Huffington Post likens "Prophet Muhammad" to George Washington

You remember when George Washington made the British line up beside a trench and beheaded 900 of them, don't you? And when he consummated his marriage with John Adams' nine-year-old daughter?

I had to laugh: "Huff Po Off the Rails: Touts 'Connection' between 'Prophet Muhammad' and George Washington," by Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs, January 12:

I've pointed out many times here at Atlas how compromised and pro-jihad the Huff Po is, but this is ridiculous, starting with the "Prophet" Muhammad reference in the headline. He ain't my prophet.

It's to vomit. Muhammad and George Washington are polar opposites. A man of honor who respected human life and refused the title of king and a bloody warlord who preached conquest, subjugation and slavery.

An Unlikely Connection Between the Prophet Muhammad and George Washington Puff Ho 01/10/2013 2:55 pm

In seventh century Arabia, a middle-aged man had a vision to create a new religious and social order for a largely pagan and tribal society. The man, Muhammad, told his band of followers to behave wisely and civilly. "The best among you," he said, "are those who have the best manners and character." More than 1,000 years later, Muhammad's wisdom would be echoed again, this time in the British colony of Virginia, by a 13-year-old schoolboy jotting down a lengthy set of behavioral rules that would later be published as "Rules of Civility." The schoolboy was none other than George Washington, who would one day become the first president of the United States of America.

"Some people from `Uraina tribe came to Medina and its climate did not suit them, so Allah's Apostle (pbuh) allowed them to go to the herd of camels (given as Zakat) and they drank their milk and urine (as medicine) but they killed the shepherd and drove away all the camels. So Allah's Apostle sent (men) in their pursuit to catch them, and they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut, and their eyes were branded with heated pieces of iron and they were left in the Harra (a stony place at Medina) biting the stones." (Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 24, Number 577)

Muhammad and Washington may seem like an unlikely connection, but in fact, they share strikingly similar biographies. Muhammad and Washington were students of history, restorers of justice and fierce warriors who led their respective nations through successful revolutions. Both men united a large swath of political territory and served as the founding father for two unprecedented social movements -- Islam and the United States of America -- whose universal ideals would both spread throughout the world respectively.

"The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)." (Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88)

Washington's contemporary, Richard Henry Lee, once said that he was "first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen." Washington's nemesis, Britain's King George III, said that Washington was "placed in a light the most distinguished of any man living" and had "the greatest character of the age." Similarly, Muslims worldwide see Muhammad as the perfect human being. In "The Prophet of Islam," Professor K.S. Rao said we witnessed "the union of the theorist, the organizer and the leader" in him. Even a non-Muslim, such as Mohatma Gandhi, called Muhammad "a treasure of wisdom not only for Muslims but for all mankind."

"Narrated Abu Huraira: 'Allah's Apostle said, "If anyone of you performs ablution he should put water in his nose and then blow it out and whoever cleans his private parts with stones should do so with odd numbers. And whoever wakes up from his sleep should wash his hands before putting them in the water for ablution, because nobody knows where his hands were during sleep."'" (Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 4, Number 163)

The connection between Muhammad and Washington can be explored further in the Holy Quran, the Islamic Scripture which documents God's revelations to Muhammad, and "Rules of Civility," a book which outlines Washington's advice for the proper conduct of young American gentlemen. For Muslims, the Holy Quran is the literal word of God, while "Rules of Civility" is less concerned with religious affairs and more focused on social rules and behavior. The Holy Quran and "Rules of Civility" have different frames, but both texts -- in a wider sense -- offer guidance toward achieving a more peaceful and noble life.

"Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: 'Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' "'" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 176)

"Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." (Qur'an 9:29)

Muhammad and Washington advised their peers to keep their mouths free of foul language. In the Holy Quran, offensive name-calling is forbidden: "Let not some men among you laugh at others ... Nor defame nor be sarcastic to each other, nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames: Ill-seeming is a name connecting wickedness" (49:11). In "Rules of Civility," Washington said "[u]se no reproachful language against anyone, neither curse nor revile" (Rule 49). He added: "[s]peak not injurious words, neither in jest nor earnest" and "[s]coff at no one, although they give occasion" (Rule 65). Muhammad and Washington taught their peers to improve relations with others by using kindness and positive words. Both men hoped that using civil language would help groups avoid misunderstandings and create a more harmonious society.

"Many are the Jinns and men we have made for Hell: They have hearts wherewith they understand not, eyes wherewith they see not, and ears wherewith they hear not. They are like cattle, nay more misguided: for they are heedless (of warning)." (Qur'an 7:179)

Along with his affinity for modest language, Washington also wrote about the importance of a modest appearance. "In your apparel, be modest and endeavor to accommodate nature rather than to procure admiration" (Rule 52), he wrote. "Keep to the fashion of your equals, such as are civil and orderly, with respect to times and places" (Rule 52). Modesty is also a theme in the Holy Quran: "Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and to be mindful of their chastity; in this they will be more considerate for their own well-being and purity..." (24:30-31). The Holy Quran requests that women "not display the charms of their bodies beyond what may be apparent thereof; hence, let them draw their head-coverings over their bosoms" (24:31). Muhammad and Washington wanted their peers to dress appropriately because a modest and clean appearance is an indication of healthy inner feelings and humble attitudes.

"Alqama and Aswad reported: A person stayed in the house of A'isha and in the morning began to wash his garment. A'isha said: In case you saw it (i. e. drop of semen), it would have served the purpose (of purifying the garment) if you had simply washed that spot; and in case you did not see it, it would have been enough to sprinkle water around it, for when I saw that on the garment of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). I simply scraped it off and he offered prayer, while putting that on." (Muslim, Book 2, Number 566)

Muhammad and Washington also believed in the virtue of humility. The Holy Qur'an states that "(t)he servants of the Merciful are those who walk on the earth in humility" (25:63) and that the "(s)uccessful indeed are the believers who humble themselves in their prayers" (23:02). In Islam, there is even the term ujb, which warns mankind of arrogance and the danger of exaggerating one's accomplishments. Comparatively, Washington believed that "a man ought not to value himself of his achievements or rare qualities, his riches, his titles, his virtue or his kindred" (Rule 63). The humility of Muhammad and Washington was crucial to the early success of their fledgling nations. The direction of the Arab and American society could have had a much different history if Muhammad and Washington were egotistical and presumptuous leaders.

"Abu Huraira reported many ahadith from Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and one is that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: I am most close to Jesus, son of Mary, among the whole of mankind in this worldly life and the next life. They said: Allah's Messenger how is it? Thereupon he said: Prophets are brothers in faith, having different mothers. Their religion is, however, one and there is no Apostle between us (between I and Jesus Christ)." (Muslim, Book 30, Number 5836)

Respect, especially for one's parents, is also mentioned in the Holy Quran and "Rules of Civility." Washington wrote that people should "[h]onor and obey" our natural parents, "although they may be poor" (Rule 108). Similarly, the Holy Quran calls for "good treatment" of parents: "Whether one of both of them reach old age [while] with you, say not to them [so much as] 'oof' [i.e., an expression of irritation] and do not repel them but speak to them a nobel word" (17:23-24). Muhammad and Washington understood the correlation between high character and respect. Both men realized that the key to a strong society is for people, especially families, to treat each other how they wished to be treated.

"Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibrahim (Abraham) and those with him, when they said to their people: 'Verily, we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allah, we have rejected you, and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred for ever, until you believe in Allah Alone.'" (Qur'an 60:4)

While it may appear as an obscure similarity, Muhammad and Washington also cared a great deal about good hygiene. The Holy Quran, for example, states that, "Allah ... loves those who keep themselves pure and clean" (2:22). Similarly, in "Rules of Civility," Washington wrote that people should keep their "nails clean and short, and your hands and teeth clean, yet without showing any concern for them" (Rule 15). Washington added that people should wear clean clothing: "Wear not your clothes foul, ripped or dusty ... and take heed that you approach not to any uncleaness" (Rule 51). Both Muhammad and Washington stressed the importance of maintaining a clean, well-presented physical appearance. They believed that good hygiene was a projection of a positive body image, which, in turn, reflected a healthy mind.

