Washington Post: Don’t deface pro-freedom ads, just surrender to jihadists instead

How much has our public discourse degenerated? This much: one of the most prominent, popular and respected Muslim spokesmen on the scene is Reza Aslan, who has recently been unmasked as a Board member of a front group for Iran’s bloody Islamic regime. Aslan is also a Left-fascist who has called for obstruction of our freedom of speech by means of vandalism of our pro-freedom ads. Aslan employs Nathan Lean, a thug who has threatened me repeatedly, repeats what he knows to be falsehoods about my record, and has been arrested for shouting obscenities at a city council meeting.

In a sane world, people like Reza Aslan and Nathan Lean would be regarded with suspicion and disdain by all free people. In ours, Lean gets space in the Los Angeles Times and New York Daily News to defame me and my colleagues, and to call for restriction of our freedom of speech. But even someone as obviously dull-witted as Nathan Lean has apparently realized that calls for restrictions on the freedom of speech still don’t sit well with most Americans, and so now in the Washington Post he has taken another tack, broken with his boss Aslan and called for our ads not to be vandalized — which doesn’t at all mean that he has suddenly gained an appreciation for Constitutional freedoms.

“Don’t deface anti-Muslim Metro ads,” by Nathan Lean in the Washington Post, October 8 (thanks to all who sent this in):

When vitriolic advertisements that equated Muslims with “savages” recently appeared in 10 New York City subway stations, some who were irked by the incendiary message took matters into their own hands.

Lean follows the constant Islamic supremacist/Leftist line that the ad refers to all Muslims. No one seems to notice that this contradicts the politically correct dogma that the vast majority of Muslims abhor jihad terrorism. If jihad terror against innocent civilians is the province only of a despised tiny minority of extremist Muslims, why should the vast majority of peaceful Muslims, and their Leftist allies, object to an ad opposing that extremism?

The posters, which read, “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Defeat Jihad. Support Israel,” became targets for vandals who plastered them with stickers, sprayed them with spray paint, and in some cases, ripped them into pieces.

The American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), an anti-Muslim organization founded by bloggers Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, paid for the ad campaign “” the latest in a long line of Muslim-bashing campaigns led by the duo. After several weeks of dispute over the legality of the ads” placement, AFDI won an injunction to have them displayed. The hateful words, a federal district court in Manhattan ruled, are protected by the free speech clause of the First Amendment.

“Anti-Muslim”: Lean apes his masters in equating our work to defend the freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and equality of rights of all people with being against Muslims. In doing so, he hopes to buttress his flimsy claim that what we do is somehow “racist.” In reality, it is pro-Muslim, and pro-human in general, to stand for these rights and freedoms. Those who oppose us in our work to defend them are the ones who want Muslims and others to live under oppression and tyranny. That would be Nathan Lean.

Now, the provocative placards are set to appear in four Metro stations throughout the nation’s capital. On Friday, District Judge Rosemary Collyer issued a one-page ruling ordering that the Washington Metro Transit Authority install the posters immediately.

The aim of these advertisements is to provoke “” to elicit an emotional outburst that their proponents then use as evidence of the very culture war they seek to advance. They begin with the presupposition that Muslims are violent, they mercilessly antagonize and taunt them, and then, when a fringe few react poorly, they complete the self-fulfilling prophecy by patting themselves on the back and saying “we told you so.”

Nathan Lean here again demonstrates that it is he who is actually anti-Muslim, and even considers them inferior subhumans — not surprising considering that the guy is an anti-free speech fascist, but still stunning. Lean, after all, has made it his business to “mercilessly antagonize and taunt” people like me and Pamela Geller — hence his repeated defamation in large forums like the LA Times, and his veiled threats to me, sending me information he thinks is about my family, and addresses he thinks are where I live and work, etc. But he can do all this secure in the knowledge that I will never harm him physically, because I am, after all, a civilized human being, and no amount of antagonism and taunting could ever possibly make me physically attack Nathan Lean, much less attack innocent people because of his taunts and threats.

But Nathan Lean clearly doesn’t think Muslims are civilized. He is the one who thinks them savages, like apes that will lash out if one pokes them with a stick enough times. He is essentially saying that we have to be quiet, censor ourselves and not anger the poor dears, because, you know, they just can’t control themselves.

His words also take on a bitter irony in light of recent headlines. Look how the 14-year-old Malala Yousafzai mercilessly antagonized and taunted the Taliban until finally they shot her — because she was calling for peace. And the Jews of Paris mercilessly antagonized and taunted the local Muslims until twelve of them began plotting jihad attacks against Jewish targets — how did they antagonize and taunt them? By being Jews. Then there were the Buddhist rubber tappers in Thailand who mercilessly antagonized and taunted the local Muslims by being Buddhist rubber tappers, and were duly murdered.

Clearly the proper response to this jihadist savagery is not to silence ourselves and cower in fear, but to stand up for ourselves and our principles of freedom. And if some Muslims do think our ad is a merciless antagonistic taunt that must be met with violence, the responsibility for that violence will be entirely theirs, not anyone else’s. Unlike Nathan Lean, I believe Muslims are free human beings who are capable of making choices and are responsible for their actions.

Lean then goes on to call for “an overwhelming societal refrain that emphasizes peace and pluralism, and condemns the divisive rhetoric of these bullies with alternative public messages that are forceful and clear.” In other words, surrender to the jihad, don’t make any “Islamophobic” moves, and all will be well with you. Is that an inaccurate summation of what Nathan Lean really means? Absolutely not. Until he demonstrates the slightest interest in going after jihad murderers with the same zeal with which he pursues those who oppose them, it is more than apt.

Army appeals court considering whether military judge exceeded his authority by ordering Fort Hood jihad mass murderer to be forcibly shaved
Rushdie: "The pope gets ridiculed every day, but you don't see Catholics organizing terrorist attacks around the world"
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    Washington Post: Don’t deface pro-freedom ads, just surrender to jihadists instead
    ………………………

    And while this is to be expected from Jihadist apologists like Reza Aslan and Nathan Lean, all too many moronic Westerners actually have themselves convinced that they are somehow “taking the high road” by such surrender. Madness.

    More:

    The hateful words, a federal district court in Manhattan ruled, are protected by the free speech clause of the First Amendment.
    ………………………

    How are these words “hateful””since they only refer to Jihadists? Unless, of course, you support Jihad…

    Of course, very few will ask that question.

    More:

    The aim of these advertisements is to provoke ” to elicit an emotional outburst that their proponents then use as evidence of the very culture war they seek to advance. They begin with the presupposition that Muslims are violent, they mercilessly antagonize and taunt them, and then, when a fringe few react poorly, they complete the self-fulfilling prophecy by patting themselves on the back and saying “we told you so.”
    ………………………

    “React poorly””you mean by rioting all over the world and *murdering our diplomatic staff*?

    My God, you’d think a couple of Muslims got irked and flipped someone off or something…

    Also, Lean talks as though *any* group might “react poorly” to “being provoked””but the fact is that civilized people don’t react with sanguinary violence to any perceived criticism”but pious Muslims certainly do.

    And moreover, this is not considered “reacting poorly” by said pious Muslims”instead, they believe that responding with homicidal violence is perfectly Islamic”in fact, that it is on the model of the Prophet of Islam, who had his critics assassinated.

    More:

    Clearly the proper response to this jihadist savagery is not to silence ourselves and cower in fear, but to stand up for ourselves and our principles of freedom.
    ………………………

    Bravo!

    More:

    Lean then goes on to call for “an overwhelming societal refrain that emphasizes peace and pluralism, and condemns the divisive rhetoric of these bullies with alternative public messages that are forceful and clear.”
    ………………………

    Jihad enablers like Nathan Lean would have you believe that those who condemning savagery makes you a “bully”, and that the understandable reaction to such “bullying” is mass murder.

    This is not merely immoral”this represents the exact inversion of morality.

    I just hope rational readers of the Washington Post will recognize it as such.

  2. says

    All this points to a dilemma that so-called moderate Muslims and their dhimmi allies have, to wit, that jihad is, to put it mildly, problematical. No one but fools or the complicit can any longer argue jihad principally means some kind of internal spiritual struggle. No, jihad the vast majority of the time clearly means being prepared to use violence to defend and promote Islam.

    Now, word games will be played, God knows they have been played, respecting how jihad in its warlike sense is only valid for defensive purposes, even though at least one Sunni school of Islamic theology, the Shafi, promotes it also for offensive purposes. But Muslims play all kinds of word games, another example being what constitutes an “innocent” human being. And so it is with “jihad.”

    Anyone who impedes, rolls back, confronts, criticizes Islam can then be said to have started an offensive campaign against poor old dear Islam which makes “defensive” jihad thereafter permissible. Examples: Israel exists, therefore jihad. Tony Blair (yeah, can you believe it?) when Prime Minister was accused of impeding the spread of Islam in Britain and so jihad. American soldiers have set foot on Saudi soil and so jihad. Islam or Mohammed have been mocked or criticized and so jihad. And on and on and on with this shit.

    So, it can be concluded, and I certainly conclude, that jihad the vast majority of the time is a thinly veiled justification for the use of violence to prop up Islam. And this is wicked. And thus jihad is evil. And so encouraging the defeat of jihad, for whatever the reason, is to align oneself with good over that which is malevolent.

