New York Review of Books calls for criminalizing of criticism of Islam

This piece by the formerly respectable Islamic scholar Malise Ruthven is so full of errors, false claims, and inaccuracies that it is surprising that the New York Review of Books published it at all. On the other hand, as the mainstream media increasingly abandons all pretense of objective reporting and becomes ever more a propaganda arm for the Left and Islamic supremacists, it isn’t all that surprising after all.

“Can Islam Be Criticized?,” by Malise Ruthven in the New York Review of Books, October 11:

…On the motives behind the film Rushdie is surely right: researchers have revealed close connections between Nakoula, a militant Coptic separatist, and out-and-out Islamophobes such as Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. (Indeed, even as people in the Middle East were rioting against the film in late September, Geller was sponsoring a controversial anti-Muslim advertising campaign in the New York subway, raising questions about hate speech in the United States.)…

False in every respect. Pamela Geller and I have no connections whatsoever, close or otherwise, to Nakoula, who may not be a “militant Coptic separatist” or a Copt at all. Geller’s advertising was not “anti-Muslim,” but against jihad attacks against innocent civilians. Ruthven’s use of the manipulative and inaccurate media slogans “anti-Muslim” and “Islamophobe” is unworthy of him as a scholar, as is his willing propagation of the spurious concept of “Islamophobia,” which Islamic supremacist groups use nowadays to intimidate people into thinking that there is something wrong and “racist” about resisting jihad.

Matthew Feldman, a political scientist, has used the term “Christianism” to describe ultra-right-wing anti-Muslim polemicists such as Geller and the Quran-burning pastor Terry Jones, who also supported the film, in order to highlight their similarities to their Islamist enemies. Both rely on religious feelings to mobilize much larger groups because of the esteem for their respective religions in the broader cultures in which they reside….

This is even more of a howler than Ruthven’s claim that we were behind the Muhammad movie: Pamela Geller, who is deeply proud of her Jewish identity, is now a “Christianist” who is relying on “religious feelings” to “mobilize larger groups”? It is astonishing that Ruthven would have the audacity to write about people that he clearly knows nothing about. In reality, the American Freedom Defense Initiative that Pamela Geller and I head up is not a religious organization, but is dedicated to defending the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law. Clearly these are “ultra-right-wing anti-Muslim” goals!

These contrasting responses suggest the possibility of a two-pronged approach to the free speech issues raised by images of the Prophet. “Insulting” the Prophet with the intent of stirring up hatred might be categorized as a form of “hate speech” comparable to anti-Semitism, racism, flag desecration, or Holocaust denial, which are forbidden by law in many countries (though not the US, where a proposed amendment protecting the US flag failed to pass by a single Senate vote in 2006), because the sacred image of the Prophet has become a fundamental part of how Muslim communities have come to define themselves. While in practice it may be difficult to draw the line between “insult” and “criticism,” if there is a distinction it must lie in intention.

Who will judge intentions, once Ruthven’s authoritarian law is passed? What will Malise Ruthven do if someone in power decides that something he has written about Islam was actually intended to “insult” Muslims, rather than to provide reasonable “criticism”? And why is the New York Review of Books publishing this invitation to the suicide of the free press?

10,000 Muslims at Google's London offices demand removal of Muhammad video
Al-Qaeda top dog urges jihad over Muhammad film
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    All that psycho babble, has one basic meaning…’Please don’t hurt me’…The cowards plea to a bully…That’s what all appeasement to Islam is all about…’Please don’t hurt me’, then kneel before your masters…Ruthven has words but no guts, he is kneeling before Islam…He has submitted…He might as well do the shahada thing, if he has not already done so…

  2. says

    Yes, it is not only global Islamic interests which campaign to criminalize and censor criticism of Islam.

    They have active political partners in the West’s political class and MSM.

  3. says

    Malaise Ruthven?

    Whatever his motivations, its falsehood and slander. And in this case its he who broke the law.

    It may be worthwhile to launch proceedings against Malaise!

  4. says

    What hypocrisy: if Ruthven has called for the same protection for Christianity, atheism & Judaism as for islam, as she should have done when going on this path, then islam had to be prohibited immediately. (Meaning: she should have had some gut-feeling that there is something rotten with choosing this path)

  5. says

    Freedom of speech is to say everything,
    so-long it is true (not lible anyone/thing)

    The sadist Allah (e.g. Q.10:4, 6:70) hates Christians & freedom of speech
    (1st Amendment U.S.)

    Q. 5:73 “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity (God of Christians, highest sin: shirk): for there is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.”

    Q.9:5 “KILL the unbelievers (mushrikun) wherever ye find them”
    through Q.8:12 beheading

    http://schnellmann.org/hr-resolution-16-18-criminalisation-of-criticism-of-islam.html

  6. says

    What an acute observer Ruthven is, identifiying threats that nobody else has ever heard of until he revealed them! “Militant Coptic separatists” and “Christianism”, indeed! Another failure of our security agencies, not identifying these threats. Better get the FBI and Homeland Security on to them, right away. Who knows (maybe Ruthven does; we should ask him) what atrocities they’re planning.
    And maybe they (the FBI) can find out why so many of the Christianists aren’t Christians, but Jews, agnostics, and atheists. ‘Tis a puzzlement.

  7. says

    It is astonishing that Ruthven would have the audacity to write about people that he clearly knows nothing about.

    No, it isn’t. Willful ignorance is rife among contemporary American academics. I know a woman who holds a Ph.D. in political science and is an associate professor of international affairs. When I ventured to point out the invidious verses in the ignoble Qur’an (9:29, 4:34 et al.), she first tried to pull rank on me (and my mere B.A.) by declaring that experts in the field with impeccable credentials would disagree. I urged her to at least read the passages in question and judge for herself, at which proposal she balked and repeated her faith in the “experts.” I told her that her refusal to look at original source material made it difficult for me to respect her as an intellectual, whereupon she waxed wroth and demanded (like the OIC) that I cease to voice any criticism of Islam and its adherents in her presence. She came up under the spell of Edward Said’s “Orientalism” and, as befits a good post-colonialist, will tolerate no aspersions on the little brown “Other.” Never mind that the little brown “Other” is aggressively colonizing us, beginning with ossified minds like hers.

  8. says

    Had a long-time subscription to the NYRB for years when I was an intellectual so-and-so. Cancelled it in 2008, after being fed up with it for years. It is a shill for the hate-Israel lobby, and proudly so. It regularly publishes such loathsome and one-sided writers (I use the term advisedly) as Joyce Carol Oates and Pankaj Mishrah.

  9. says

    As for the title of the above article. It’s a godd one. For as stated before and should be stated again the only real reason the such type of laws might be enacted is because the foundations and doctrines of Islam are so weak the they can’t hld pu to or stand up to criticism

  10. says

    The New York Review of Each Others’ Books has been anti-logic (or chop logic) since its founding in 1963. It has gone downhill from there.

