US relied on Muslim Brotherhood for Benghazi Consulate security

Thank you for the link. I knew there was something odd about his lecture....Especially when he implied that Islam was spread "peacefully".

Brilliant, sir.

I wish I read LemonLime's response prior to wasting my time watching the video you suggested. Prof. Donner suggests there was an amicable relationship between 'believers' (muslim) and Christians noting the mihrab creche in a Syrian church.
Sura 9, Verse 29, Part 2 "Repentance" lays to rest that theory with the Pact of Umar:

"the Christians will:

1. Allow Muslims to rest “in our churches whether they come by day or night”;
2. “Open the doors [of our houses of worship] for the wayfarer and passerby”;
3. Provide board and food for “those Muslims who come as guests” for three days;
4. “Respect Muslims, move from the places we sit in if they choose to sit in them” – shades of Jim Crow;
5. “Have the front of our hair cut, wear our customary clothes wherever we are, wear belts around our waist” – these are so that a Muslim recognizes a non-Muslim as such and doesn’t make the mistake of greeting him with As-salaamu aleikum, “Peace be upon you,” which is the Muslim greeting for a fellow Muslim;
6. “Be guides for Muslims and refrain from breaching their privacy in their homes.”

I didn't listen to the lecture long enough (it's over 40 minutes long) to get to the point about Islam's peaceful osmosis over the ecumene. However, another odd thing about that lecture that struck me immediately -- he is delivering a lecture currently at a major university and he has his full career and reputation perfectly intact. That alone is fishy, and 9 times out of 10 means that he consistently teaches the PC MC line on Islam -- not so much because he's lying, but because he has become in his heart and mind, a True Believer. I personally know a professor (now emeritus), a man of intellectual and scholarly brilliance, a decent man of integrity (though a tad arrogant at times, but everyone has their flaws) who furthermore is a scholar of comparative religions and has spent some 40 years of his long life studying various religions, including Islam -- and this man after 911 has written either 1) nothing about Islam; or worse, 2) utter drivel parroting and regurgitating PC MC platitudes (e.g., the Andalusian "Convivencia" myth).

The psychocultural process that can produce and enculturate such people -- intelligent, decent people -- who remain so monstrously myopic to the elephant, or the camel, in the room, is a fascinating, when not infuriating, conundrum. The puzzle could easily be solved by demonizing these people (as Breivik did, and as quite a few in the Counter Jihad do as well) -- but that solution strikes me as facile and unfounded, and just doesn't make sense. It would make sense if the West were a corrupt hellhole that grows precious few decent intelligent people (e.g., Muslim polities); but the West is the most advanced, sophisticated, progressive civilization in all world history. so it seems unlikely that we can explain its majority being myopic to Islam by some explanation that would depend on that majority being either 1) stupid, or 2) evil; or both.

WhupTdue,

That's yet another feature of Islamic supremacism to list among the thousand others. I recall first learning about that when reading about the Catholic monks who were massacred by Muslims in Algeria in the 90s. Of course, most stories and mainstream books about the incident are relatively clueless about the point of the atrocity; and when they note that those peaceful loving monks not only spent years helping the Muslims of the rural community surrounding the monastery in various ways -- from giving food, to helping repair their houses, to giving free medical care (one of the monks was also a doctor) -- the monks also developed a "relationship" with the Muslims by allowing part of the space inside the monastery to become, effectively, a mini-mosque, so that Muslims could come and worship. The description of this process in all the reports I read showed that the authors and reporters (and scholars) were clueless about what was really going on, depicting it as a wonderful example of multiculturalist "tolerance" we should all emulate -- utterly oblivious to the scripted imperative in Islam for its supremacist encroachment (by hook and/or by crook) upon the sacred space of the Mushrikoon. The abduction and then beheading of the monastery's seven monks was simply the logical Islamic conclusion to that process.

Indeed, an eminent scholar of Islam -- a Belgian professor who converted from Catholicism to Islam, Yahya Michot, not long after the incident translated an authoritative and respected work by an Islamic scholar of history that justified (on various Islamic grounds, usually relating to the spread of fitna and/or fasad) the slaughter of Jews/Christians within the Dar-al-Islam. Prof. Yahya is a cagey devil -- he wormed out of his translation by the plausible deniability that he was only translating a work, not advocating anything, and his career has continued to thrive in Academe, both in Belgium and in the U.S. -- where, at a sleepy college in Connecticut -- Hartford Seminary (a Catholic college, for Christ's sake! pun intended) -- he has been elevated to chief editor of one of the best Western scholarly journals on Islam studies, Muslim World, founded in 1911. As I wrote on my blog in my essay Of scholars and massacres:

"No doubt in its earlier decades it [the journal] published many, if not mostly, politically INcorrect (i.e., actually scholarly) articles about the various deformities and seamy undersides of Islamic history and culture; while more recently -- and particularly under the aegis of Professor "Yahya" -- it is grievously safe to say that it has purged itself of its former, quaintly anachronistic and morally shameful "Orientalism".)"

Note: the journal is unavailable online, and one must have current academic standing -- as faculty, student or staff of any major university -- to be able to read any online issues. I used to have this ability, but alas, no longer.

P.S. I note just now that Professor Yahya according a fairly recent article "has now been made a fellow of the Center for Islamic Studies in Oxford". It seems that being a Muslim convert and apologist for the deadly evil of Islam is quite the career booster these days!

http://pointdebasculecanada.ca/articles/10002434-did-oxford%E2%80%99s-new-lecturer-justify-murder-of-monks.html

Unfortunately, reporters continue to remain criminally clueless as witnessed in today's report from Canada:
Muslims want permanent prayer rooms high schools [and get one in Mother Teresa Catholic secondary school The second link could use your input, LL.

Thanks for the recent historical reference about the monks. I will make good use of it in the future.

Well, a West African student of mine (a Muslim) once expressed shock that "a good Muslim" could condone partial birth abortion. He was speaking about President Obama. I asked him what evidence he had that Obama is a Muslim, and he said "his name".

I took the teaching opportunity to explain that there are lots of Americans for whom religious identity is either a matter of convenience, being too lazy to shuck off a tradition no longer accepted, or something to be constantly revised according to the latest revelation to our major media. I further noted that a lot of Americans change religions during the course of their lives, and if Obama was born Muslim, his latest membership has been in a kind of revisionist "Christianity".

Frankly, I remain convinced that Obama's religion is his political career. He will do what it takes to please the audience to whom he is speaking, and pray to whatever god he worships at the moment that the public memory is short.