    In short, jihad simply cannot be defended as a positive for mankind. It’s got to go and, this is important too, jihad would not exist if Islam did not exist and this is part of the reason, but only part, why Islam has to go. Whatever problems the world has, it still would be a much better world without jihad—–and without Islam.

  3. says

    … to elicit an emotional outburst that their proponents then use as evidence of the very culture war they seek to advance.

    The people who are seeking to advance the culture war are those who perpetrated the Benghazi attack, the Fort Hood massacre, the Beslan butchery, the 9/11 atrocity, etc. etc. ad nauseam, in accordance with their marching orders in the ignoble Qur’an: to wit, Muslims.

  4. says

    “If jihad terror against innocent civilians is the province only of a despised tiny minority of extremist Muslims, why should the vast majority of peaceful Muslims, and their Leftist allies, object to an ad opposing that extremism?”—

    Freudian slip. The subconscious is making these cretins trip over themselves, they know that the majority of pedohameddans are intolerant, bigoted and violent prone people so that’s why they’re linking ‘jihad’ to ‘muslims’ even tho the ad doesn’t mention ‘islam’ or ‘muslims’.

  5. says

    *****************************************OT***************************************************************

    A dream has revealed this all to me:

    Last night, in the beautiful voice of the late, great Mel Allen, voice of the New York Yankees,

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPdbJj8cNF4

    God told me that Pope Benedict the XVI,

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyaUNK0cgx4

    a Pope of German ancestry, so you know he is very smart, likes to play with rockets, has ancestry, (namely the Teutonic Hordes, that sacked and pillaged Rome), has begun canonization proceedings today for George Steinbrenner.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeigwpHtp-o

    George took God’s Team, The New York Yankees, to seven World Series Championships. George is in Heaven, along side with God, where he is “The Boss” of God’s Team, The New York Yankees, along with mangerial help from Ralph Houk and Casey Stengel.

    Playing Centerfield For The Heavenly New York Yankees:

    Mickey Mantle

    http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=20095791&c_id=nyy

    The Yankees

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl8gBn8T5O8&feature=fvwrel

    God also told me, in Mel Allen’s voice, that He has had to revoke Michael Bloomberg’s NYC mayorship on the basis of stupidity, and failure, especially after 911, to recognize the evil that is islam.

    God is also going to have a New York City rabbi, of His choosing, channel Moses into telling Bloomberg, in a very powerful dream, what a horse’s ass he is.

  6. says

    “But Nathan Lean clearly doesn’t think Muslims are civilized. He is the one who thinks them savages, like apes that will lash out if one pokes them with a stick enough times. He is essentially saying that we have to be quiet, censor ourselves and not anger the poor dears, because, you know, they just can’t control themselves….”

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    No one will say this, “the poor dears, you know, just can’t control themselves.” Why? I listened to Limbaugh this afternoon for a couple or so hours talking about the Benghazi murders / White House cover-up; the riots all over the Middle East ostensibly over a video and earlier ostensibly because of some Muhammad cartoons. Limbaugh is dubious that Muslims would riot over either. Did Mr. Limbaugh wonder why the poor dears cannot control themselves? I did not hear it. Rarely does anyone broach this ‘sensitive’ topic.

  7. says

    Jihad is one of the worst things ever invented by mankind. Telling us that jihad equals the inner struggle for self-improvement means taking the piss out of us civilised people. We’re pretty patient, but we don’t like to be fooled.

    Islam is the cancer of this planet and enlightenment is the answer, to paraphrase one of their sayings “Europe is the cancer, Islam is the answer” in a slightly modified way.

  8. says

    “Reza Aslan and Nathan Lean are given space in the Los Angeles Times and New York Daily News to defame those who oppose Islamic supremacism and the laws of Shariah, and to call for restriction of our freedom of speech…”

    How in the hell could those working the editorial desks at the Los Angeles Times and the New York Daily News possibly be so clueless about the workings of Islam and the Muslims so as to give these two pro-Islam snakes space to spin their deceptions?

    Oh yeah! Because to scrutinize or criticize Islam itself is tantamount to being an evil, racist, bigoted Islamophobe! Right? Right…

    >>>>>

    We ex-Muslims living with Islam’s formal and informal death penalty for apostasy know for certain that Islam is an evil religion/ideology both in part and on the whole.

    The Reality of Friendship in Islam

    Friendship is only possible in Islam if both parties remain in the religion forever. For Muhammad has ordered that Muslims who leave Islam must be killed.

    If there are two Muslims sitting in front of the computer reading this article, they must admit that they should kill their friend if he or she tried to leave Islam.

    Muhammad’s Islam even demands that a Muslim disown his or her family members if they attempt to leave the religion. It says so right in the Qur’an!

    009.023
    YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love infidelity above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong.

    PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers.

    SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not take your fathers and your brothers for guardians if they love unbelief more than belief; and whoever of you takes them for a guardian, these it is that are the unjust.

    Granted, this verse does not pertain to friendship. It pertains to one’s own family members. Can a person imagine a statement, a commandment, more perverse than these words spoken by the Islamic prophet Muhammad? Let’s consider this verse and its meaning for a moment before moving on to the topic of friendship in Islam.

    In Verse 009.023 of the Qur’an, Muhammad is claiming that god has commanded him to inform “the Muslims” that they must put Islam ahead of their own family in importance. In other words, Muhammad has said that Muslims should virtually disown their own family members should they simply choose not to remain Muslim. At minimum the family member is to be heartlessly ostracized.

    Can you imagine being a Muslim parent or child and having to obey this verse should the reality arise within your own family? This tragic situation has arisen within millions of Muslims families throughout the centuries, and millions have been killed by their own families due to Islamic apostacy laws. Such is the sickening legacy of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

    Let us now consider friendship in Muhammad’s Islam:

    First let us consider the reality of friendship amongst Muslims themselves. This topic concerned me greatly when I was a Muslim. For inside I knew the answers to the questions I was asking myself – and the truth was deeply disturbing. Some of the questions I asked myself were as follows:

    If I were to leave Islam would my Muslim friends have to dump ME?

    Does this mean that if one of my Muslim friends chose to leave Islam that I would have to dump THEM?

    The answers to these fundamental questions helped open the door for me and leave Muhammad’s Islam. This and other “Islamic realities” led me to a critical study of Islam that helped free me from its perverse falsehood.

    Obviously real friendship is profound and is to be highly respected and cherished. Many know how important friendship is to human health, happiness and our general development as individuals. Tragically, there can be no genuine friendship in Islam. Many Muslims still do not understand this basic fact. Let me explain why.

    Muslim-to-Muslim friendship is contingent upon adherence to Islam. In other words, if a Muslim simply chooses to leave Islam for his own reasons his Muslim friends are obliged to consider him a traitor to the Muslim Ummah, an enemy of god, and a worthless failure. And, of course, an Apostate that should be killed:

    Hadith, Sahih Bukhari: Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:

    Narrated ‘Ikrima:
    Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to “Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn “Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Apostle forbade it, saying, “Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'”

    Now let us look to Islam’s “holy book,” the Qur’an, and see what it has to say regarding friendship:

    003.028
    Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.

    005.051
    O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

    005.080
    Thou seest many of them turning in friendship to the Unbelievers. Evil indeed are (the works) which their souls have sent forward before them (with the result), that Allah’s wrath is on them, and in torment will they abide.

    058.014
    Turnest thou not thy attention to those who turn (in friendship) to such as have the Wrath of Allah upon them? They are neither of you nor of them, and they swear to falsehood knowingly.

    060.013
    O ye who believe! Turn not (for friendship) to people on whom is the Wrath of Allah, of the Hereafter they are already in despair, just as the Unbelievers are in despair about those (buried) in graves.

    In closing, Islam’s treatment of friendship is obviously severely perverse. Upon close inspection, Islam is the obvious fraud of a very, very deranged con man.

    >>>>>

    Ex-Muslim Ali Sina’s ongoing challenge to Muslims can be found over at Faith Freedom.org:

    The Challenge

    I receive many emails from angry Muslims, who sometimes beg me, and sometimes order me to remove this site. I consider both, pleading and bullying, signs of psychopathology. Argumentum ad baculum and argumentum ad misericordiam are both logical fallacies.

    If you do not like this site and want me to remove it, instead of acting as a bully or as a victim, disprove my charges against Muhammad logically. Not only will I remove the site, I will publicly announce that Islam is a true religion. I will also pay

    $50,000 U.S. dollars

    to anyone who can disprove the following accusations that I have made against Muhammad. I accuse Muhammad of being:

    a narcissist
    a misogynist
    a rapist
    a pedophile
    a lecher
    a torturer
    a mass murderer
    a cult leader
    an assassin
    a terrorist
    a madman
    a looter

    …These charges are irrefutable. You simply can’t disprove them because they are reported in Islamic sources and as such they are as good as confession…

    http://www.faithfreedom.org/the-challenge/the-challenge/

  9. says

    It really pains me to say this, but Nathan Lean is not too smart…He knows how blow poison darts, but is not smart enough to look good doing it…
    He needs to do more inner struggle jihad, and pull himself out of the mental fragmentation he has fallen into…Word magick, or word trickery, (taqiyya) were invented as a shield for the dishonest and depraved to hide behind…
    The problem with Nathan’s taqiyya is that it is transparent and you can see the liar behind it…He’s a two bit player, not ready for prime time…

  10. says

    Thank goodness for William McGurn’s excellent rebuttal in the Wall Street Journal. The only thing he could have done better, was to refer to one of the atrocities of the savages that are the subject of the ads. http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/72
    Not content with killing Tali Hatuel, a woman 8 months pregnant, and her four young daughters aged 11 and below, after killing Tali Hatuel the jihadists shot her in the belly so as to be sure her unborn son would die too.