  11. says

    Islam is the old hate speech but wins acceptance from Muslims and clueless dhimmis. Truth is the new hate speech but is excoriated by Muslims and clueless dhimmis. And the modern Left is the newest version of fascism and links up quite well with just about the oldest version of fascism——-Islam. World upside down.

  12. says

    “..because the sacred image of the Prophet has become a fundamental part of how Muslim communities have come to define themselves..”

    The sacred image of the prophet?

    Here is what Allah had to say about his “sacred” prophet:

    “That Allah may forgive thee of thy sin that which is past and that which is to come” Quran 48:2 (i.e sinner to the bone!)

    And here is what this same Quran had to say about someone else:

    “He said: I am only a messenger of your Lord: That I will give you a pure* boy.” Quran 19:19 (i.e Jesus, the Holy One)

    http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2011/05/saint-and-sinner.html

  13. says

    I have the Oct. 11 issue of The New York Review of Books before me, and there is NO article titled “Can Islam Be Criticized” by Malise Ruthven in that issue. Nor is such an article or writer in the Oct 25 issue. I don’t understand.

  14. says

    Who is Malise Ruthven (and what kind of a pretentious-ass name is “Malise” anyway? Were his parents that nosebleedingly removed from the hoi polloi in the rarified air of their Manhattan townhouse patio overlooking Central Park?):

    Some of his oeuvre:

    Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction
    Malise Ruthven – 2007
    Fundamentalism is seen as the major threat to world peace today, a conclusion impossible to ignore since the events in New York on September 11, 2001. But what does “fundamentalism” really mean?

    A fury for God: the Islamist attack on America
    Malise Ruthven – 2004
    In A Fury for God, Malise Ruthven first reconstructs the events of September 11 and the war in Afghanistan.

    Islam in the World
    Malise Ruthven
    In this updated edition, Islamic expert Malise Ruthven adds a new preface and new chapters analyzing the major issues of today, including the impact of 9/11, the meaning of “the war on terror,” and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.

    Islam: A Very Short Introduction
    Malise Ruthven – 2012
    In this new edition, Ruthven brings the text up-to-date by reflecting upon some of the most significant changes in the Muslim world in recent years; from the emergence of al-Qaeda and the attacks on New York and Washington on 9/11 …

    Historical atlas of Islam
    Malise Ruthven, Azim Nanji – 2004
    The historical evolution of Islam is explained in this detailed reference, which chronicles the history of the religion from the birth of Mohammed to the independence of former Soviet Muslim States, covering a wide variety of themes …

    Cairo
    Time-Life Books, Malise Ruthven – 1980
    Explores the land and the people of one of the most celebrated cities on earth–the “Mother of the World”–surveying the relics of Cairo’s fabled past

    Freya Stark in Iraq and Kuwait
    Malise Ruthven, Freya Stark, St. Antony’s College (University of Oxford). Middle East Archives – 1994
    Her [Stark’s] photographs of the Yazidis are unique, and her travels in Kurdistan now seem particularly poignant. In Kuwait she photographed pearl fishers, the Marsh Arabs and various residents of the capital city.

    Encounters with Islam: On Religion, Politics and Modernity
    Malise Ruthven – 2012
    Representing the “best of Ruthven,” these lucid essays will be widely appreciated by students, specialists and general readers. They transform our understandings of contemporary society.

    Freya Stark in Southern Arabia
    Malise Ruthven, Freya Stark – 1995
    The magnificent canyons of Wadi Hadhramaut inspired Freya Stark to produce some of her best photographs.

    Allah spare us from all these coffee-table books glossy with academic credentials misinforming and deforming the intellectually sophisticated general public about Islam.

    And here’s one by Malise Ruthven I made up:

    Malise: A Very Short Autobiography, a Very Small Brain and a Very Short Penis
    Malise Ruthven – 2012
    In this new edition, Ruthven marshalls his considerable verve and academic testicles to bring the reader up to snuff on how utterly asinine he has become over the years with regard to the problem of Islam which he dismisses in his Very Short Preface as “no problem ‘t all…!”

    (P.S.: If the reader is wondering who Freya Stark is (or was), she — Dame Freya Madeline Stark (Mrs Stewart Perowne) — was a British woman who gallivanted about the Middle East and North Africa taking photogrraphs and observing how exotic and “interesting” were the Oriental locals — she lived to be a 100 years old, died in 1993! If Malise Ruthven likes her enough to have written two books about her, you can bet she’s thoroughly suspect for being a proto-PC MC.)

  15. says

    Gregory Palamus of Thessalonica on Islam and Muslims.

    “For these impious people, hated by God and infamous, boast of having got the better of the Romans by their love of God…they live by the bow, the sword and debauchery, finding pleasure in taking slaves, devoting themselves to murder, pillage, spoil…and not only do they commit these crimes, but even ” what an aberration ” they believe that God approves of them. This is what I think of them, now that I know precisely about their way of life.” –

    Gregory Palamus of Thessalonica, 1354.

    This is the most abhorant of all Muslim practice, that not only do they murder, burn, pillage and rape, but they believe that allah not only approves but actually recommends such evil. Muslims make their allah an accomplice in war crimes and human rights violations of the most gruesime kind. And for such evil, they are granted a place in the brothel in the sky.

    The fact is, that there is so much to criticise in the creed and practice of Islam, that it would be a dereliction of duty of the good not to criticise Islam.

  16. says

    I’ve just read Malise Ruthven’s article. For me, one telling part is this:

    “Building on the neuroscientist Susan Greenfield’s notion of group identity, one could suggest that”after many centuries of “programming” by means of ritual, devotion, and prayer”the cultural myth of the Prophet, like that of other religious icons, is so integral to the construction of how many Muslims see themselves that an assault on the Prophet may be experienced as an attack on all Muslims.”

    Well, there’s a simple way for Muslims on a hair trigger
    to explode the ‘cultural myth’ – read the Qur’an, ffs!
    And read the aHadith central to Islam! These sources, respected in the Islamic world, should put right any misconceptions they have of a man of peace who lived a blameless life.

    But on the point of whether a critic *intends* to insult or denigrate Islam, or not, we can see that the recent shooting of a 14 year old girl by the Sharia-promoting Taliban was done on the assumption that she asserted the right to be educated.

    If calling for the Universal right of education is an ‘intentional’ attack on Islam, then free speech is even more badly needed than anyone could have thought!

