorized as "religion" though it scarcely fits the label, as it is inimical to liberty with its "spiritual totalitarian ideology".

* Secondary concerns over what happens in Islamic neighborhoods, as woefully witnessed enclaves in Europe, per Eric Bell

* Sharia, which is contrary to our human rights, is inseparable from Islam, per traeh.

* BlueRaven notes "Muslims believe that everyone is born a Muslim. They kill any Islamic apostate" (extreme bigotry), and other unsavory, un-liberal, and un 21st century behaviors.

* Islam is an 'unenlightened' religion with over 19,000 acts of terror since 9/11 alone, a damming indictment of Islam, per Wellington.

* Islam in its literal sense, for Muslims following the letter of their religion, are "antithetical to democracy and runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution and American law", per PRCS.

… then it goes off on some tangents regarding Glazov radio show, MSA member Saba, etc.

* Reference to Swiss ban on minarets, Brandon O'connor, symbols of Muslim conquest, per Erdogan.


I may have missed some, but the evident pattern is that this Murfreesboro mega-mosque is more than a mere religious building built in some obscure middle America suburb, but a serious concern of encroachment on our American soil by a supremacist ideology that is forming a beachhead for its Sharia agenda. So this is serious, and big, and it should be called out as such publicly, in the media, by members of city government, and by the public at large. Like the planned mega-mosque at Ground Zero was, it is a 'victory' mosque, and as such should be restricted from building. In short, Murfreesboro mega-mosque construction is our "line in the sand". It must not be built, with cause. This debate must be taken public on a grand scale.

Good job, all.


In your rush to ignore me, BoT, you left out a very important point, and that is, it is illegitimate to demand a Muslim renounce Muhammad.

To do this repeatedly, before an audience, including Robert Spencer, and to have this enshrined in perpetuity on the internet is an act of self abasement.

The fiasco is not mine. I have been called a homosexual, a Muslim, and insane, all for telling truth.

Obviously BoT does not care who EAB is. The clique doesn't care who he is, either.

Well, I don't care about the clique, what I do is for the real people.

EAB is a public figure, his name is ALL OVER the internet. He has shown us the way, and that is, it is open season on other people's beliefs, except his, and penetrating criticism is no vice.

I have no problem taking down lying Eric Allen Bell.

To be punished at JW for standing up to EAB is a badge honor.

I said I was going to ignore you, but I can't resist.

It is completely legitimate to ask Muslims if they think raping 9-years olds is something to emulate. They claim to idolize the man who did such a reprehensible thing, and it is the duty of everyone of conscience to call them out on it.

I call it "The Muhammad Conundrum" and every Muslim should have to face it. And I will only be to happy to bring it to their attention.

"The Muhammad Conundrum" says that:

-The Qu'ran says Muhammad is an excellent example of conduct.

-Islamic tradition says Muhammad married a 6-year old, raped her when she was 9, owned slaves, raping the female ones, told his men it was acceptable to do the same, slaughtered an entire tribe, authorized the assassinations of his critics, and robbed caravans.

-So, for the Muslim, they have 2 choices: Either rape, robbery, murder, owning slaves are EXCELLENT THINGS TO DO, in which case they have no place being in civil society. OR, the Qu'ran is wrong.

It's not my concern if that makes them uncomfortable; I didn't make them Muslims. And if they tell me they are Muslim, I believe it is absolutely authorized to question them about this very fundamental part of their religion.

Maybe if more Muslims were confronted by this, we might see them abandoning Qu'ranic literalism, or Islam itself more.

I COMPLETELY disagree with you. It is alright, nay, a duty to question all Muslims where they stand on this reprehensible figure known as Muhammad.

"1.Do you or do you not still support any and all “Occupy” movements?
2.Will you vote for Obama in November? Why or why not?"

NO and NO

Occupy sees the problem of plutocracy, but then wrong thinks that increasing taxes and growing the government is the solution. It fails to see the government itself as a corrupt force with a monopoly.

I voted for Obama over McCain in 2008. I feel that was the right move, given the alternative. That said, Obama is clearly way too far to the left, has a soft spot in his heart for the Muslim Brotherhood and I think sort of hates America, thinks of us as the world's big bully that needs to apologize. He wrong sees the problem of Islamization is either a civil rights issue or a social class issue and thus tends to back the wrong side.