    Sounds like savage to me.

  11. says

    I see that Peter is pushing his pathetic, Jesus was a pacifist, again …

    Peter is a mohammaden troll posing as a Christian, plain and simple.

    Peter is a pathological liar.

    Oh, and get this …

    Recently Peter stated that he “didn’t know that much about islam”, which is completely impossible for someone whose been posting on Jihad Watch as long as he has–for a couple of years–by my estimation. Even the newcomers to JW get a basic education about islam and company within days, if not weeks, of reading through the headlines. So for a long time poster like Peter to state that he doesn’t know much about islam is, well, impossible!

    He’s a lying clown, and not a very good one, at that.

  12. says

    You see how these guys work.

    You all have let this Islamic supremacist poseur “Peter” completely hijack this thread, which is about (or should have been about), the AFDI pro-freedom ads, the freedom of speech, media bias, Left-fascist thuggery, etc.

    But now all of that is completely forgotten, the point successfully obfuscated. “Peter”‘s mission is accomplished.

    Just letting you know.

    Cordially
    Robert Spencer

  13. says

    “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Defeat Jihad. Support Israel,” — headline

    Hear, hear! …we all must do the right thing and defeat jihad and fully support Israel.

    Long live Israel and our freedom of speech! ..and all God’s people said, Amen.

  14. says

    Advice and counsel to any person new to this site and this subject who may have just dropped in – at the time of my writing this, or later – and has persevered thus far, perhaps even (with increasing bewilderment) reading the postings of the bandersnatch calling itself ‘Peter’:

    the thing to do in *any* thread where such a dementor or distractor or general sand-and-sh*t-thrower appears, and the thread goes wildly offtopic, is to scroll right back up to the top and re-read the posted article, so as to have it fresh in your mind.

    I am now taking my own advice.

    [three minutes later]

    anyone who has read this post, do what I just did: go up to the top and read Mr Spencer’s riposte to Nathan Lean.

    Do similarly in *any* thread where ‘Peter’ (or any other Troll/ Distractor/ Dementor) obsessively threadjacks, because the fact of that attempted or achieved threadjacking shows that the subject of the posted article is important and is something the Mohammedans and/ or their dhimmi serfs/ enablers do not want us to think about.

  15. says

    For those who may have been momentarily confused by the claim by ‘Peter’ that if Jesus had encouraged the Jews of 1st century Judea and Galilee to rebel against their Roman oppressors, this would have made him a ‘jihadist’ and such a rebellion would have been a ‘jihad’: that claim is NONSENSE.

    When the Jewish Maccabees, prior to the time of Jesus’/ Yeshu’s birth, rose up against their pagan oppressors and liberated the Jewish homeland, which then enjoyed a few generations of independent existence, it was *not* a ‘jihad’. It was what modern people would call a war of national liberation. They stopped at the boundaries of historic Israel; because that is all they wanted; to be free in their little patch of dirt.

    Whereas Jihad is the open-ended ongoing campaign by Muslims which has as its goal nothing less than the imposition of Muslim rule – and sharia – over every last inch of ground and every last living soul on *earth*. All the little local jihads – even if they may wear the mask of ‘self-determination’ of this or that Islamised people-group – add up to the Total Jihad which pursues the aim of – as John Roy Carlson put it, ‘Islam, Islam Ueber Alles’.

    Indeed, a medieval Muslim ‘theologian’, Ibn Khaldun, in his Muqaddimah (15th century) explicitly stated that there was a difference between the wars of self-defence fought by Christians and Jews, and the Jihad fought by Muslims.

    “”In the Muslim community, the holy war [i.e. jihad – dda] is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force…

    “The other religious groups [thatis, besides Islam] did not have a universal mission [sez he…- dda] and the holy war was not a religious duty to them, save only for purposes of defence..”.

    And for an astute sociologist’s analysis of what makes Jihad different from wars fought by adherents of other belief systems/ cultural groups, read Jacques Ellul’s foreword on Jihad, written for Bat Yeor’s ‘The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam’:

    http://www.dhimmi.org/Foreword.html

    If you are new to this site and this subject, click on the link and read it; indeed, I suggest you print off several copies and re-read, and keep it up your sleeve to share with others. It is nice and short and easy to read, and its author was one of the most astute and deep French thinkers of the 20th century.

    Excerpt:
    “In Islam, on the contrary [that is, by contrast with other belief systems such as Christianity – dda] jihad is a religious obligation. It forms part of the duties that the believer must fulfil; **it is Islam’s normal path to expansion.** {my emphasis – dda. Note – ‘expansion’, NOT ‘self-defence’ or ‘national liberation from a foreign oppressor’}.

    “And this is found repeatedly dozens of times in the Koran.

    “Therefore, the believer is not denying the religious message. Quite the reverse, jihad is the way he best obeys it.

    “And the facts which are recorded meticulously and analyzed clearly show that the jihad is not a “spiritual war” but a real military war of conquest. It expresses the agreement between the “fundamental book” and the believers’ practical strivings…”.

    “…the jihad is an institution and not an event, that is to say it is part of the normal functioning of the Muslim world…”.

    “But it is most essential to grasp that the jihad is an institution in itself; that is to say, an organic piece of Muslim society.

    “As a religious duty, it fits into the religious organization, like pilgrimages, and so on.

    “However, this is not the essential factor, which derives from the division of the world in the (religious) thought of Islam.

    “The world, as Bat Ye’or brilliantly shows, is divided into two regions: the dar al-Islam and the dar al-harb, in other words: the “domain of Islam” and “the domain of war”.

    “The world is no longer divided into nations, peoples, tribes. Rather, they are all located en bloc in the world of war, where war is the only possible relationship with the outside world.

    ” The earth belongs to Allah and all its inhabitants must acknowledge this reality; to achieve this goal there is but one method: war.

    “War, then, is clearly an institution, not just an incidental or fortuitous institution, but a constituent part of the thought, the organization and the structures of this world.

    “Peace with this world of war is impossible.

    “Of course, it is sometimes necessary to call a halt; there are circumstances where it is better not to make war.

    “The Koran makes provision for this. But this changes nothing: war remains an institution, which means that it must resume as soon as circumstances permit.

    “I have greatly stressed the characteristics of this war, because there is so much talk nowadays of the tolerance and fundamental pacifism of Islam that it is necessary to recall its nature, **which is fundamentally warlike! ** {my emphasis – dda}.”

    So Peter’s disingenuous attempt, above, to pretend that the Jihad waged by Muslims – whether past or present – is the same sort of thing as would have been a hypothetical rebellion of the Jews of Jesus’ time against the Romans (similar to the actual Maccabean rebellion prior to the time of Christ, and the attempted rebellions that happened later on) simply does not work.

  16. says

    And for the benefit of anyone who might have been confused by the attempt by ‘Peter’, in a posting above, to pretend that Muslim family executions/ ritual human sacrifices of female family members, aka ‘honor’ murders, are the same sort of thing as the family violence found among people of other cultural groups: the short answer is that they ain’t.

    Not the same kind of thing at all.

    As the redoubtable Jewish feminist Phyllis Chesler, who has spent her life analysing every imaginable form of violence agianst women, and is therefore in a position to see whether and how ‘honor’ murders differ from, say, a western man’s murdering his wife in a crime passionelle, explains *here*:

    http://www.meforum.org/2067/are-honor-killings-simply-domestic-violence

    Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence?
    by Phyllis Chesler
Middle East Quarterly
Spring 2009, pp. 61-69

    click on the link, read it, and then henceforward, whenever ‘Peter’ or some other Mohammedan or Mohammedan apologist attempts this sort of spurious moral equivalence/ tu quoque, you can treat him with the disdain he deserves.

  17. says

    In addition to the sound counsel of dumbledoresarmy in her comments above, I would advise newcomers and oldcomers alike to do what I do when a “Peter” or any of his ilk attempts to hijack a thread like this one: simply read the responses to him, and ignore his responses. (As I scroll down, my nerve reflexes hit the “PageDown” button with an almost spastic rapidity and surefire efficiency, as though seeing a venomous spider, every time I spot a “Peter” at the head of a comment.)

    The reader will easily be able to glean whatever gist Peter’s comments had, through the responses to him — in fact, one will derive that gist much better that way — boiled down to its incoherent essence, and packaged with a nice rebuttal. In fact, this tactic I advise makes for enjoyable and informative reading; while if the reader chooses to ignore my advice and goes ahead to slog through Peter’s clinically insane obsessive compulsive sociopathy masquerading as reasonable debate, they will be in for viscerally frustrating and annoying pain. There’s enough of that in real life, why let Peter add one iota more of it?

    (I do realize that for my tactic to work, a certain number of Jihad Watchers actually have to suffer through reading Peter in order to provide their rebuttals for the rest of us to enjoy — for which I commend them as front-line soldiers charging through mud. A better alternative would be for Spencer to preserve two Peter threads (there must be a couple of dozen by now in the archives) and link to them in a section titled “Examples of Deranged Islam Apologists” but after that simply ban any Peters who rear their ugly mouses. Meanwhile, I still like, as the best of all possible worlds, the one I counseled in my October 11, 8:06 PM comment. :) )

  18. says

    ”Lean then goes on to call for “an overwhelming societal refrain that emphasizes peace and pluralism, and condemns the divisive rhetoric of these bullies with alternative public messages that are forceful and clear.” In other words, surrender to the jihad, don’t make any “Islamophobic” moves, and all will be well with you.”