  17. says

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

    HOW TO DEAL WITH THE WORLDWIDE muslim PROBLEM:

    My Dear Jihad Watchers,

    The answer has already been given to us by the “Father of Science Fiction”, Robert A. Heinlein.

    http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/h/robert-heinlein/

    You deal with muslims like the bugs that they are:

    http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/h/robert-heinlein/starship-troopers.htm

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWhrGGrs3Ow

    Eventually, you enlist the aid of Doogie Howser:

    http://www.reelfilm.com/images/tvdoogie.jpg

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faFuaYA-daw&feature=related

    Well, science fiction fans, do you GROK me?

    Robert A. Heinlein, four-time winner of the Hugo Award and recipient of three Retro Hugos, received the first Grand Master Nebula Award for lifetime achievement. His worldwide bestsellers have been translated into 22 languages and include Stranger in a Strange Land, Starship Troopers, Time Enough for Love, and The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. His long-lost first novel, For Us, the Living, was recently published by Scribner and Pocket Books

  18. says

    In other words do not report the truth about Islam!! This kind of idiotic verbiage can only come from those who worship the god of political correctness. To please their god they will sell their soul to the devil!!

  19. says

    MALAYSIA GOVERNMENT ORDER BANNING MY BOOK PUNISHABLE BY 3 YEARS IN JAIL

    To understand what an order banning a book is read the order banning my book ISLAM EVIL IN THE NAME OF GOD in Malaysia and attempt to ban it in London.

    MALAYSIA TYRANNY

    Islamic tyranny on display in modern, moderate Malaysia. Malaysian government has banned the book,
    “Islam: Evil in the Name of God”. One can be jail for three years, plus fined, for possessing, publishing or distributing the book.

    Those of you who think that censorship regarding Islam will not happen in the USA because of the
    First Amendment – dream on. The code words for banning
    ALL examination of Islam, the teachings of the Quran and Prophet Muhammad are given in this order namely: “evil effort, sow hate, negative sentiments, falsehoods about
    character of Muhammad and sanctity of Islam, could threaten the peace.” Its just a matter of time before a lawsuit is filed in the USA stating that all those who oppose Islam are spreading hatred against Muslims and by doing so are
    threatening the peace.

    KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia – The Home Ministry has gazetted a prohibitory order against the publishing of a book entitled Islam Evil in the Name of God on July 7 for containing false narrative facts.

    The ministry’s Publication Control Section and Al-Quran Text secretary Abd Aziz Md Nor said the narrative facts in the
    book were totally false, especially those involving the character of Prophet Muhammad and the sanctity of Islam.

    * “The publication is the evil effort of certain quarters to
    sow hatred and negative sentiments against Islam among non-Muslims. If the publishing is allowed, it could threaten peace.”

    * He said the ban was in accordance with Section 7 (1) of the Printing Presses and Publication.

    GO TO: http://egagah.blogspot.com/201

    PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION OF BRITAIN

    UK’s Daily Mail reports that the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) has demanded banning my new book “Prophet Muhammad: Monster of History”, which
    is distributed by Amazon.com in the UK. Saying that “Freedom of expression should not be unlimited, and publications that cause anti-Muslim hatred, anti-Jewish hatred or homophobic hatred should not be allowed’, the
    Muslim Council of Britain called on Amazon to “take proper responsibility’ for the content of the books on its site.

    Adding support to the MCB’s demand for censorship, Richard Mollet, chief executive of the Publishers Association, said: “It’s time internet companies did start to take a better look at their practices and behaved more responsibly.’

    Labour MP Paul Flynn also jumped in to support MCB’s call for censorship by saying: “If Amazon is providing the platform for books that wouldn’t be published otherwise, it is responsible.’

    Jake Neuman is the author of “Islam and Sharia Law Are Treason: Jihad Is Treason” and “Prophet Muhammad (AKA ALLAH): Monster of History.” (free
    download) at http://www.islamreform.net/new

  20. says

    People are constantly referring to things which are at most anti-Islamic or anti-Islam as anti-Muslim.

    At first I thought it was stupid, but I am coming around to the idea that it is deliberately misleading and intended to silence criticism of Islam.

    Most people, or at least most westerners know that criticizing a doctrine is innocuous compared to condemning individuals or groups. Not to mention being a natural right.

    I think that because that is understood, defenders of Islamic censorship feel the need to characterize anti-Islamic speech and writing as a form of personal defamation.

    The repeated use of the term anti-Muslim is simply a false accusation — leveled intentionally to defame the critics of Islam.

  21. says

    Taught in the Koran….

    005.041 O Messenger! let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief: whether it be among those whosay “We believe” with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews,- men who will listen to any lie

    RACISM and HATRED if ever there was any (especially because it is taught in the name of ‘Holy’)

    Thus, comes to mind….

    1Cr 1:20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? (certainly not among the media) hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? Yep….He has….in SPADES!

    Even a simpleton can see the evil in that koran teaching. The media (who loves to broadcast such idiotic – and evil – voices) has become the voice for evil. Don’t patronize them, nor their sponsers. Stay away from them.

    But stand up to them – speak the truth out loud – an act that they hate.

  22. says

    Unbelievable!

    […] Indeed, even as people in the Middle East were rioting against the film in late September, Geller was sponsoring a controversial anti-Muslim advertising campaign in the New York subway, raising questions about hate speech in the United States.

    Indeed, this went on even as people in the Middle East were quietly murdering Americans, all this raising serious questions about hate speech in the US…

    Notwithstanding the timing of these ads was quite coincidental. On 2nd thought, any timing would have the same effect…

  23. says

    didn’t the natzi play the same game? “YOU are NOT allowed to speak if….”

    hitler had the brilliant PASTOR BONHOFFER in germany hanged for speaking up.

    childabusers threaten the lives of the abused if they TELL someone. homosexuals in usa put the muzzle on free speech if people speak up even to the point of a fool’s law in california now that BULLIES parents of children to not allow therapy. how perverse can they get?

    natzi, childabusers, perverts, islamists……all in the same bag: “don’t you SAY anything, or else!”

    “where the Spirit of the LORD is, there is LIBERTY”. that is what the BIBLE says.

    people’s LIBERTY in the usa came from Judeao-Christian beginnings. this liberty is being attacked by the godless, people who make an idol of mo-ham-mad, and perverts, self abusers, and abusers of others.

  24. says

    “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!’ Patrick Henry

    “Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.”
    – Benjamin Franklin

    “Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.”
    -Justice William O. Douglas

    In the fight against evil there is no middle ground, no gray area, no neutrality. Those who are not actively and vigorously fighting against evil are helping evil to triumph.

    “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” (Edmund Burke)

  25. says

    According to Wikipedia -not a great source- he was one the first to use the term ‘islamofascism’. So what follower of islam is not gonna feel insulted, offended by that term-not many, most of them are comrades with nazis, fascists and communists, they all share the same hatred against jews and dissent-? if critisism of islam is ever outlawed, he should be one of the first to be tried and hanged. Oh, the buffoonery!. Will it never end?