As for my use of the term "political Islam" when communicating with a large number of people, I find it expedient. People can identify political Islam in the form of a theocracy such as those in Iran or Saudia Arabia. They can see that exists. From there it is less of a leap to show someone that political Islam is really just Islam.

Eric

Livingengine

Says

In your rush to ignore me, BoT, you left out a very important point, and that is, it is illegitimate to demand a Muslim renounce Muhammad.

Teri Adams replied to comment from gravenimage | June 2, 2012 6:03 PM | Reply There has been a "Saba Ahmed" posting on EAB's Facebook page recently. I don't know if that's the same Saba, although it seems likely

To do this repeatedly, before an audience, including Robert Spencer, and to have this enshrined in perpetuity on the internet is an act of self abasement.

Robert Spencer has to put up with much worse as part of the course, you have taken exceptional exception, now you need to listen to other peoples advice and climb down, otherwise you will harm your own cause.

The fiasco is not mine. I have been called a homosexual, a Muslim, and insane, all for telling truth.
Then you must know that the truth does not need help it can stand on its own, it does not favour the 'CULT' of personality.

Obviously BoT does not care who EAB is. The clique doesn't care who he is, either. Well, I don't care about the clique, what I do is for the real people. EAB is a public figure, his name is ALL OVER the internet. He has shown us the way, and that is, it is open season on other people's beliefs, except his, and penetrating criticism is no vice.

They feel he should be given a fair chance simply because he wrote a favourable piece, but he has already split JW with his hypocricy, all the Christians and Buddhist and Jews know where he is at, and because of his views (his privately held views which he ONLY expounds on his website) none of us are fooled and we can have no alliance with him.

I have no problem taking down lying Eric Allen Bell.
You dont need to do ANYTHING

To be punished at JW for standing up to EAB is a badge honor.

Then be patient or it will be you who is rejected.


MV

Where do you get the idea that " . . . it is illegitimate to demand a Muslim renounce Muhammad . . ."?

I have to agree with Bad Mo Foe on this point.

The key to dismantling the influence of islam is to demonstrate the unacceptability of the behavior of its execrable "prophet" and to demand that muslims take sides, either with the practices established by such behavior as "normative" or against them. It is no different than asking Nazis to repudiate Hitler and the atrocities propagated by Nazism. The fact that they refuse to do so gives a clear indication of exactly where they stand vis-a-vis the acceptability of such practices in Modern Society.

The more we point out exactly who muhammad was and what he did, (he is considered "the ideal man" and a perfect example of humanity by muslims, without question) and demand that muslims make judgments about whether or not they advocate following his example, the further along we will be in accomplishing the goal of awakening the entire world, both Infidel and muslim, as to the primitive, barbaric, objectionable nature of the cult. muslims need to fully understand what muhammad represents, and they need to be held accountable for their decision to "follow him" and all the consequences that ensue from that conscious choice.

I strongly object to the assertion that has been made here and on other threads, that it is somehow possible to condemn a particular behavior or practice without condemning the individual involved in perpetrating one or the other. ? ? ? That is just straight up bizarre and pure bullshit. So I should condemn murder but not the murderer? Condemn rape but not the rapist? Don't you see how ridiculous that is? People make a conscious choice to commit crimes, and that makes them responsible and worthy of being condemned. Condemning things in the abstract is pointless. muslims need to be held accountable both for the crimes perpetrated by muslims in the past and in the present. Yes, the influence of "islam" is to blame, but individuals put islamic ideals into practice, and these individuals - and especially muhammed himself - should be called to account for them.

Bad Mo Foe's comment was spot on. Put mohammedans on the spot. Make them squirm and defend the indefensible. It might just make them start to think.

The one skill that muslims as a group sorely lack is critical- thinking. We should be happy to oblige their need for enlightenment exactly as BMF describes above.

No Muslim is going to condemn Muhammad for ANY reason, even for raping a child.

They are not going to do it. They wouldn't be Muslims.

I don't think I am splinting hairs, or engaging in semantics; Eric repeatedly called for the condemnation of Muhammad, and even said "stop being a Muslim".

No one else is doing this, only Eric.

I am all for getting the message out about Muhammad killing, and disfiguring, and killing, and raping, and killing, and torturing for money, and killing, and killing, and on and on.