    Eggsactly ! That *is* the constant underlying message of amoral little gits like lean, and *slightly* more able islamic supremacists (aka muslims) like aslan and rehab.

    Any resistance to jihad, creeping sharia, islamic supremacism, is all rolled under the umbrella of ‘hate’, ‘bigotry’. ‘racism’, and all the other favourite lefty buzzwords.

    Unfortunately for them, it clearly isn’t working any more. Of course, there are still some idiots taken in by it, but even looking at commentary in the Guardian, and other lefty rags, the actual readership is more and more in opposition to the glib claptrap of the journalists. Indeed, you cannot ”fool all of the people all of the time.”

    Incidentally, to add to what has already been said about the fool ‘peter’, I think his drivel is supposed to attack Christians who haven’t really read their Bibles, and attack them with the notion that it is somehow evil, or wicked, to fight back against evil. He’s not very good at it, though.

    If one clicks on his website, it’s rather pathetic; his real name is ”Brian Boatman”, and although he talks about ”our community”, he is the only contributor ! I tried to read one of hos articles, but it was written in the same repetitive, robotic style as his comments. Don’t let’s pay him any more mind.

  19. says

    ”After reading the entire community blog, any feedback would be appreciated”

    That is just *so* creepy. This weirdo is so busy listening to the voices inside his head ; ”the community”. Yuck !

    I had a look at the comments under Lean’s article. It was gratifying to see how many commenters were calling him out on his pusillanimous rubbish. But in his leftard supremacist arrogance, no doubt he will dismiss them as ‘bigots’.

  20. says

    I see peterkin has sneaked back, trying to have the last word.

    ”It does not help when people call each other names.”

    Good. Push off, you pusillanimous little wanker.

  21. says

    Jan, you stated : ” I see peterkin has sneaked back, trying to have the last word.”

    Comment:

    Having the last word pertaining to Peace, is a very good thing since

    Jesus said, Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God.

    My advise to all Christians is, if they want to be blessed in this life and the next , they need to be Peacemakers.

  22. says

    Re ‘Peter’.

    No matter what he says, it is perfectly possible that he is a Mohammedan in a mask, throwing showers of sand. And hijacking bandwidth with his obsessive sidetracking from the subject under discussion.

    The course of action he appears to be promoting – that is, a policy of suicidal pacifism at individual and national level, involving total disarmament of non-Muslim states and a self-censorship that refused to publicly criticise any aspect of Islam, of the character of Mohammed, or of the conduct of Muslim states and Muslim groups and of individual Muslims – and that confined itself only to 1/ withering self-critique/ self-flagellation whilst 2/ speaking to and about Muslims and their cult only by saying ‘soft things’ – would guarantee the Islamisation of the West and probably of all of planet earth.

    Peter asked me, above, a series of disingenuous questions, after I mentioned the episode of convert-to-Islam Nu’eym al Masud who, concealing the fact that he had joined the Muslims, gave to his tribe counsels that led to their being conquered by Mohammed.

    He pretends that there cannot be any similarity between himself and Nu’eym.

    But the analogy I am getting at is general: ‘a person, concealing their affiliation to Islam, gives advice to the group to which they previously belonged and to which they continue to *pretend* to belong, which is likely to make them vulnerable to Mohammedan attack’.

    To help any newcomers who may have persevered thus far, to understand the perfectly real possibility that despite all ‘Peter’s protestations, he might be a Muslim:

    Three classic articles by Arabic-fluent Coptic-background scholar, Raymond Ibrahim.

    http://www.meforum.org/2095/islams-doctrines-of-deception

    Islam’s doctrines of deception
    by Raymond Ibrahim
Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst
October 2008

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

    “How Taqiyya Alters Islam’s Rules of War: Defeating Jihadist Terrorism,” by Raymond Ibrahim in the Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2010.

    And this:

    http://www.meforum.org/2066/war-and-peace-and-deceit-in-islam
    War and Peace – and Deceit – in Islam

  23. says

    To anyone who has persevered thus far, I would strongly recommend reading dumbledoresarmy’s comments, and the **original article**.

    This ‘peter’, apart from whatever else he might be, is a self-deluded fantasist, who talks about his pathetic blog as if written by multiple contributors, as when he uses the descriptors ‘we’, and ‘the community’. The only ‘we’, and ‘community’, are the voices inside ‘peter’s’ head.

    I’ve clicked on his ‘blog’, and he is the *only* contributor*. There are about 3/4 badly written articles in the same repetitive, robotic, demented style as his posts. All with the same theme: America is evil, and all ‘christians’ should be ‘peacemakers’, by which he means it is evil, wicked and sinful to resist, or fight back against evil.

    In fact, I strongly suspect ‘peter’ suffers from some form of mental illness, or personality disorder, or maybe he is just thick as a brick, coupled with a monstrous ego that drives him and compels him to continue typing utter bullshit, drivel, and crap, when any *normal* person would realise he would never make any headway.

    If he was English, I would strongly suspect he had recently been released from Broadmoor ( a loony bin for the criminally insane).

    Anyway, whatever his motives, he’s an unpleasant lunatic, and I shall never reply to any of his posts in future, if he is stupid enough to post here again.

    Read and inwardly digest the original article. And whenever (if ever) you see ‘peter’s’ posts in future, remember his sole desire is to hijack the thread away from the original point, and ignore him. He’ll soon bugger off when he doesn’t get the attention he craves.

  24. says

    “Peter” wrote:

    From the post :

    Look how the 14-year-old Malala Yousafzai mercilessly antagonized and taunted the Taliban until finally they shot her — because she was calling for peace.

    Comment:

    So muslims are capable of calling for peace, as the 14 year old muslim girl called for peace
    ……………………………..

    What this story exemplifies”in the grimmest possible manner”is that any Muslim deemed “insufficiently Islamic” for rejecting violent Jihad will be murderously targeted by their more pious coreligionists”even if they are a child.

  25. says

    “So muslims are capable of calling for peace, as the 14 year old muslim girl called for peace”

    She’s just a little girl who wants to go to school without getting killed. Otherwise, she is enabling the same monster that is trying to kill her, and which has killed innumerable of her schoolmates and fellow countrymen. She may, or may never, wake up to this fact. The monster is our priority, not starry-eyed Muslim girls who dream of a world of peace like some precocious Kumbaya Miss Universe.

  26. says

    You’re a clown, Peter.

    The fact that Muslims who call for peace are shot by other Muslims, not by Christians, Hindus, Buddhists or Christians, reveals that Islam has a major problem at the core of its dark heart, namely violent Jihad.

    Your post simply underlines that point!

  27. says

    You are very welcome, London Jim.

    Did you know Benedict is a huge American sports fan?

    He fired his budget director for too much cost cutting. Bottom line, Pope Benedict XVI wants the NFL Package:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unzqtPcXXr0

    We Catholics love our Football, and we love the Armenians too, hence, one of the greatest Notre Dame coaches ever:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU6_XsxbKjk&feature=related

    Not ironically, we Catholics are not too crazy about islam.

    Hence, The Crusaders of THE CRUSADES were mostly Catholic.

    Pull your average muslim out of his morning prayers, tell him/her, “Hey moron, I am a Crusader!”

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-s0urEOAbooc/Ti8eLaGpFLI/AAAAAAAAGwE/XyuOn9phJLw/s1600/Empire%252520Crusader.jpg

    … then, with courtesy, jam his/her head back up into his/her ass, and go root for the New York Yankees.

  28. says

    I think that the late Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder were funnier as Bialistok and Bloom. That let’s you know how old I am. Further, the older movie version, by ending as it did, showed that the two fraudsters were a couple of people who never learn–a little like the unreconstructed PeeCee/EmCee crowd that Nathan Lean and some others represent.

  29. says

    Oh, for God’s sake, here we go again.

    If these mohammedans refuse to wear the same shirts as the rest of the team, because of some ‘sharia’ rubbish, then they should be kicked off the team.

    But I doubt Pardew has the ba$!* to do it.

  30. says

    You stated : ” any Muslim deemed “insufficiently Islamic” for rejecting violent Jihad ”

    Comment:

    What is the difference between violent jihad and the violent jihadists that the US government supported against the Soviets in Afghanistan ?

  31. says

    Lemon, you stated : “which has killed innumerable of her schoolmates and fellow countrymen.”

    Comment:

    I am not sure how many schoolmates got killed in a war zone,since using US government lethal drones in any country, makes that country a war zone

    but compare those statistics with peaceful America where parents kill their own children or

    the “honor” killing that goes on in America where jealous boyfriends and husbands kill their girlfriends or spouses

  32. says

    Saleem, you stated : ” I will also pay

    $50,000 U.S. dollars

    to anyone who can disprove the following accusations that I have made against Muhammad.”