    Also, you -Robert, Geller… etc- should sue this buffoon for calumny and libel, don’t let this jester get away with this crap.

  26. says

    Malice Ruthven sounds as if he’s some kind of intellectual bully who thinks his PhD makes him an expert on everything and everybody. Speaking as a hard-core “Christianist”, I was not aware until I read quotes from his work that Pamela Geller was one of us. I thought she was an admirer of Ayn Rand–although I could be wrong.

    The fact that Ruthven talks about “fundamentalism” as a threat–as if some Mennonite who believes the world was created in 6 days is a “threat” to civilization–immediately tells me that he’s part of that great herd who jumped at the chance to de-Americanize Evangelicals when Khomeini’s goons seized our Embassy in Iran.

  27. says

    The NY Review of Books or PressTV? That goes way beyond bias and sloppy journalism.

    Interesting juxtaposition on Ruthven’s publisher’s (IB Tauris, founder and chairman Iradj Bagherzade) 2012/13 religion catalogue.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/106237782/Religion-Catalogue-2012-2013

    Ruthven’s new book is featured second to the “Madness of King Jesus”.

    “All the evidence points to the fact that Jesus’ executionerst hought him to be an inconsequential and deluded lunatic, to be mocked and put outof his misery. Drawing on fresh sources andrare medical texts about mental illness inantiquity, this provocative and daringly originalbook explores the full implications of Jesusas “mad’ for our understanding of his mission..”

  28. says

    Spreading hate and lies that may lead to violence and for public safety all hate spreading shops such as this one JIHADWATCH should be shut down and with new law drawn up.

    Another option may be a WARNING posted on site like this one,

    that clearly warn public that “THE SITE MAYBE A PHOBIA SPREADING SITE PROMOTING HATE AND RELIGIOUS DISHARMONY AMONG PEOPLE ON BEHALF OF SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP, SUCH AS EXTREME RIGHT WING ZIONIST BUT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF FREE SPEECH.

    THEIR AIM IS TO DISCREDIT ISLAMIC RELIGION BY SPREADING FALSEHOOD AND DO ALL THEY CAN TO START LARGE SCALE VIOLENCE OR WAR IN THE MIDDLE-EAST TO PERMANENTLY OCCUPY PALESTINE BY CREATING A HOLOCAUST TYPE CLEANSING OF PALESTINIAN PEOPLE.

  29. says

    I wonder whether he ever met Conor Cruise O’Brien?

    If anybody here feels inclined, they could always send Mr Ruthven a copy of *this*, which the redoubtable Irishman (who, by the way, was a supporter of Israel; and also as staunch a red-hot anti-clerical Irishman as one could ever find, *he* could not possibly be accused of being a ‘Christianist’) wrote in the wake of the Rushdie fatwa:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/islam-back-to-the-dark-ages-we-should-not-repeal-the-enlightenment-to-appease-ayatollahs-says-conor-cruise-obrien-1382946.html

    Islam: back to the Dark Ages: We should not repeal the Enlightenment to appease Ayatollahs, says Conor Cruise O’Brien

    CONOR CRUISE O’BRIEN

    FRIDAY 12 AUGUST 1994.

    And it might be fun to hit him with this, too:

    http://reason.com/archives/2010/05/14/the-poet-versus-the-prophet

    The Poet Versus the Prophet
    On standing up to totalitarian Islam
    Mark Goldblatt | May 14, 2010

    Or with what Christopher Hitchens wrote the day after the jihad bombers hit London in 2005:

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2005/07/08/we-cannot-surrender-115875-15713152/

    WE CANNOT SURRENDER

  30. says

    “Nakoula, a militant Coptic separatist”

    Given the Copt’s plight in 2012 Egypt, is this not like calling the Warsaw Jews in 1944, “militant Jewish isolationists”?

  31. says

    Mr. Spencer, the author of that piece states that you have some sort of “connection” with Mr. Nekoula. You might actually have grounds for legal action against this man.

  32. says

    Christianism?

    What doyou call then the Atheists who are against Islam? Christianism? Even atheists point out that Christians in Muslim countries are severely persecuted for the crime of not being Muslim!

    NY Post has become from one of the human rights advocates to human rights terrorists.

    Anyway, if criticism of Islam should be banned, then so should anti-Semiticism, anti-Christianism, anti-Atheist, anti-Buddhism, anti-Confucianism. Let’s see if the ones propagating anti-Islam comments will back out or now. After all, the Islamic world is full hate towards who is not Muslims. The jails and courts will be disproportionately be full of Muslims because hate is rooted in Islamic doctrines.

  33. says

    New York Review of Books calls for criminalizing of criticism of Islam

    “Can Islam Be Criticized?,” by Malise Ruthven in the New York Review of Books, October 11:

    …On the motives behind the film Rushdie is surely right: researchers have revealed close connections between Nakoula, a militant Coptic separatist…
    …………………………….

    Protesting the oppression and slaughter of Copts at Muslim hands makes you a “militant Coptic separatist”? In other words, how *dare* this dhimmi criticize his oppressors?

    Certainly, pious Muslims agree.

    More:

    …and out-and-out Islamophobes such as Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. (Indeed, even as people in the Middle East were rioting against the film in late September, Geller was sponsoring a controversial anti-Muslim advertising campaign in the New York subway, raising questions about hate speech in the United States.)…
    …………………………….

    Note *this* moral equivalence”nay, moral inversion. While Muslims were *butchering* people in riots against any criticism of Muhammed and Islam, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer dared to question the morality of such Jihad violence.

    And yet, as Ruthven has phrased it, it implies that homicidal rioting is more moral than criticizing such violence. Madness.

    More:

    Matthew Feldman, a political scientist, has used the term “Christianism” to describe ultra-right-wing anti-Muslim polemicists such as Geller and the Quran-burning pastor Terry Jones, who also supported the film, in order to highlight their similarities to their Islamist enemies…
    …………………………….

    That’s a neat trick, as noted, since Ms. Geller is both proudly ethnically Jewish and an Objectivist, which means that she is a staunch atheist. And yet, in the upside-down world of PC/MC, such a person can be considered a “Christianist”.

    Moreover, what have Geller”or Pastor Terry Jones, for that matter”ever done that renders them “similar” to “Islamist” Jihadists?

    While I consider the rational Ms. Geller much more impressive intellectually, the fact is that both figures have merely criticized the violence and oppression of Islam. To compare them to the Muslim mobs slaughtering our diplomatic staff is *grotesque*.

    More:

    Both rely on religious feelings to mobilize much larger groups because of the esteem for their respective religions in the broader cultures in which they reside….
    …………………………….

    What crap. As noted, this makes absolutely no sense when applied to Ms. Geller.