I am all for demanding Muslims stop living unexamined lives, even to the point of shaming them. (see Daniel Greenfield's excellent speech here) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/12/robert-spencer-and-raymond-ibrahim-at-restoration-weekend-november-2011.html

But, until I hear Robert Spencer, or Pamela Geller, or Geert Wilders, etc. say Muslims have to stop being Muslims, I am going to object when someone like EAB tries to discredit the movement, and its leaders.

Hi all

On Mr Eric Bells Facebook pages he has asked various people to be on the lookout for anything that could be used in a Court of Law for Libel.

He says "I want to thank everyone who sent me screenshots that can be used in a court of Law, Thank you for having my back."

I have a screenshot myself showing peoples responses to his request but cannot upload it to this board

Obviously I am not going to have any conversation with him at all after that.


MV

@Livingengine: "In your rush to ignore me, BoT, you left out a very important point, and that is, it is illegitimate to demand a Muslim renounce Muhammad."

Well, to be fair, I did not "rush to ignore" you, I merely saw your arguments centering on character assassination and Eric Bell's other than Jihad interests (which to me are perfectly fine and innocuous, even courageous) as being irrelevant to the discussion at hand, namely what is under the slippery foundation of the mega-mosque at Murfreesboro, TN. Side issues of New Age, Jamie Glazov's radio show, Eric's drilling Saba on endorsing religiously a 7th century con man and rapist 'prophet', or Bell's personal history, are just not that relevant to this discussion; point being, as Marveloouchi pointed out, your exchange merely stroked your projected 'cult' personality complex. Who cares? What does this have to do with the Murfreesboro mega-mosque? Fact is, he wrote a damn good article.

BTW, this is all the 'negative attention' you'll get from me, kid. Get off your high horse, we got bigger fish to fry.

MV -

Grow up. Let's keep our eye on the prize.

If you can find it in your heart to overlook that I do not believe in Jesus, that is.

Eric

EAB


Grow up. Let's keep our eye on the prize.

Your prize is the booby prize.

If you can find it in your heart to overlook that I do not believe in Jesus, that is.

I can overlook that you don't believe in anything, but the plain fact is that you have shown that you despise those who really believe in something you can't accept. you are not a credible person attacking Islam, when in your heart you hate all those who have a belief, what earthly use are you, you are no use to man nor beast.

Don't respond


MV


One hell of a thread.

Eric Allen Bell wrote:

CHECK OUT MY NEW SITE
..........................

I did, and it looks very promising.

Thanks for agreeing with me!

I think it's good to make Muslims squirm under the harsh light of truth.

It's really entertaining to watch how most Muslims squirm and try to do anything but face the truth about their Prophet.

Usually they try to deny Muhammad married a 6-year old, but that means that they have to reject Bukhari and Muslim's collection of ahadith, leaving Islam with very little of substance; you would have to reject the good stories, too.

So, yes, we should ask them, every single one, if they think raping 9-year old children is okey-dokey. And if not, then that means the Qu'ran isn't infallible. OOOOPS!

We didn't make them become Muslims, we didn't create these terrible stories of Muhammad, but we really need to know if they think murder, rape, and theft are commendable.

I had my say, answered questions, didn't lie, stood my ground, and I don't tell you what to do.

Thank you. Very much appreciate that. This is what I am talking about.

I checked out your new website … and you have done a great job.

Thank you for the effort and the care you put out to expose the lie that it is called Islam.

I lived all my life trying to survive my islamic life I was born to, with no choice of mine .. and now after I left islam I am trying to survive that [ leaving islam] but the wonderful difference between the two,is*** it was my choice.***

Choice has no place in Islam … especially a Muslim women …

I appreciate your help very much so, in joining the cause to face off against Islam that lives in the minds of Muslims … As a women my self I feel Muslim women are the most in need of outside help of such eloquent writer like your self … the fight has just got rejuvenated with your joining us.

I share your view about religions …and I respect believers especially when they respect me back and do not put me down for not believing.

I look forward to reading all your Article and posts … this thread keeps going and going now it has a life of it's own .

fineliving56 … Arab American ex Muslimah

I apologize for my English mistakes.

FineLiving56 -

It has been a long and exhausting past few days. Your words of encouragement come at a good time :)

Thanks!

Eric

Brill ! (Your new site). I've put it into my favourites.

Your exposure of the shenannigans surrounding the Murfreesboro mosque are very troubling; I would bet this sort of thing goes on with the building of *any* mosque in Dar-al-Harb.

BMF

A moment of Clarity please!