    Comment:

    Just as at least 85% of christians do not follow the peacemaking of Jesus,

    you can at least find 85% of muslims who do not follow the prophet of Islam when it comes to marrying children or waging war

    and even the 15% of muslims who do try to follow Islam, even they do not follow Islam closely in every respect

  33. says

    Buraq, you stated : ” The fact that Muslims who call for peace are shot by other Muslims, not by Christians, ”

    Comment:

    John Lennon and Martin Luther King Jr called for peace and they got killed by Americans, does that mean all Americans shoot peacemakers ? off course not

    so likewise, just because a few taliban kill peacemakers, does not mean all muslims kill peacemakers

  34. says

    WJ: I asked this question before. how the hell they relate jews to apes? I thought apes were only in Africa. did they ride their camels to Africa and saw apes?
    M

  35. says

    “Just as at least 85% of christians do not follow the peacemaking of Jesus,”

    Yet you don’t find these christians going around killing, maiming and destroying in the name of Jesus, now do you? so in essence when Christ or Christianity is ridiculed, Christians take the more passive approach and adhere to Christ’s words ” my kingdom is not of this world….”

    “you can at least find 85% of muslims who do not follow the prophet of Islam when it comes to marrying children or waging war”

    You make it sound like it is a bad thing to follow Mohammed’s example, when the koran itself says “Mohammed is the sublime example to be followed” so what is it going to be? Should Muslims follow Mohammed and marry little girls, have multiple wives and concubines, be extremely anti-Semitic, kill apostates, curse Christians and Jews?… and the horid list goes on

    “and even the 15% of muslims who do try to follow Islam, even they do not follow Islam closely in every respect”

    Well then you have to admit that Islam is an amazingly confusing religion…

  36. says

    “Just as at least 85% of christians do not follow the peacemaking of Jesus,”

    Yet you don’t find these christians going around killing and maiming ‘in the name of Jesus’, now do you? so in essence when Christ or Christianity is ridiculed, Christians take the more passive approach and adhere to Christ’s words ” my kingdom is not of this world….”

    “you can at least find 85% of muslims who do not follow the prophet of Islam when it comes to marrying children or waging war”

    Ironic…You make it sound like it is a bad thing to follow Mohammed’s example, when the koran itself says “Mohammed is the sublime example to be followed” so what is it going to be? Should Muslims follow Mohammed and marry little girls, have multiple wives and concubines, be extremely anti-Semitic, kill apostates, curse Christians and Jews?… Oh wait! I think you find many fanatical Muslims behaving in this exact fashion, in the Islamic world (and in some parts of the west too)

    “and even the 15% of muslims who do try to follow Islam, even they do not follow Islam closely in every respect”

    Well then you have to admit that Islam is an amazingly confusing religion… and if Muslims did follow Islam to the “T” how much better human beings do you suppose they would be, when they are clear teachings in the koran to slay the infidels, not to befriend Jews and Christians, beat their wives… etc.?

    It truly is a mixed up world in Islam, where wrong is right and right is wrong. When will we give up this ridiculous obsession of appeasing the oppressor and promoting their hateful ideology, all in the guise of being politically correct?

  37. says

    “Just as at least 85% of christians do not follow the peacemaking of Jesus,”

    Yet you don’t find these christians going around killing and maiming ‘in the name of Jesus’, now do you? so in essence when Christ or Christianity is ridiculed, Christians take the more passive approach and adhere to Christ’s words ” my kingdom is not of this world….”

    “you can at least find 85% of muslims who do not follow the prophet of Islam when it comes to marrying children or waging war”

    Ironic…You make it sound like it is a bad thing to follow Mohammed’s example, when the koran itself says “Mohammed is the sublime example to be followed” so what is it going to be? Should Muslims follow Mohammed and marry little girls, have multiple wives and concubines, be extremely anti-Semitic, kill apostates, curse Christians and Jews?… Oh wait! I think you find many fanatical Muslims behaving in this exact fashion, in the Islamic world (and in some parts of the west too)

    “and even the 15% of muslims who do try to follow Islam, even they do not follow Islam closely in every respect”

    Well then you have to admit that Islam is an amazingly confusing religion… and if Muslims did follow Islam to the “T” how much better human beings do you suppose they would be, when they are clear teachings in the koran to slay the infidels, not to befriend Jews and Christians, beat their wives… etc.?

    It truly is a mixed up world in Islam, where wrong is right and right is wrong. When will we give up this ridiculous obsession of appeasing the oppressor and promoting their hateful ideology, all in the guise of being politically correct?

  38. says

    “Peter” wrote:

    What is the difference between violent jihad and the violent jihadists that the US government supported against the Soviets in Afghanistan ?
    …………………………

    The implication that all violent Jihad is somehow the fault of short-sighted anticommunist American policy is just ludicrous. Nice try.

    More crap:

    Lemon, you stated : “which has killed innumerable of her schoolmates and fellow countrymen.”

    Comment:

    I am not sure how many schoolmates got killed in a war zone,since using US government lethal drones in any country, makes that country a war zone
    …………………………

    What utter crap. The US is using drones to take out Jihadists there. Your implication that if the US were not responding to Jihad there that this would be some sort of peaceful Islamic paradise is absurd. Did the Taliban shoot this little girl because of US policy?

    The fact is that the Taliban has been murdering schoolgirls and blowing up girls’ schools for much longer than the US has had a presence in the region.

    More:

    but compare those statistics with peaceful America where parents kill their own children or

    the “honor” killing that goes on in America where jealous boyfriends and husbands kill their girlfriends or spouses
    …………………………

    More ludicrous moral equivalence. All of these are punishable crimes in the West, and the vast majority of Westerners consider those who harm their own children or spouses beneath contempt.

    Not like in Islam, where such “Honor” crimes are either winked at or actively condoned.

    More, in reply to Saleem Smith:

    Just as at least 85% of christians do not follow the peacemaking of Jesus,

    you can at least find 85% of muslims who do not follow the prophet of Islam when it comes to marrying children or waging war

    and even the 15% of muslims who do try to follow Islam, even they do not follow Islam closely in every respect
    …………………………

    An astonishing admission from “Peter”. While there are some decent”or merely lax”Muslims who fail to wage violent Jihad and rape children, they are doing so by *ignoring* the model of their baleful “Prophet”.

    In other words, the only morally decent Muslims are Muslims who do not adhere to the terrible tenets of Islam.

    And Islam is not a faith of individual conscience”through Shari’ah, they are compelled to follow the barbarity of Islamic law”and to impose it on the rest of us.

  39. says

    You wrote: ‘John Lennon and Martin Luther King Jr called for peace and they got killed by Americans, does that mean all Americans shoot peacemakers ? off course not’

    The Taliban would have killed Martin Luther King, John Lennon and Malala Yousafzai for exactly the same reason; they are/were all considered to be secular infidels.

    The Taliban have said they will try to murder Malala Yousafzai again because she is a ‘secular minded lady’.

    And where do the Taliban get such an idea? From Islam, Al Qur’an to be exact.

    You’re a clown!

  40. says

    Blitz, you stated : ”

    you don’t find these christians going around killing, maiming and destroying in the name of Jesus, now do you?”

    Comment:

    when the SEAL killed an unarmed Bin Laden, he said ” for God and country”

    If the SEAL is a christian, was he killing in the name of Jesus ?

  41. says

    Buraq, you stated : ” where do the Taliban get such an idea? From Islam, Al Qur’an to be exact.”

    Comment:

    Can you link me to where the Quran says children can be killed ?

    but I can link you to the Old Testament where children can be executed just for disobeying parents

    and if you say Jews do not follow the Old Testament anymore, same thing with a large percentage of muslims who do not follow every aspect of islam

  42. says

    “when the SEAL killed an unarmed Bin Laden, he said ” for God and country”

    If the SEAL is a christian, was he killing in the name of Jesus ?”

    Haha! what a weak pathetic statement, when you know it was your own Islamophile (or closet Muslim) president Obama, who gave the marching orders to kill the “unarmed” Osama.

    Did he send them out as soldiers for the cause of Jesus, or to for his own political gains. Barry took the whole credit of killing Osama himself. So there goes your silly “for God and country” argument….

  43. says

    Blitz, you stated : ” So there goes your silly “for God and country” argument…. ”

    Comment:

    It was not an argument.

    The SEAL, who killed the unarmed Bin laden, was he a christian, when he said ” For God and country ”

    and if he is a christian, are christians capable of killing in the name of God ?

  44. says

    Blitz, you stated : ” Islam is an amazingly confusing religion”

    Comment:

    Any religious verse in any religion can be interpreted in different ways, so any religion can be confusing, especially to outsiders.

    For example, some people might say Jesus was asking why the elders were not executing children for disobedience to parents

    at the same time, other people might interpret the same verse as Jesus saying that the elders were not following the Old Testament laws rather than Jesus wanting children killed.

  45. says

    Blitz, you stated : ” Christians take the more passive approach and adhere to Christ’s words ” my kingdom is not of this world….”

    Comment:

    Do christians actually follow Christ, when Jesus said, “(His) Kingdom is not of this world “.

    and if so, why do christians join the military to fight for an earthly Kingdom, America ?

    unless most christians do not think of themselves as citizens of Christ’s Kingdom

  46. says

    “Can you link me to where the Quran says children can be killed ?”
    Not directly but definately a link… Use your logical thinking skskills.

    (Surat al-Ahzab: 40), the Prophet Muhammad (saas) was sent to mankind as the last prophet. He was a living example of the sublime morality of Allah’s last revelation.

    So here we see Allah proclaiming Mohammed as a sublime example for all mankind, which means they should follow all his ways and commands… no?