    But note, also, the implication that they intend to “mobilize much larger groups””in the case of Anti-Jihadists, that would be to inspire others to stand against the barbarism of Islam, while in the case of Jihadists it would be to motivate Muslims to burn and murder in the name of Islam.

    Not exactly one and the same…

    More:

    These contrasting responses suggest the possibility of a two-pronged approach to the free speech issues raised by images of the Prophet.
    …………………………….

    “The Prophet”? Is Mr. Ruthven a “revert”? Does he believe that the readers of the New York Times Review of Books are all Muslim?

    More:

    “Insulting” the Prophet with the intent of stirring up hatred might be categorized as a form of “hate speech” comparable to anti-Semitism, racism, flag desecration, or Holocaust denial, which are forbidden by law in many countries (though not the US, where a proposed amendment protecting the US flag failed to pass by a single Senate vote in 2006), because the sacred image of the Prophet has become a fundamental part of how Muslim communities have come to define themselves. While in practice it may be difficult to draw the line between “insult” and “criticism,” if there is a distinction it must lie in intention.
    …………………………….

    *Absolute crap*. British teacher Gillian Gibbons meant no disrespect when she let her class of 7-year-olds name a teddy bear “Muhammad”, yet she faced flogging, imprisonment, and calls for her execution.

    Any quick look at blasphemy laws shows that this restriction would be no safeguard.

    Moreover”as even Malise Ruthven notes”none of those things are actually illegal in the United States under the First Amendment. But that would change in the case of Islam if Ruthven”and the brutal pushers of Shari’ah”got their way.

    And, as Robert Spencer asks, who would judge such intentions? Men like himself? “Islamic scholars”? Shari’ah judges? The mind boggles.

    But more than any of this, why should the free West ban criticism of any historic figure “because the sacred image of the Prophet has become a fundamental part of how Muslim communities have come to define themselves”?

    Surely, neo-Nazi ‘communities” consider adulation for Adolf Hitler to be a “fundamental part of how they have come to define themselves”. Does that mean that we should ban any criticism of Der Führer”?

    Madness, and suicidal madness.

  34. says

    Of course, even the most thoughtful and serious criticism of Islam is attacked just as viciously as the crude stuff by the blood-thirsty imams.

    For evidence, just see what this Islamic propagandist calls Spencer’s excellent work of criticism of Islam.

  35. says

    Jihad Watch is hypocritical in disclaiming responsibility for comments like this but characterizing publication of Ruthven’s article as an endorsement of his ideas by The New York Review of Books.

    Ruthven’s mealy-mouthed suggestion for outlawing of “insults” is despicable. His examples of Euro-criminalized hate speech serve only to show the slippery-slope dangers of this whole concept.

    In his article (not including in the Jihad Watch summary), Ruthven suggests that “[c]ritical analysis of the Quran that challenges the myths surrounding the primal figures of Islam is another story entirely,” and allowable whereas the “insults” should not be. I don’t see Islamic authorities making any such distinction. The advantage is that academic criticisms are usually less visible than YouTube videos. But the world of Islam has become more vociferous at searching out anything it can manage to regard as an insult, its standards being a bit wider than Malise Ruthven’s.

  36. says

    I just started “Until Proven Innocent” the book about the Lacrosse players who were put on trial by the corrupt prosecutor and slandered by the mainstream media and more importantly lynched by just about every “teacher” in Acadamia including “The 88″ at Duke University. It brought me right back the the two books I just finished reading, “The Professors” and “Ivory Towers On Sand”. A good book to read that just kick the shit out of liberal FemiNazis who are trying to turn our boys into eunics or however you spell it, is “The War Against Boys” by Christina Hoff Sommers. She also mentions the Goebells like fascist mainstream media that pushes the liberal agenda to the point of Treason.

  37. says

    Criminalize any criticism of Islam?

    This is madness!

    In the name of Islam, crimes — horrific crimes — are being committed all over the world. THAT is the crime!

    We’re caught in some kind of time warp. The 1930s!

  38. says

    Stop the presses…I’m about to insult Islam…

    The Quran is a dark and evil fairy tale whispered into the ear of a psychotic Arab by an incoherent angel named Gabriel…He suffered these auditory and sometimes visual hallucination for a twenty two year span…Had they had anti-psychotic drugs in those days, there would be no Islam today…Mahound built up to a psychotic break for years and it finally happened in the cave on Mt Hira when the demon possessed him by pressing on him, demanding he read something…After that, the demon visited him often, which reinforced his psychosis…A psychotic break, if not treated right away can result in a psychotic lifestyle…And that is how Islam was created, as a psychotic lifestyle, by a life long psychotic…Mahound was a ‘wild and crazy guy’, who today would be in an institution or prison, and be on heavy drugs…

  39. says

    Besides the “free” speech issue, if the tyrants want to stop criticism of Islam they must agree to stop their anti Jewish and anti Christian diatribes.

    Of course we know that this ain’t going to happen. It’s about time the Dhimmis of the world woke up to the realities that exist. Those that think the dagger in hand, hovering over you is an ice cream cone are very sadly mistaken.

  40. says

    True Islam teaches brotherhood among human being ! That is what I learned by reading and that is what my understanding from various Islamic writing.

    Furthermore, “It is Islam that says: If you kill one innocent human being, that is like killing the whole humanity. ”

    Now, all you guys, or commonly known as foot soldiers of right wing Zionist, some of you don’t even believe in any religion. You came to these ISLAMOPHOBIA spreading sites as this one and act like you are scholar in Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

    I understand it is your duty paid or unpaid to spread ISLAMOPHOBIA on behalf of extreme right wing Zionist or maybe ministry of foreign affairs of Israel and so-called Christian fundamentalist popularly known as Amen corner that must lead to shift of western public opinion, so that a large war and relentless violence can take place in the middle-east. That would give your bosses to permanently occupy Palestine. Even an Israeli Prime minister was gun down as that great soul by the right wing Zionist terrorist
    To me, it seems there are more violence instigated by these right wing elements than the Palestinian side.

    As an example, I can point out Zionist terrorist settlers violence in Hebron, occupied Palestine. Violence against Palestinians over there are a daily matter, it is happening 24/7.

    I feel sad for the Palestinian victims.

  41. says

    “This piece by the formerly respectable Islamic scholar Malise Ruthven is so full of errors, false claims, and inaccuracies that it is surprising that the New York Review of Books published it at all. On the other hand, as the mainstream media increasingly abandons all pretense of objective reporting and becomes ever more a propaganda arm for the Left and Islamic supremacists, it isn’t all that surprising after all.”