"Narrated 'Aisha: 'I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).'" (Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 4, Number 229)

Ultimately, Muhammad and Washington were gentlemen of the highest degree. This is no more evident than in the connection between them in the Holy Quran and "Rules of Civility." Perhaps Muslims worldwide and American could forge better relations if each group adhered to the advice Muhammad and Washington provided.

Ultimately, the PuffHo is dhimmi asshattery of the highest degree. This is no more evident than in this article.
| 40 Comments
del.icio.us | Digg this | Email | FaceBook | Twitter | Print | Tweet

40 Comments

| Leave a comment

Just when you thought that jihadi-dhimmi lies could not get any more shameless, then something like this comes along.
Soon the whole of the Muslim-Leftist alliance will have noses so big that they'll be walking around and smacking into walls.

Just as one should conclude the opposite of what Karl Marx asserted if you're trying to figure out how the world really works, so should this be done with the Huffington Post.

Another example of the curious Islamic inferiority complex, whereby they often aren't comfortable making the case for Islam and Muhammad on their own terms via the Quran and Islamic history, but instead have to try to compare them to and make analogies with respected Western figures, institutions or historical developments. It seems that, at least subconsciously, Muslims understand that Muhammad as a man doesn't warrant the praise that Islam bestows on him. Can you imagine a Christian apologist trying to make the case for Jesus by equating him with some secular Arab ruler?

If x = y and y = z, then x = z.

Geo. Washington is America’s Mohammed.

Castro = GW = Mohammed = Castro

Traitors have always infested the MSM and Washington DC,

from http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=912.
The New York Times had been singing Castro's praises since the first interview with him as a rebel in February 1957. By now most of the international press had joined the cheerleading. Jack Paar never treated a guest on his Tonight Show as deferentially as he treated honored guest Fidel Castro. Ed Sullivan [yes, THAT Ed Sullivan] hailed Castro as "Cuba's George Washington." Retired president Harry Truman called Castro a "good young man trying to do what's best for Cuba. We should extend him a hand." The U.S. actually accorded diplomatic recognition to Castro's government more quickly than it had recognized Batista's in 1952. In fact, the promptness of this U.S. recognition set a record for recognition of a Latin American government. Usually the process took weeks; for Castro, it took mere days.

Yet within three months of his entry into Havana, Castro's firing squads had murdered an estimated 600-1,100 men and boys, and Cuba's jails held ten times the number of political prisoners as under Fulgencio Batista, who Castro overthrew with claims to "liberating" Cuba.

Barely a year in power, Castro was referring to the U.S. as "a vulture preying on humanity!" And most of Cuba's newspapers and TV stations (Cuba had more TVs per capita at the time than Germany, Canada or France) were under government control, to better serve "the people." Six months later he confiscated all U.S. properties on the island; 5,911 businesses worth $2 billion worth, along with most property and businesses owned by Cubans.

And let's not forget George Washington's habit of practicing taqqiya!

"Cherry tree? What cherry tree?"

Huffpo clowns!

Leftist incompetence at logic and thinking in general is very striking and very stubborn.

We see here again their constant confusion between superficial similarity and identity.

Washington was a leader and founder, and Mohammed was a leader and founder -- ergo, they must be the same sort of person with the same sorts of goals and virtues, and the same claims on prestige.

They do this sort of thing all the time with respect to all sorts of issues. And it often leads to consequences which would be hilarious if they weren't so grotesquely unjust. For example, punishing children for drawing pictures of guns because ... the picture resembles a gun, and therefore should be treated as a real gun.