Thanks for agreeing with me!
Unough of the back slapping. You do realize that this board is about to completely lose its identity just because you agree with someone, does not make them right, having a hatred of Muslims is not going to change one thing. in fact it will redefine them.
I think it's good to make Muslims squirm under the harsh light of truth.
And what pray will you have to offer them in return for the loss of their faith, atheism, communism, or the New Age cults, what thing have you to offer to replace that most precious thing they believe they have their faith.
It's really entertaining to watch how most Muslims squirm and try to do anything but face the truth about their Prophet.
Yes, but the position that you have taken by having this "entertainment" is that you have blocked all possible chance of a relationship or of dialogue, it is you who is the loser, cutting off your nose to spite your face. and you have achieved nothing.
Usually they try to deny Muhammad married a 6-year old, but that means that they have to reject Bukhari and Muslim's collection of ahadith, leaving Islam with very little of substance; you would have to reject the good stories, too.
And you were probably born in a country of your own choice, HO HUM, i bet you only have friends who agree with you too.
So, yes, we should ask them, every single one, if they think raping 9-year old children is okey-dokey. And if not, then that means the Qu'ran isn't infallible. OOOOPS!
No thats not the best way, it is best to be polite and respectful, when speaking about ones faith, not to lecture and beat them over the head. Actually, doing otherwise just reinforces their views that Muhammad was right.
We didn't make them become Muslims, we didn't create these terrible stories of Muhammad, but we really need to know if they think murder, rape, and theft are commendable.
No...this not necessary it ends dialogue, stick to the facts that Islam is violent and why should we allow Mosques to muslims in the Western world (as well as human rights) when the indiginous non Muslim populations of Islamic countries are denied and prevented theirs. Also we must prevent our Laws from being negated by Shariah Law, and the enemy here is not the Muslims but our own politicians.

MV

This is from Eric Allen Bell's website where he discusses the "spirituality" of "Remote Viewing". It is yet one more example of EAB promoting well-known New Age scams of long standing. This has been known to be false for years. Science of Consciousness? I have to scoff.

http://www.globalone.tv/profiles/blog/list?tag=spritual-networks

Remote viewing (RV) is the practice of seeking impressions about a distant or unseen target using paranormal means, in particular, extra-sensory perception (ESP) or "sensing with mind".

Scientific studies have been conducted, some earlier, less sophisticated experiments produced positive results but they had invalidating flaws, and none of the newer experiments had positive results when under properly controlled conditions.

The scientific community rejects remote viewing due to the absence of an evidence base, the lack of a theory which would explain remote viewing, and the lack of experimental techniques which can provide reliably positive results.

It is also considered a pseudoscience.

At the Stanford Research Institute in the 1970s and 1980s, Targ and his colleague Harold E. Puthoff co-founded a 23-year, $25-million (tax money -livingengine) program of research into psychic abilities and their operational use for the U.S. intelligence community, including the CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency and Army Intelligence

The emergence of New Age thinking and the popularity of the human potential movement provoked a "mini-renaissance" that renewed public interest in consciousness studies and psychic phenomena, and helped to make financial support more available for research into such topics.

In the early 1970s, Harold E. Puthoff and Russell Targ joined the Electronics and Bioengineering Laboratory at Stanford Research Institute (SRI). In addition to their mainstream scientific research work on quantum mechanics and laser physics, they initiated several studies of the paranormal. These were supported with funding from the Parapsychology Foundation and the newly-formed Institute of Noetic Sciences. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing

Targ and Puthoff both expressed the belief that Uri Geller, retired police commissioner Pat Price, and artist Ingo Swann all had genuine psychic abilities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Targ

Puthoff got involved with the Church of Scientology in the late 1960s and reached what was then the top OT VII level by 1971. Puthoff wrote up his "wins" for a Scientology publication, claiming to have achieved "remote viewing" abilities. In 1974, Puthoff also wrote a piece for Scientology's Celebrity magazine, stating that Scientology had given him "a feeling of absolute fearlessness". Puthoff severed all connection with Scientology in the late 1970s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_E._Puthoff

Eric Allen Bell also promotes another New Age boondoggle Zero Point Energy.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3AHMjchdElSXoJ%3Awww.globalone.tv%2Fprofiles%2Fblogs%2Fare-quantum-physics-and+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Wisdom of Eric Allen Bell at Daily Kos

"Religion will end us all if we do not evolve out of it."
JOIN ME ON FACEBOOK at - www.Facebook.com/EricAllenBell
by EricAllenBell on Thu Jan 19, 2012 at 12:10:08 PM PST

Everything is made of nothing... (1+ / 0-)
"... That nothingness is what I perceive to be "spirituality". It is in all things, is the fabric of all things.