    Now let us see what Mohammed’s response to exposing women and children to danger..

    Narrated as-Saíb bin Jaththama: The Prophet passed by me at a place called al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their WOMEN AND CHILDREN to danger. The Prophet replied, “THEY ARE FROM THEM.”

    Mercy much?

  47. says

    Blitz, you stated : ” “Can you link me to where the Quran says children can be killed ?”
    Not directly but definately a link… Use your logical thinking skskills.”

    Comment:

    The Koran itself does not command children to be executed but the Old Testament does command that children be executed for disobedience

    What other capital punishments does the Old Testament command compared to the Koran ?

  48. says

    HEY! PETER MORON!

    Chew on this for awhile:

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

    A little something about Jesus Christ, he never said to just lie down and let muslim assholes or muslim apologists do what they will.

    So, tell me, Pete, which one are you … muslim asshole or muslim apologist.

    muslims are all assholes anyway, until proven otherwise.

  49. says

    Paleo, you stated : ” A little something about Jesus Christ, he never said to just lie down and let muslim assholes or muslim apologists do what they will.”

    Comment:

    So why did Jesus only criticize the Jewish leadership and not once did He criticize the terrorist Romans ?

    could it be because the people who know the Truth ( the Jews ) were held to a higher standard by God

  50. says

    Graven, you stated : ” “Peter” wrote:

    What is the difference between violent jihad and the violent jihadists that the US government supported against the Soviets in Afghanistan ?
    …………………………

    The implication that all violent Jihad is somehow the fault of short-sighted anticommunist American policy is just ludicrous. Nice try. ”

    Comment:

    That was not my point.

    I was just asking the difference between violent jihad and the violent jihadists that the US government supported.

    is there a difference or is it ok when the violent jihadists are working for the US government ?

  51. says

    Graven, you stated : ” The fact is that the Taliban has been murdering schoolgirls and blowing up girls’ schools for much longer than the US has had a presence in the region.”

    Comment:

    Taliban have been murdering school girls before the US presence ? do you have a link regarding that ?

  52. says

    Graven, you stated : ”

    (quoting me ) compare those statistics with peaceful America where parents kill their own children or

    the “honor” killing that goes on in America where jealous boyfriends and husbands kill their girlfriends or spouses
    …………………………

    More ludicrous moral equivalence. All of these are punishable crimes in the West, and the vast majority of Westerners consider those who harm their own children or spouses beneath contempt.

    Not like in Islam, where such “Honor” crimes are either winked at or actively condoned.

    Comment:

    they are punishable crimes in the west and east, including muslim countries

    Do you have a poll or a study that states that people in the east ( muslims ) have no problems with honor killing and killing of children ?

  53. says

    David you stated:

    “Make no mistake – Peter is a Muslim. No doubt.”

    Comment:

    Being critical of our government and Americans in general does not mean I am muslim, just as

    Jesus being critical of the Jews instead of criticizing the terrorist Romans did not make Jesus a Roman

  54. says

    Champ, you stated : ” I see that Peter is pushing his pathetic, Jesus was a pacifist,”

    Comment:

    Jesus was not a jihadist unless you can point to where Jesus told the Jews to rebel( jihad ) against the terrorist Romans

  55. says

    Question: “Was Jesus a pacifist?”

    Answer: According to Webster’s dictionary, a pacifist is someone who is opposed to violence, especially war, for any purpose, often accompanied by the refusal to bear arms by reason of conscience or religious conviction.

    While Jesus is the “prince of peace” (Isaiah 9:6), He was not, and is not, a pacifist. Revelation 19:15, speaking of Jesus, declares, “Out of His mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. He will rule them with an iron scepter. He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.” Ecclesiastes 3:1, 3, & 8 say, “There is a time for everything and a season for every activity under the heaven…a time to kill and a time to heal, a time to tear down and a time to build…a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace.” Daniel 9:26 says that “war will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.” Matthew 24:6-8 says, “You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.”

    Jesus Himself said, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn “a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household'” (Matthew 10:34-36). “From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it” (Matthew 11:12).

    We are commanded to hate what is evil and cling to what is good (Romans 12:9).

    Above excerpt here:
    http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-pacifist.html

  56. says

    You’re a mohammedan troll intent on lying …

    The truth about Jesus escapes you, and you are in way over your head here, since I am armed with the truth about who He is.

  57. says

    You wrote:

    “Jesus was not a jihadist unless you can point to where Jesus told the Jews to rebel( jihad ) against the terrorist Romans”

    AHAHA!!!! …oh my, that is the funniest damn question; since only a mohammedan could come up with that one!

    Keep them coming, Peter …since it’s these types of question that only prove my point that you’re a muslim posing as a Christian.

    Gotta love how stupid liars are …

  58. says

    Champ, you stated : ” Jesus Himself said, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn “a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household'” (Matthew 10:34-36). ”

    Comment:

    Yes, the above verse will be taken by the jihadists to mean that Jesus and the prophet of Islam both wanted war

    but when you study the above verse, Jesus was not talking about christians taking up the sword in a jihad

    but rather Jesus was saying that conversion to Christianity will mean christians will be victims of the sword, when there will be “honor” killings within families for leaving the jewish faith to become christians.

    So Jesus was not calling christians to become jihadists but rather the “sword” Jesus was talking about is the violence that christians will experience even within their own families for following Jesus.

    IN OTHER WORDS, JESUS WAS TALKING ABOUT HONOR KILLINGS AGAINST CHRISTIANS WITHIN JEWISH FAMIILIES FOR LEAVING JUDAISM

  59. says

    Champ, you stated : ” While Jesus is the “prince of peace” (Isaiah 9:6), He was not, and is not, a pacifist. Revelation 19:15, speaking of Jesus, declares, “Out of His mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. He will rule them with an iron scepter.”

    Comment:

    As the Son of Man on earth, Jesus was a pacifist

    but when Jesus returns, he does not return as the Son of Man but rather as the Son of God, the Judge, to Judge righteously.

    The reason Jesus has called us to be Peacemakers is because human beings cannot judge correctly

    and so we cannot kill another human being even as self defense, that is why the early christians went to their deaths without rebelling against Rome.

    But if there were any weak christians among the early christians, the Holy Spirit helped them escape from persecution and death

    Only the strong christians who could bear witness to the Living Christ were given the strength by the Holy Spirit to endure the pain of death.

    And because of the great witness of Christian martyrs, the pagan Romans gave their hearts to Christ and the pagan Roman empire fell and embraced christianity as the official religion of the empire.

    But if a person is a non-christian, its understandable if he defends himself through violence because he does not have the protection of the Holy Spirit

  60. says

    Champ, you stated : ”

    ( quoting me )
    “Jesus was not a jihadist unless you can point to where Jesus told the Jews to rebel( jihad ) against the terrorist Romans”

    AHAHA!!!! …oh my, that is the funniest damn question; since only a mohammedan could come up with that one!

    Keep them coming, Peter …since it’s these types of question that only prove my point that you’re a muslim posing as a Christian.

    Comment:

    How does the above prove that I am a muslim posing as a christian ?

    For discussion sake, Lets assume I am a muslim as you say from the above statement

    does that mean Muslims do not believe in Jihad since I stated Jesus was not a jihadist ?

  61. says

    If a Christian joins the Armed Forces and serves his country by defending it, then there is nothing wrong with doing that–it’s completely legal. A country, like the U.S.A, has a God given right to defend it’s boundaries against attacks, and there’s nothing illegal about that.

    Jesus stated the importance of obeying the law, so I repeat, there is nothing illegal about joining the Armed Forces and defending ones own country.

    Your *pretzel logic* is idiotic beyond belief; but of course it is, since you’re a mohammedan troll attempting to pull on the heart strings of Christians–but it isn’t working.

  62. says

    You asked:

    “How does the above prove that I am a muslim posing as a christian ?”

    It sounds like it’s straight out of an islamic playbook:

    “Jesus was not a jihadist unless you can point to where Jesus told the Jews to rebel( jihad ) against the terrorist Romans”

    True Christians know that this never happened, so of course there aren’t any passages in Bible supporting this. It’s a question designed to “trap” someone; and a true Christian wouldn’t even bother with such a mumbo-jumbo BS question to begin with. Make sense now? Probably not …

    Your brain is to busy thinking of the next BS question to run by me …

    Knock yourself out, I’m done here.

  63. says

    Champ, you stated : ” Jesus was not a pacifist concerning matters of national security and defense ”

    Comment:

    If Jesus was not a pacifist, He would have told the Jews to rebel against the terrorist Romans

    but instead Jesus told the Jews not to defend Jerusalem

    but to flee since the Jews refused to be peacemakers even though Jesus told the Jews that Peacemakers are blessed by God

    The Jews continued to not make peace and so in AD70 the Romans slaughtered the Jews and burned down their temple.

    Did the Jews then become Peacemakers as Jesus told them to ?

    No, they once again rebelled against Rome and this time in AD135 the Romans expelled all Jews from Jerusalem and renamed Judea, Palestine

  64. says

    Champ, you stated ” If a Christian joins the Armed Forces and serves his country by defending it, then there is nothing wrong with doing that–it’s completely legal.”

    Comment:

    How can Christians who are called to be Peacemakers, then become war makers or jihadists ?

    how can a christian who is called to love the enemy, be able to kill the enemy ?

    how did the early christians treat the terrorist Romans ? by killing the enemy or as the Word states through peacemaking :

    Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

    As it is written, For your sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

    No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen ( Romans 8: 35-39 )

    Jesus said, blessed are the Peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God.