It's all very pathetic and disgusting.

And dangerous.

Truth-telling, if it is something that reflects negatively on Islam, Mohammed, or Muslims, is "blasphemy" as far as Islamic supremacists are concerned.

Ah, but this puts Muslims in an odd place.

Muslims, by using or defining negative as understood in the West, are actually acknowledging that the West has set the worldwide standards on discourse concerning moral behavior, and importantly that those standards are in fact the standards of Muslims as well. And further that those standards are BETTER than Islamic standards.

Otherwise, why wouldn't Muslims be proud of Mohammed's character and past behavior if he is, in their view, the perfect man, Insaan-e-Kaamil. Shouldn't they be rejoicing in all of his behaviors especially his worldly lusts; his sexual lusts, his lust of the property of others, his lust for vengeance? In the Islamic view of reality, these things are worthy of imitation, a fact which Muslims regard highly by doing just that, imitating their last "prophet."

And shouldn't Muslims feel esteemed, certainly not offended, that we non-Muslims are recognizing Mohammed's character if in fact his character and behavior are, as Muslims believe, admirable?

Consequently there's no need for Muslims to be angry when anyone, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, recognize that Mohammed did these things. Muslims should justifiably take pride in their messenger.

But oddly they don't. Muslims go wild when Mohammed's historically-proven character and actual behavior are exposed because it shows Mo to be a reprehensible individual, but reprehensible only if Western standards are used. His character in Islamic eyes is perfect, and therefore couldn’t be reprehensible.

I suppose, when things really get down to the nub, that we should be flattered on two scores: even Muslims KNOW that Mohammed was despicable; and even Muslims recognize that Westerns morality standards are superior. Otherwise why would Muslims want to hide from sight so many of the KNOWN and PROVABLE anti-social traits of their prophet. They simply can't admit it - though they KNOW it - because doing so would cause the pretend fantasy world that Islam-is-perfect to come crashing down around their heads.

"Perhaps Muslims worldwide and American could forge better relations if each group adhered to the advice Muhammad and Washington provided."

But Muslims worldwide do adhere to the advice and example Muhammad provided. They murder, enslave, torture, maim, rape, rob, lie, cheat the kuffar whenever and wherever possible. Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to help forging better relations with the kuffar. No doubt it must be the kuffar's failure to adhere to Washington's advice that is the reason for such lamentable state of relations between moslems and Americans. Americans need to do something about it. Hopefully, Huffington ComPost will let us know which of Washingto's advices American's fail to adhere to, so the situation may be corrected soon.

Geo Washington never told a lie...End of story...Who ever wrote that fairy tale must have been visited in the night by Lilith dressed up as Gabriel...

For starters, muhammad was not a true prophet of God, but instead a false wannabe prophet who lied, stole, murdered, raped a young girl, and every other sin known to man ...okay so muhammad was more like the prophet from hell!

And then to liken this evil man to one as respectable as George Washington is laughable. I would say that muhammad is more like Adolf Hitler, but even he was an angel compared to muhammad. I don't think anyone will ever measure up to evil muhammad ..except of course when the man of sin appears: the antichrist. Then finally a man more evil than muhammad will have arrived.

I detect idol worship and shirk in that pump up Mahounds image piece...No mention of Allah, only his book...Allahu Akbar has been replaced with Mahound Akbar...What an insult to Mahound, comparing him to a filthy kuffar, as though they were somehow equals...Blasphemy!!! Punish the offender...

Every time I read or hear the muslims praising their pedophile prophet, I feel I would like to vomit. It is sooo stupid. And now a dhimmi does the same, what a moron. So I usually stop reading after a few lines before I upset my stomach.