    Okay, so she’s just like that book-of-lies-and-deviancies the cult of islam clings to. Full of lies, deception, vileness and spite all bound up in hatred and deception.
    islam really is more and more disgusting the deeper I look into it on my own, and that along with the never-ending list of daily atrocities perpetrated by ‘the relifion of peace?’ simply demonstrates to me more and more that islam is just a very dangerous cult that cannot be abided any more than ‘only a few cancer cells’ can be abided.

    islam offers NOTHING, yet consumes voraciously–like cancer, and is every bit as pleasant and deadly.

    I watched a friend of Husband’s and mine die from cancer, and I do not make the comparison between cancer and islam lightly.

  42. says

    @sean I think its worse, I think islamistst & islamophiles get their inspiration from this notion to label islam-critics as “discriminatory” (and “racists”). I think the full range of this type of problems is very well expressed in these two lectures (especially the 2nd): http://www.instituteofcatholicculture.org/the-closing-of-the-muslim-mind-how-intellectual-suicide-created-the-modern-islamist/ (When you don’t like religion at all, please skip the first 2 minutes)

  43. says

    Ruthven’s piece is featured in the NYR’s online “blog” section — often mainstream publications have an online version that differs in certain respects from the print edition.

  44. says

    Andrew Bostom, who found that quote of the 14th century Orthodox theologian, perpetuates the misspelling “Palamus”. I wrote Bostom an email correcting him about 4 years ago, but he apparently never got my email or doesn’t care.

    The correct spelling is “Palamas”.

  45. says

    Matt …

    I read your story from that other thread, and wow, what you and your wife went through sounds like an awful nightmare! My husband and I have had similar terrible experiences with muslims, so I can relate to your story; which is why we will never trust any muslims EVER again. I mean once you get personally burned by a muslim, then you learn not to stick your hand anywhere near the flame. Yeah I think that you and your wife are wise to keep good healthy boundaries with them. We do the same thing. I guess good fences make good neighbors, right? …especially where muslims are concerned.

  46. says

    what kind of a pretentious-ass name is “Malise” anyway? In British English it’s clear.
    Advice / Advise
    Device / Devise
    Practice / Practise
    Malice / Malise
    It’s a noun with a “c” and a verb wuith an “s”.

  47. says

    Thanks for relating Champ! Not to deviate from this post but could you help us with the spreading of our story. Robert Spencer is working on publishing a follow up presently. Are you on FaceBook? I can easily link through there.

  48. says

    Also, if muslims want to be trusted, then they need to be *trustworthy* …of course my advice will only fall on deaf ears; since they seem to consider it their rite-of-passage to treat people like crap, but then they expect others to trust and respect them regardless of how badly they behave. Talk about backwards and wrongheaded.

  49. says

    In my experience, Kepha, many of the silliest and pettiest human beings I have ever met have a PhD (right now in my job I’m dealing with two such persons), which tends to prove that being a well educated individual is no guarantee against being deficient in human development. In fact, it’s getting to the point for me where someone who has a PhD in one of the liberal arts is guilty until proven innocent, especially if the doctorate is in English literature or sociology. Yeah, it’s gotten that bad.

  50. says

    Yes, I am on Facebook, but I don’t provide that information here. Sorry …

    Take care, and I wish the best to you and your wife! :)

  51. says

    THEIR AIM IS TO DISCREDIT ISLAMIC RELIGION BY SPREADING FALSEHOOD…

    Can you name one falsehood stated on this site? Islam discredits itself…No one needs to make up any falsehoods when the truth is all that is needed…It is you who are spreading falsehoods little boy……

  52. says

    If you want to make a meaningful difference in the world, then grow a brain and aim your attacks at those responsible for making these headlines …

    Robert is merely reporting what islam and company are doing.

    You’re a lost cause defending an evil cause: islam.

  53. says

    Danny, you talk of a “HOLOCAUST TYPE CLEANSING OF PALESTINIAN PEOPLE”.

    According to many many muslims the holocaust in Germany never occurred, it was faked by Zionists.

  54. says

    Well, danny, I never saw such “religious disharmony” as I did in the Sudan. Muslim against Muslim! So what are you going to ban there, seeing Islam is the source of the rivalry and “disharmony”?

  55. says

    Gee, I have to wonder, danny, what your conception of free speech is. Exactly, and be specific here, what criticism of Islam and Mohammed would you consider not an abuse of free speech? Go ahead and enlighten us all.

    No dodging, danny. Tell us what about Islam and Mo could be criticized that wouldn’t send you off into hysterics about the abuse of free speech. I’m thinkin’ nothin’, but go ahead and prove me wrong. I say you can’t.

  56. says

    “danny” wrote:

    Spreading hate and lies that may lead to violence and for public safety all hate spreading shops such as this one JIHADWATCH should be shut down and with new law drawn up.
    ………………………………..

    “danny” has never indicated what, exactly, is inaccurate here at Jihad Watch. Indeed, he cannot, since that material here is entirely factual.

    But those like “danny” believe that the accusation itself is enough in today’s PC/MC environment.

    Also, note his passive phrasing “may lead to violence”. Of course, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller have never advocated violence.

    What he means is that homicidal Muslims may react violently to anyone telling the truth about their vile creed. That sets the schoolyard bully as arbiter of our free speech.

    It is Muslims themselves who are threatening the public safety”not those pointing out the violent nature of Islam.

    More:

    Another option may be a WARNING posted on site like this one,

    that clearly warn public that “THE SITE MAYBE A PHOBIA SPREADING SITE PROMOTING HATE AND RELIGIOUS DISHARMONY AMONG PEOPLE ON BEHALF OF SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP, SUCH AS EXTREME RIGHT WING ZIONIST BUT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF FREE SPEECH.
    ………………………………..

    “danny” has never considered the oppression and murder of Infidels and the “insufficiently Islamic” to be a form of “religious disharmony””but he considers pointing out such atrocities to be just that.

    In other words, he is advocating full Shari’ah strictures on the West, and would render us completely defenseless against Islam. But then, that is what Shari’ah is for.

    More:

    THEIR AIM IS TO DISCREDIT ISLAMIC RELIGION BY SPREADING FALSEHOOD AND DO ALL THEY CAN TO START LARGE SCALE VIOLENCE OR WAR IN THE MIDDLE-EAST TO PERMANENTLY OCCUPY PALESTINE BY CREATING A HOLOCAUST TYPE CLEANSING OF PALESTINIAN PEOPLE.
    ………………………………..

    “danny” has here descended into that clear indication of unhinged bullying on the web: SCREAMING ALL CAPS.

    And note his implication: that Westerners don’t really care about freedom of speech, and that Anti-Jihadists don’t really care about the victims of Islam.

    Also, the idea that “Palestinians” are in danger of a “Holocaust” is more moral inversion. The Israelis, in fact, supply free medical care to “Palestinians””not exactly a “genocidal” thing to do.

    Meanwhile, Hamas’s charter calls for the destruction of Israel, Iran threatens to “wipe Israel off the map”, and pious Muslims worldwide scream about the “Army of Muhammed” coming to slaughter the Jews.