    If a christian wants God’s blessings, he needs to strive to be a peacemaker and not a war maker between christians and muslims

    and by being Peacemakers we will actually be winning the hearts and minds of muslims here and around the world

    because muslims will start seeing christians as not war makers but peacemakers and they will wonder what gives christians the strength to love and not hate

  65. says

    Dear Mr Spencer, I must thank you for allowing me to discuss important issues in this forum.

    You stated : ” Islamic supremacist poseur “Peter”

    Comment:

    I am not a supremacist of any kind.

    I am a Peacemaker between christians and muslims

    pleading with both sides to see the “elephant in the room” which is the war mongering Pentagon that

    takes our hard earned money and wastes it on defense contractors that are more interested in profit than actually protecting the American people.

    Due to the Pentagon, eventually the US government will have to declare bankruptcy in about 10 to 20 years.

    When the US government gets into the business of war, there is a cost to pay in tens of thousands of lives lost , millions of refugees

    and trillions of hard earned tax dollars either wasted or stolen as evidenced by the Pentagon not being able to pass any financial audit.

    Every year, up to 1.4 trillion of hard earned tax dollars is being diverted to maintain the US government’s military empire:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States#Budget_Breakdown_for_2012

    40% of which is being borrowed from places like China,

    which will eventually lead to the US government declaring bankruptcy within the next 10 to 20 years.

    So the question is ” IS THE US GOVERNMENT’S MILITARY EMPIRE NECESSARY ?”

    Read the following to find out :

    Its under the title “IS THE US GOVERNMENT’S MILITARY EMPIRE NECESSARY ?”

    http://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/?view=flipcard

  66. says

    Mr Spencer

    just outta curiosity – have you ever put the tech guys onto tracing this creep ‘Peter”s ip signature or whatever one uses to find out where he, or perhaps I should say ‘it’, is posting from?

    He’s been here before, as far back as 2009, as ‘lovevrybody’ and as ’45ch’ before he reappeared as ‘peter’; his robotic, mind-numbingly repetitive squawkings (I’d swear that English is not his first language) are completely distinctive.

    Me, I had him pegged as a mohammedan dementor in a mask – one attempting Alinsky-style jiu-jitsu gainst the Christians here present – as soon as I’d read about six comments by him, way back when he first appeared.

    All of us regulars know he’s a Mohammedtroll (and a bandersnatch – bandwidth thief) to boot.

    Those who answer him tend to do so in order to prevent newbies from being confused by his sand-throwing.

  67. says

    Robert Spencer wrote:

    You see how these guys work.

    You all have let this Islamic supremacist poseur “Peter” completely hijack this thread, which is about (or should have been about), the AFDI pro-freedom ads, the freedom of speech, media bias, Left-fascist thuggery, etc.

    But now all of that is completely forgotten, the point successfully obfuscated. “Peter”‘s mission is accomplished.
    ……………………….

    Absolutely, Mr. Spencer. This thread is, really, a textbook example of the phenomenon.

    I realized that I would have to put on hip boots”so to speak”just to wade through the copious amount of verbiage he aimed at me personally.

    More crap from “Peter”:

    I am not a supremacist of any kind.

    I am a Peacemaker between christians and muslims

    pleading with both sides to see the “elephant in the room” which is the war mongering Pentagon…
    ……………………….

    “A Peacemaker between christians and muslims””i.e., he is advocating that Christians live as dhimmis under Shari’ah, and heavily implying that Christians are, in fact, not following the teachings of Jesus *unless* they cravenly submit to supremacist Muslims.

    As for his references to the “war mongering Pentagon”, he is deliberately ignoring the fact that the “War on Terror””no matter how inconsistent and frequently poorly handled”has been an attempt to defend Americans against violent Jihad.

    Whereas “Peter”, of course, implies that we do not have the right to defend ourselves at all.

  68. says

    Champ, you stated : “we all must do the right thing and defeat jihad and fully support Israel.”

    Comment:

    How about just following Jesus and becoming Peacemakers

    and in being Peacemakers, Israel and Palestine will have peace since

    God is able to bring muslims, christians and Jews together through the power of the Holy Spirit

  69. says

    Gee, Peter,dear namesake, all the most vehement “peaceandjustice” Christians I’ve known have insisted that Jesus was a revolutionary guerrilla fighter, and that the figure we have in the New Testament was forged by sellouts to Roman power. I guess I’ve revealed that I’m old enough to remember the Sillier ‘Seventies.

  70. says

    Kepha, you stated : ” insisted that Jesus was a revolutionary guerrilla fighter,”

    Comment:

    Where is the evidence of Jesus being a jihadist ? do you have documentary evidence older than the New Testament accounts ?

  71. says

    Lemon,

    while the christians and muslims are fighting with each other, the defense contractors of the Pentagon are “laughing all the way to the bank”

    while looting the treasury

    while the US government borrows 40% of the 1.4 trillion security budget from places like China

    which will eventually lead to the US government declaring bankruptcy within the next 10 to 20 years

    and for all practical purposes the US government’s military empire will be forced to come to a very abrupt end after the bankruptcy

  72. says

    Lemon,

    while the christians and muslims are fighting with each other, the defense contractors of the Pentagon are “laughing all the way to the bank”

    while looting the treasury

    while the US government borrows 40% of the 1.4 trillion security budget from places like China

    which will eventually lead to the US government declaring bankruptcy within the next 10 to 20 years

    and for all practical purposes the US government’s military empire will be forced to come to a very abrupt end after the bankruptcy

  73. says

    Dumble, you stated : ” mohammedan dementor in a mask ”

    Comment:

    In the history of Islam, has any muslim ever pretended to be a christian while not supporting the prophet of Islam but supporting the peace making of Jesus ?

  74. says

    Dumble, you stated : ” something the Mohammedans and/ or their dhimmi serfs/ enablers do not want us to think about”

    Comment:

    Can you specify what it is that you feel that my postings prevents people from thinking about ?

    Could it be that peacemaking is much more effective in winning over the other side than war making and that is what my posts are all about ?

    People do not realize that the “elephant in the room” is the treasury looting Pentagon and its contractors

    and while the defense contractors are “laughing all the way to the bank”

    they are depriving Americans of a better and healthier life since the government is cutting back on cancer research while pouring trillions into the US government’s world wide empire

    Why is it when 3000 Americans died on 9/11 , the government was willing to spend trillions on the “war on terror “,

    40% of the money being borrowed from places like China

    but at the same time,

    the same government is cutting cancer research even when over a million Americans are dying from cancer alone every two years ?

    http://www.aacr.org/home/public–media/science-policy–government-affairs/resources-for-policymakers/federal-cancer-research-funding.aspxIs

    even though its been proved that government funded medical research is useful

    and government medical research has given rise to breakthroughs and nobel prize winners:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_Research_Council_(United_Kingdom)

    Is supporting the profit agenda of the warfare corporations more important than the lives of your friends or loved ones and millions of Americans ?

    One must ask whether the so-called “War on Terror” is really about keeping us safe,

    or as retired Lieutenant Colonel William Astore writes,
    about feeding the “web of crony corporations, lobbyists, politicians and retired military types who pass through Washington’s revolving door, engorged by

    untold trillions devoted to a national security and intelligence complex that dominates Washington.”

    When the US government finally declares bankruptcy ( within 10 to 20 years ) due to the excess borrowing from places like China

    the only people who will be fine economically are the defense contractors while

    the rest of Americans have to suffer a much lower standard of living

    while millions of Americans will continue to die from cancer due to drastic cuts in cancer research after the bankruptcy

  75. says

    Dumble, you stated : ” They stopped at the boundaries of historic Israel”

    Comment:

    That is not the history of the west or even the history of the state of Israel as both the west and israel have in different times, pushed way beyond their promised land or the 13 colonies ( in the case of the US government’s imperial expansion )

    Notice in verse 15 below, it talks about nations beyond the promised land that the Israelis are given permission to attack

    Deuteronomy 20:10-15

    When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace.

    If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you.

    If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city.

    When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it.

    As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves.

    And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.

    VERSE 15: This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

  76. says

    Champ, you stated : ” islamic supremacist poseur “Peter”

    Comment:

    In being a Peacemaker, I cannot tell muslims that Christianity is superior

    and neither can I tell Christians, islam is superior

    because Jesus taught humility and not superiority

  77. says

    Dumble, you stated : ” are the same sort of thing as the family violence found among people of other cultural groups: the short answer is that they ain’t.

    Not the same kind of thing at all.”

    Comment:

    You are right, its not the same thing.

    In fact, “honor” killing of spouses and girlfriends by jealous non-muslim boyfriends and husbands is far worse than honor killings in the muslim world

    Here are the facts from the US dept. of justice:

    American men and women who have killed their own children or loved ones or relatives or ex-spouses between 1976 and 1997 number at 116,814 ( annual rate of 5562 ):

    http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/wo.txt

    Compare the number of killings in America alone ( not the world ) and compare that figure to the world wide number of honor killings in muslim societies

    Annual worldwide high end estimate of honor killings : 5000 per year:

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

    Muslims don’t follow sharia as much as non-muslims follow the ideology of hate in killing their daughters/children, loved ones, intimate partners or ex-spouses or relatives.