So I am in the world as a person located in space and time and playing out a certain drama.

Simultaneously I am aware that none of it is actually very real.

One reality does not negate the other.

Referring to me sarcastically as "Mr. Spiritual" fails to make any significant point whatsoever.

You're just giving me classic pop psychology shtick because that is what is comfortable for you instead of considering what is written in the article above."
JOIN ME ON FACEBOOK at - www.Facebook.com/EricAllenBell
by EricAllenBell on Fri Jan 20, 2012 at 12:35:32 AM PST

Very well.

I am trying to provide background to someone who has been presented to us as a "titan", and a "superstar", but I am pissing into the wind.

Thanks again for noticing his attempts to sue me.

If you would like to send me the screen shots, my e-mail is
livingengine@yahoo.com.

You seem like an honest man, thank you.

Take care.

Marveloouchi,

I totally disagree with you. Asking Muslims (or Christians, or Hindus, or Jews) to explain their beliefs is completely reasonable.

Maybe they don't even know about all the bad things Muhammad did, and if they don't, they should. They are, after all the ones who say they are Muslims.

We infidels really need to know what these people believe, because if they believe raping 9-year olds, stealing others' stuff, and murdering people who disagree with them is A-OK, then we can protect ourselves.

BMF

Sorry but whether you agree with me or not you have legal obligations you cannot duck or dodge.....

Asking Muslims (or Christians, or Hindus, or Jews) to explain their beliefs is completely reasonable. I totally agree and to date it has been no problem, faith is an attribute which is passed from father to son and they too also agree. (but that may make them targets from offended parties .
Maybe they don't even know about all the bad things Muhammad did, and if they don't, they should. They are, after all the ones who say they are Muslims..
Gee this bloke Muhammed is a brand exclusive to radical muslims alone .

We infidels really need to know what these people believe, because if they believe raping 9-year olds, stealing others' stuff, and murdering people who disagree with them is A-OK, then we can protect ourselves..


By describing your self as an infidel you have to exclude yours self from being called "Christian" therefore in the coming conflict your are on your own , that is why any Christians on JihadWatch cannot engage in any more dialogue, We resent the term "infidel" just as much as the Muslims do, and we are obliged to to reject that concept of human understanding as completely unworthy of what is possible or what is acceptable within the bounds of a loving God's large circle lof admirers.:)

Thin ice for you but not for us

MV

You are failing to make sense.

Legal obligations? Huh?

Calling myself infidel means I'm not Christian? Just for the record I'm not, but I was using it as Muslims do, meaning EVERYONE who is not a Muslim.

And no other religion holds as reprehensible a mortal man up to be the ideal man, an excellent example of conduct as Islam does.

Please try to make more sense.

Marveloouchi wrote, replying to Bad Mo Foe:

Sorry but whether you agree with me or not you have legal obligations you cannot duck or dodge.....
............................................

Like Bad Mo Foe, I have no idea what "legal obligations" you believe he has here...

More:

By describing your self as an infidel you have to exclude yours self from being called "Christian" therefore in the coming conflict your are on your own , that is why any Christians on JihadWatch cannot engage in any more dialogue, We resent the term "infidel" just as much as the Muslims do...
............................................

Actually, I use the term "Infidel" all the time here on JW, albeit somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Certainly, "Infidel" is *exactly* how Islam regards us "non-believers", and we are *all* considered fair game for oppression and murder—Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Deists, Wiccans, "New Agers", Agnostics, Atheists—it's all of a piece as far as they are concerned.

You say you resent the term "Infidel" as much as Muslims do—but are you willing to kill over it? Many pious Muslims are.

As for non-Christians "being on their own", speak for yourself. Personally, I stand with *any* decent Infidel (there's that word again) who is threatened by Islam.

I hope neither Robert Spencer nor Eric Allen Bell have been too put off by some of the silly verbiage on this thread. I still want to hear what they have to say.

I'm glad it's not just me who has no idea what Marveloouchi is talking about, so I appreciate the support.

I mean, I say that at the risk of making "this board... completely lose its identity..." (another Marveloouchi-ism)

And I, too stand with any and all decent "Infidels" against the seemingly relentless march of Islamic supremacism.