    Some pretty serious projection on “danny’s” part.

  57. says

    Tom (and Lemonlime)

    I just looked up the derivation/ etymology of the name ‘Malise’.

    My book ‘Names For Boys and Girls’, by Charles Johnson and Linwood Sleigh, which I used when naming my own children, and which I have found to be scholarly and reliable in all its other etymologies, states that the name ‘Malise’ is from Gaelic Maol Aosa and means ‘servant of Jesus’.

    It turns up in documentary records – borne by Scots and Irishmen – as early as the 16th century.

    So although in this particular person’s case, in light of what he has done with his life so far, you may choose to poke fun at his first name on the basis of unfortunate interlinguistic puns with ‘Malaise’ and ‘malice’, there is nothing really wrong at all with the name itself as such. It is a perfectly good Christian name, though less often met with than others.

  58. says

    You are spot on, Max.

    Given that the Christian Copts are the indigenous people of Egypt facing genocide, Malaise Ruthven has quite a hide to call “Nakoula a militant Coptic separatist”.

    The impoverished, disenfranchised Copts survive under piles of garbage in Cairo, in other areas they are running for their lives from murderous muslim mobs.

    However, that would put Malaise firmly in the camp of Islam. We should regard him as an enemy agent.

  59. says

    Well, I’m a “Pehudnik” (a nudnik with a Ph.D.) in political science myself.

    Frankly, I’ve grown so worried about the future of First Amendment rights under this administration that, much as Romney’s tax plan amounts to taxing the upper middle class to subsidize the upper class, and much as Romney is pretty much a lightweight in international affairs, I’m still voting for him over the O.

  60. says

    Thanks Sheik.

    How ’bout this creep’s appropo name:

    Malaise (/məˈleɪz/ mal-AZE) is a feeling of general discomfort or uneasiness, of being “out of sorts”, often the first indication of an infection or other disease

  61. says

    Thanks Sheik.

    How ’bout this creep’s appropo name:

    Malaise (/məˈleɪz/ mal-AZE) is a feeling of general discomfort or uneasiness, of being “out of sorts”, often the first indication of an infection or other disease

  62. says

    Wayene, you say:

    “Danny,my liberal friend ,Do you post rot for attention? Are you a muslim?What is your motivation?I,ve read some of your post and you seem like a intelligent person just misguided!”

    Muslim? Well, not enough evidence at the point. Hasn’t (yet) discussed an urge to behead those who disagree with him.

    No, manner of speech indicates more likely a standard Chomskyite, corroborated by total lack of coherence/common sense whatsoever. Intelligent? no way (contradicts previous finding…) Childish, appears to be the closest assessment.

    And, btw, yes, he IS awfully misguided, e.g., about the treatment those designated “Palestinians” get in Arab countries. He may need to google ‘palestinians refugees Lebanon Jordan’ before replying, except he can’t. You see, “Truth Hurts…”

  63. says

    dumbledores, interesting info about the name “Malise”. Ruthven has also written books about Scotland, so he probably has familial roots that have earned that name, even if he has lived a life that shames and betrays his own heritage.

    The “ise” part referring to “Jesus” puts one in mind of the Arabic “Issa” (though the apter comparison, of course, would be the Greek “Iesous”, which in any event is where Muslims stole it from).

    Still, the name “Malise” reminds one of “valise” and “malice” — a Julian Assange-ish association perfect for Ruthven — and furthermore sounds like the kind of name Madonna would choose for her son and/or daughter.

  64. says

    Karl Pov wrote:

    In his article (not including in the Jihad Watch summary), Ruthven suggests that “[c]ritical analysis of the Quran that challenges the myths surrounding the primal figures of Islam is another story entirely,” and allowable whereas the “insults” should not be. I don’t see Islamic authorities making any such distinction.
    ………………………….

    Karl, I believe this is a “distinction” without a difference. Pious Muslims have also threatened to kill Robert Spencer for his scholarly, carefully researched questioning of the existence of the historical Muhammed, for instance.

    Several questions arise: firstly, who is to judge whether a piece qualifies as “critical analysis” or just “insults”? For instance, figures like Mark Steyn and David Wood practice solid scholarship, but leaven their presentations with an ironic sense of humor. So”would works such as theirs be “allowable” or not?

    But more to the point, even, is that while such distinctions might matter to Malise Ruthven, they *do not matter to pious Muslims*, as you note.

    Whether a perceived insult is fine literature, rigorous academic scholarship, rarefied irony, inept film making, or crude humor matters not a whit to touchy Muslims. If we start by censoring the obvious “insults”, we will soon find ourselves faced with having to censor *any* criticism of Islam, no matter how nuanced or considered.

    And here’s another point”why should even “insults” be censored in the free West? We can insult politicians, royalty, pundits, and public figures of all sorts. Why should “Allah and his Prophet” be exempt?

    It is obvious that they should not”and this would be the case even if they were not such appalling figures to begin with.

    I cannot, in fact, conceive of any figures more deserving of both considered criticism *and* of insult.

  65. says

    Danny, or Abdual, or perhaps the best would be Danual, again makes a fool of himself.

    “True Islam teaches brotherhood among human being ! That is what I learned by reading and that is what my understanding from various Islamic writing.”

    Islam teaches hatred of non-muslims, and if you actually had read islamic writing, you would know that. Or you are merely lying, again.

    _____

    “Furthermore, “It is Islam that says: If you kill one innocent human being, that is like killing the whole humanity. ”

    The context of that poor quote turns it around rather badly for you, Danual… And islam does not consider non-muslims to be human. Obvious in the way it treats them.

    ______

    “Now, all you guys, or commonly known as foot soldiers of right wing Zionist, some of you don’t even believe in any religion. You came to these ISLAMOPHOBIA spreading sites as this one and act like you are scholar in Islam, Christianity and Judaism.”

    Your english is extremely poor. Schools in the middle east are really deficient, are they not? You act like you are ignorant about ALL relgions, and lie about islam.

    ____________

    “As an example, I can point out Zionist terrorist settlers violence in Hebron, occupied Palestine. Violence against Palestinians over there are a daily matter, it is happening 24/7.”

    Shouldn’t refer to Hebron…. Muslims slaughteed their jewish neighbours there around 85 years ago. Typical for islam. And yes, the jews are on guard 24/7, due to islamic terrorism.

    ____
    I feel sad for the Palestinian victims.

    The true palesinians are the jews. The arab victims of islam, you have no sympathy for. You and those like you are the ones exploiting and murdering them.

  66. says

    “danny” wrote:

    True Islam teaches brotherhood among human being ! That is what I learned by reading and that is what my understanding from various Islamic writing.