    No matter how much sharia is out there, the sad fact is that non-muslims have been more violent towards their relatives/daughters/loved ones/ex-spouses/children/intimate partners than muslims have been been:

    http://crime.about.com/b/2004/10/29/parents-killing-their-children.htm

  78. says

    Peter, I’m an old codger who remembers the 1970’s. Are you saying that all the radical priests and ministers of that era, who now sit as tenured faculty in prestigious universities were wrong? You mean, the Viet Cong and the rioters of the inner cities in the 1960’s weren’t doing God’s work, and Mao’s Long March didn’t have the same redemptive significance of the Exodus from Egypt? You mean, Yasir Arafat was wrong when he said that Jesus wasn’t the first Palestinian freedom fighter? How could all those Liberation Theologians be wrong?

  79. says

    I expect the North African ones, at least, looked across the Straits and saw the apes gambolling on the Rock. They might even have gone there.

  80. says

    Kepha, you stated : ” How could all those Liberation Theologians be wrong?”

    Comment:

    It depends where they are getting their source documents from ?

    Are they basing their analysis on documents older than the new testament texts or

    texts from a much later time period in which those not depending on the guidance of the Holy Spirit

    with a political or social or religious agenda might be inclined to modify the texts

  81. says

    Lemon, you stated : “for which I commend them as front-line soldiers charging through mud”

    Comment:

    Instead of being soldiers, its a lot more effective to be Peacemakers plus we get the blessings of God, being Peacemakers

    as Jesus said ” Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God”

  82. says

    Jan, you stated : ” surrender to the jihad, don’t make any “Islamophobic” moves, and all will be well with you.””

    Comment:

    Making peace does not mean surrender.

    When Jesus told the Jews to make peace, He was telling the Jews a better way to deal with the terrorist Romans

    but the Jews did not listen to Jesus and the result was the slaughter of the Jews and the burning down of their temple in AD70.

    So did the Jews then listen to Jesus and become Peacemakers ? again no

    So finally in AD135, the Romans expelled all Jews from Jerusalem, turned Jerusalem into a pagan city

    and renamed Judea, Palestine.

    If you read the entire community blog below you will see a practical way to make peace and to make sure that no dangerous power hungry individual ever takes power.

    Please read the following to see how Peace is possible without war.

    Its under the title :”IS THE US GOVERNMENT’S MILITARY EMPIRE NECESSARY ?”

    in the link below:

    http://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/?view=flipcard

    After reading the entire community blog, any feedback would be appreciated

    so we can keep improving the blog, thanks

  83. says

    Graven, you stated : ” Whereas “Peter”, of course, implies that we do not have the right to defend ourselves at all.”

    Comment:

    If you read the entire community blog, you will see there is a better way to defend ourselves without giving trillions to the “defense” contractors.

    If you read the entire community blog below you will see a practical way to make peace and to make sure that no dangerous power hungry individual ever takes power.

    Please read the following to see how Peace is possible without war.

    Its under the title :”IS THE US GOVERNMENT’S MILITARY EMPIRE NECESSARY ?”

    in the link below:

    http://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/?view=flipcard

    After reading the entire community blog, any feedback would be appreciated

    so we can keep improving the blog, thanks

  84. says

    Jan, you stated : ” he will dismiss them as ‘bigots’. ”

    Comment:

    It does not help when people call each other names.

    I hope Lean becomes a Peacemaker

    Lean should be asking the question : ” Why is it when 3000 Americans died on 9/11 , the government was willing to spend trillions

    on the “war on terror “,

    but at the same time, the same government is cutting cancer research when over a million Americans are dying from cancer alone every two years ?

    http://www.aacr.org/home/public–media/science-policy–government-affairs/resources-for-policymakers/federal-cancer-research-funding.aspx

    Is supporting the profit agenda of the warfare corporations more important than the lives of your loved ones and millions of Americans ?”

  85. says

    Jan

    well done. And you’re a braver woman than I, to click on his link.

    duh-swami, one of our most stalwart regulars, used to reiterate one piece of advice all the time: *not* to click on links offered by Mohammedans or their apologists, his own experience of such had been that they often had, as he put it, ‘bugs that jump’…So I usually err on the side of prudence, especially as I am not particular techn-literate.

    Anyway, thank you for investigating and sharing what you found. Brrrr, it does sound creepy (but then his syrupy nonsense – which comes across as wholly insincere, he doesn’t give off the same vibe as *any* other professing Christian I have ever met on the internet either here or anywhere else – gives the creeps anyway). However – I wouldn’t be so sure that ‘Brian Boatman’ is his *real* name, either…

    Methinks he might be – in his own way – playing a game not unlike that of one Nu’aym bin Masud, back in the day. As Mr Spencer puts it – “a new convert to Islam, Nu’aym bin Mas’ud, came to the Prophet with a proposition: since his own people, the Ghatafan, did not know that he had become a Muslim, Muhammad could perhaps make use of him to gain an advantage over his enemies.” [Truth About Muhammad, p. 127].

  86. says

    Dumble, you stated : ” he doesn’t give off the same vibe as *any* other professing Christian I have ever met on the internet either here or anywhere else ”

    Comment:

    That is because most christians do not follow the peacemaking of Jesus who criticized His own commmunity rather than the terrorist Romans

    because Jesus wanted the Jews to live to a higher standard

    which tragically the Jews did not do and were not interested in being peacemakers

    and because of that they ended up being slaughtered by the terrorist Romans in AD70 and their temple burned down.

    Did the Jews listen to Jesus after that tragic war with the Romans ? no they did not

    And so in AD135, the Romans expelled all Jews from Jerusalem

    turned Jerusalem into a pagan city and renamed Judea, Palestine

    So what does all this mean to us ?

    Today we heard the sad news of Senator Arlen Specter dying from cancer

    ” Over the years, Arlen Specter had fought two previous bouts with Hodgkin’s disease, overcome a brain tumor and survived cardiac arrest following bypass surgery.”

    Comment:

    Even the rich and powerful are affected by cancer

    and yet cancer funding research is being cut in favor of redirecting hard earned tax dollars to the warfare corporations and institutions.

    Why is it when 3000 Americans died on 9/11 , the government was willing to spend trillions

    on the “war on terror “,

    but at the same time, the same government is cutting cancer research when over a million Americans are dying from cancer alone every two years ?

    http://www.aacr.org/home/public–media/science-policy–government-affairs/resources-for-policymakers/federal-cancer-research-funding.aspx

    The reason there is no money left to

    address the problems of our society

    and no money left to address all your problems that you see in society is because

    every year, up to 1.4 trillion of hard earned tax dollars is being diverted to maintain the US government’s unnecessary military empire:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States#Budget_Breakdown_for_2012

    that has led to programs being cut including

    federal cuts in research on cancer even though over 1 million Americans die from cancer alone every two years.

    If we can save $700 billion a year from the budget that is now going to maintain the US government’s military empire,

    we can save all the programs that will keep Americans safe and healthy.

    So the question is, “Is the US government’s yearly trillion dollar world wide military empire necessary” ?

    Read the following to find out :

    Its under the title “IS THE US GOVERNMENT’S MILITARY EMPIRE NECESSARY ?”

    http://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/?view=flipcard

  87. says

    Dumble, you stated: ” a new convert to

    Islam, Nu’aym bin Mas’ud, came to the

    Prophet with a proposition: since his own

    people, the Ghatafan, did not know that he

    had become a Muslim, Muhammad could perhaps

    make use of him to gain an advantage over

    his enemies.” [Truth About Muhammad, p.

    127].”

    Comment:

    Did Nu’aym bin Mas’ud persuade people to be

    peacemakers ?

    If he did not, then can you point to any new convert to islam who did not believe in Jihad ?

    So if every new convert to islam believed in Jihad,

    how then can I be a new convert to Islam since I never said I believed in Jihad

  88. says

    Dumble, you stated: ” involving total disarmament of non-Muslim states and a self-censorship that refused to publicly criticise any aspect of Islam,”

    Comment:

    I have already stated I do not believe in Jihad like most christians and muslims believe in a defensive war.

    As for calling for the total disarmament of non-muslim states, can you point to where we stated that in our blog titled ” “IS THE US GOVERNMENT’S MILITARY EMPIRE NECESSARY ?”

    http://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/?view=flipcard

    The blog asks the question ” IS THE US GOVERNMENT’S MIILITARY EMPIRE NECESSARY ? ”

    and if you read the answer, nowhere in the blog do we call for the US government to totally disarm after giving up its world wide empire

  89. says

    From Jan : quoting Peter “America is evil, and all ‘christians’ should be ‘peacemakers’, by which he means it is evil, wicked and sinful to resist, or fight back against evil. ”

    America is not evil. There are at leat 15% of Americans who are angels.

    What is evil is what the US government does, not what 15% of Americans do because at least 15% of Americans are remarkable and very good people.

    When you say you want to fight back against evil, are you talking about Jihad against evil ?

  90. says

    From Jan : quoting Peter “America is evil, and all ‘christians’ should be ‘peacemakers’, by which he means it is evil, wicked and sinful to resist, or fight back against evil. ”

    America is not evil. There are at leat 15% of Americans who are angels.

    What is evil is what the US government does, not what 15% of Americans do because at least 15% of Americans are remarkable and very good people.

    When you say you want to fight back against evil, are you talking about Jihad against evil ?