Hi BMF

Had it not been for a post above (Jamie Glasov gang) i would probably not posted here again.
The fact is that calling yourself an infidel is a confession to unbelief, that is intolerable language niether could i call a Muslim "infidel" because he says he actually believes in a God recognised by Abraham, whether he practices that belief expounded by Moses, in the Mosaic Law which proscribes Murder, and the hatred of your neighbour , or to covet your neighbours goods or your neighbours wives (or their daughters)this is the benchmark by which those people who believe in God ("the God of Abraham")will be judged.

Infidel is a bad metaphor and meaningless because it is only what you believe that matters, because your actions follow suit.

Excellent excellent excellent
To Jamie Glasov Gang and Dwight Schultz and Mr Trudeau.

Brilliant

MV


Nonsensical post.

Marveloouchi,

I guess you simply don't understand that EVERYONE, from people who believe in Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Jainism, to those who don't believe in any gods; that is, simply EVERYONE WHO IS NOT A MUSLIM is considered an infidel to Muslims.

And that is how I used the term. I'm not sure why such a simple concept escapes you.

The money to build this mosque most likely came from the same place where Mohammed and Islam reared their ugly heads: Saudi Arabia. It only makes sense. Many of the mosques here in the U.S. have been funded by the Saudis for decades and decades.

If we can rid ourselves of political correctness and define what Islam really is; a CULT, then we are most certainly on our way to eliminating this cult from our nation.

At about 16:36 during his appearance on the Jamie Glazov Show you can hear Eric say 24 million people have come to his site.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/radio-jihad/2012/03/07/the-jamie-glazov-show

He also says in bold face on his web site that " . .more than a million people" come to his site every month.
http://www.globalone.tv/

The actual statistics, however, say that is not true.
http://globalone.tv.hypestat.com/

His daily traffic is less than 8,200, which is less than 3 million a year.

Globalone was started in 2009.

Why does he do it? I don't know.

But, he does do this kind of thing, this misrepresentation of himself, and I don't think it is a good sign.

Caveat.

This is from his appeal for donations -

" It is worth noting that I had created another website, for another cause, which has had 28 million visitors in the past 2 years. "
http://www.globalinfidel.tv/page/help-eric-allen-bell-fight-political-islam

Now Globalone's web traffic is up to 28 million?

Too much!

First thanks so much, Eric for switching to the good side.

Something else needs to be exposed is Islam connections to Hitler's Nazi Germany. And I will reference David Horiwitz's film what really happened in the middle east:

http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/

Believe it; Islam is Hitler's ongoing "Final Solution", first for the Jews and then the Christians.

In Egypt the MB protestors are waving Nazi flags and on the streets of America during the Gaza conflict the muslims were carrying posters like: "God bless Hitler, bring back the ovens..."

Thanks again to you and for all who are taking a stand against this barbaric political ideology that seeks global domination. That usurper in our Whitehouse is out to help Islam establish a world caliphate with Sharia law and/or a neo-Ottoman Empire.

" You're just not getting it. We are losing the war against Islamic conquest specifically because no one wants to join or take it seriously. And why is that? Because of the Liberal Media? Not as much as we are told. No. The reason why Counter Jihad is not taken seriously is because it is rightly perceived for what it actually is - a front for expanding Christianity. So long as that is the case, we will fail. Get that. Stop pretending not to understand and wasting time being offended that I'm somehow against you or against god. I've been on the front lines of this battle, I've met nearly all of the major players, I've talked to the major sources of financing. Now not all of them are misguided. But GENERALLY SPEAKING Counter Jihad is being used as front to expand Christianity. And the Liberal Media has got this one right. They see it for what it is. So too do all of those people who know that Islam is an increasing problem, but they don't want to join the Religious Right. The Evangelical movement is THE REASON why Islam grows in America and gains power. The Evangelical movement is the insurance policy that Counter Jihad will not grow as a movement, will not be taken seriously and will fail." - EAB


If I were to sum up Eric Allen Bell in a word, it would be "hostile".

Leave a comment

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







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


Stealth Jihad


The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam


The Truth About Muhammad


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“A brilliant scholar and writer.”
Douglas Murray

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“A hero of the American right.”
Karen Armstrong

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

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

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

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

“Satanic ignoramus.”
Khaleel Mohammed

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

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



Follow me on Twitter
facebook islam
RSS feed

Monthly Archives



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


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

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