    Furthermore, “It is Islam that says: If you kill one innocent human being, that is like killing the whole humanity. ”
    …………………………….

    That would be Qur’an 5:32:

    “On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.”

    In other words, this is not an indication of the peacefulness of Muslims, but rather *yet another warning to the Jews*.

    That this passage is intended as a threat to the Jews is made even clearer in the following verse, Qur’an 5:33:

    “The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter”.

    Are you ignorant of the fact that many readers here are fully aware of this Sura?

    More:

    Now, all you guys, or commonly known as foot soldiers of right wing Zionist, some of you don’t even believe in any religion. You came to these ISLAMOPHOBIA spreading sites as this one and act like you are scholar in Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

    I understand it is your duty paid or unpaid to spread ISLAMOPHOBIA on behalf of extreme right wing Zionist or maybe ministry of foreign affairs of Israel and so-called Christian fundamentalist popularly known as Amen corner that must lead to shift of western public opinion, so that a large war and relentless violence can take place in the middle-east.
    …………………………….

    Like many pious Muslims, you happily conflate atheism and Christianity. And why not? Muslims consider both equally Kufr.

    I notice that you don’t even bother to address the attempts by Muslims and their useful idiots to crush freedom of expression in the West. As usual, you like to pretend that Israel is the only issue here.

    But long before Israel ever existed, Muslims were oppressing and slaughtering Infidels. And one of the cornerstones of that oppression is to prevent any criticism of Islam”especially by “filthy Infidels”.

    Incidentally, there is *already* relentless violence in the Middle East”and most other parts of Dar-al-Islam. Violence against Jews, against Christians, and against other-sect Muslims”and all of it waged by violent Muslims.

    So you can just take your bullsh*t elsewhere.

  67. says

    QUOTE
    The sadist Allah (e.g. Q.10:4, 6:70) hates Christians & freedom of speech
    (1st Amendment U.S.)

    Q. 5:73 “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity (God of Christians, highest sin: shirk): for there is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.”

    Q.9:5 “KILL the unbelievers (mushrikun) wherever ye find them”
    through Q.8:12 beheading

    http://schnellmann.org/hr-resolution-16-18-criminalisation-of-criticism-of-islam.html

    ENDOFQUOTE

    You can imagine how they see us, those who follow the Ancient Ways and the Ancient Gods & Goddesses.
    Trouble is…Paganism survived the purges and near exterminations of centuries past. We learned from that.
    We stand with our fellow opponents of the islamofascism spreading across the world.
    How do Pagans feel about 1st Amendment??
    It’s an inherent, natural Birthright that belongs to every Human being as an Innate Right of Being.
    islam, muslims and such…need to stop whining and tantrumming like snotty-nosed toddlers with loaded pants.
    They need to grow up, stop behaving in such a disgraceful and undignified infantile manner, realize that Life is NOT all about them, and realize that they must share this world with others, or the bulk of Humanity will turn on them as Humans do whenever anything crosses the line into becoming a threat to the species.
    If that happens–islam will be a footnote, at best, and islam’s own damned fault.

  68. says

    re ‘Malise’ being the kind of name Madonna would choose…well, she named her actual daughter ‘Lourdes’ after the Catholic pilgrimage site.

    Not sure she’d go for ‘Malise’.

    It’s just a very old-fashioned Scottish name.

    Here’s one historic ‘Malise’, from 13th century Scotland.

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

    “Malise mac Gilleain (circa 1250 – 1300) was the second chief of Clan Maclean. He was loyal to Alexander III of Scotland and expelled Haakon IV of Norway from Scotland.”

    Here’s another:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maol_�osa_II,_Earl_of_Strathearn

    Note that the name is a two-word phrase, maol + iosa. ‘Iosa’ (which then, in the anglicised version of the name, becomes -ise) is simply the *Gaelic* way of rendering the name ‘Jesus’ (which of course originally, in Hebrew, Aramaic and then in its Greek versiion, had a soft initial Y sound, not a hard ‘J’). Nothing to do with Arabic.

    Here’s another medieval/ early renaissance Scots ‘Malise:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malise_Graham,_1st_Earl_of_Menteith

    And as for ‘Ruthven’ – I’d seen it before, as a street name in an Australian town, presumably given in honour of an early pioneer. Who would have been a Scot, surnamed Ruthven…

    Result of one preliminary internet search: “This [Ruthven] is a famous Scottish clan surname. It is locational from the barony of Ruthven in the former county of Angus. In the ancient charters of Scotland, the original family were recorded in the register of the abbey of Scone as being witnesses to various transfers of land by the royal family of Scotland in the years between 1125 and 1150.”

    I don’t know how common ‘Malise’ would be in modern Scotland; but it would probably not raise eyebrows.

    I’d hazard the guess that his parents were proud of / interested in their Scottish ancestry. ‘Malise’, for all we know, may be a family name, given in honour of a grandfather or great-uncle or such.

    The one thing that is in fact not at all offensive about this guy, is his name. His Scottish ancestors are probably wincing with shame at the sight of his grovelling to Mohammedan tantrums; he had better watch out or the family ghosts will come visiting him in his dreams.

  69. says

    ” ‘Iosa’ (which then, in the anglicised version of the name, becomes -ise) is simply the *Gaelic* way of rendering the name ‘Jesus’ (which of course originally, in Hebrew, Aramaic and then in its Greek versiion, had a soft initial Y sound, not a hard ‘J’). Nothing to do with Arabic.”

    Nothing to do with Arabic; however the Arabic “Issa” has everything to do with the Greek rendering of the Hebrew/Aramaic. In the Koran it’s a loan-word (as are the names of the Old Testament prophets whenver mentioned).

  70. says

    ” ‘Iosa’ (which then, in the anglicised version of the name, becomes -ise) is simply the *Gaelic* way of rendering the name ‘Jesus’ (which of course originally, in Hebrew, Aramaic and then in its Greek versiion, had a soft initial Y sound, not a hard ‘J’). Nothing to do with Arabic.”

    Yes — nothing to do with Arabic; however the Arabic “Issa” has everything to do with the Greek rendering of the Hebrew/Aramaic. In the Koran it’s a loan-word (as are the names of the Old Testament prophets whenver mentioned); or a “take-word”.

  71. says

    ” ‘Iosa’ (which then, in the anglicised version of the name, becomes -ise) is simply the *Gaelic* way of rendering the name ‘Jesus’ (which of course originally, in Hebrew, Aramaic and then in its Greek versiion, had a soft initial Y sound, not a hard ‘J’). Nothing to do with Arabic.”

    Yes — nothing to do with Arabic; however the Arabic “Issa” has everything to do with the Greek rendering of the Hebrew/Aramaic. In the Koran it’s a loan-word (as are the names of the Old Testament prophets whenver mentioned); or a “take-word”.