My dogs are much better than Muhammad, definitely. My dogs are loyal never betray me like what Muhammad did to his companies, never bite me when I sleep like Muhammad's assasins who killed people when they were sleeping, never had sex with puppies like Muhammad did to Aisha, never lie, etc. Doggy akbar, praise the dogs. LOL

About the only thing both Washington and "prophet Mohammad" had in common was that both were slave owners. All we have to say that Washington wasn't an avid slaver is heresay evidence. Otherwise he was more than willing to sign stuff like The Fugitive Slave Act and the Naturalization Act (only whites could become citizens) and arming slave owners fighting in the Haiti Slave Rebellion.

But of course The Huff-Po has no interest in making the only legit connection there is.

Something tells me that Muhammad would never have gone into retirement saying that two terms as President were enough for anyone. Muhammad strikes me as more the prototype of the Third World "Great Leader"; and isn't it interesting that after the USA got back on track with the 22d Amendment, it takes a Party with a President with a soft spot for Islam to even suggest doing away with Presidential term limits!

Didn't George Washington prescribe horse urine as a cure to common ailments? Didn't he capture the widow of a British general that he had killed, marry her at gunpoint and consummate that very night? Didn't he have a pregnant poet who criticized him murdered by one of his lackeys? Didn't he get aroused seeing his daughter-in-law having a bath and get his son to divorce her so that he could marry her himself? Didn't he sometimes attend his war councils in semen stained clothes?

Citing Gandhi, who was a 'kapo'-Hindu, to coin a phrase, is rich, since Gandhi reveled in sacrificing Hindu lives in order to persuade the world how secular/tolerant he was.

Hey Guys!

I'm an Indian man, living in the UK.
I have been reading Jihad Watch for 4 years now.
I'm not a great writer, but do enjoy reading Robert Spencer and the people who blog here.

Most of the comments on here are brilliant apart from the trolls.

But I guess the Trolls are desperately needed, so we can have some fun.
I try my best to refer people to Robert's website.

I do read a lot and feel the world is opening their eyes.

Good wishes to you all.


The Huff Po writer of this piece (of shit) is Craig Considine, no mere ingenue in the realm of DhimmIslamopologist spin: less than a month ago he wrote a puff piece on Akbar Ahmed -- (we could call Considine a Huff Po Puff Ho) -- and also worked as "film director and research assistant" for Akbar Ahmed's doubtlessly Dawa-&-Taqiyya-riddled propaganda film Journey into America: The Challenge of Islam.

Unfortunately, Akbar Ahmed ("current Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic studies at American University") with his impressive resume that goes on pages and pages hoodwinks many, many Americans (and indeed Westerners) -- including innumerable Christians in high and middle places.

Hugh Fitzgerald has written at least twice about him, and if you Google Akbar Ahmed and Jihad Watch you will find a few runs-in Spencer has had with him.

For more info, see:

Liberal Christians and Islam

Greetings, Darsh! :)

Greetings to you Champ!

I read so many of the comments on this website, that I rephrase to me friends and colleagues at work. I have been better armored to defend what is right and what is evil.

The people who blog on here ....do contribute so much to the cause.

Great work by everyone on this website, especially Robert Spencer, Raymond Ibrahim & Pamela Geller.

I hope you are all having a good day.


LOL..sorry !

Defend the right and expose evil.(correction)

What a silly, fantasy loaded apologia that piece was. I posted a comment on the blog, pointing out how strange a comparison the author makes. At this rate HuffPo will be great reading within the fantasy-fiction genre.

Wow. CC is a lost cause. I went over to the HuffPo site and read the comments, most of which were contemptuous of his nonsense. He replied to a couple shamelessly condescendingly and without substance, while thanking the Muslims who praised him in a grovelling fashion.
That Muslims praised him is actually quite funny. With infidel Yanks like Washington appearing on the scene with no prompting from angels or Allah himself, who needs Mohammed?!

You remember when George Washington was brestfed by his UNCLE, don't you?
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2013/01/breastfeeding-la-muhammad.html

George Washington and...MUHAMMAD? Really, how can anyone write something so outlandish with a straight face? Perhaps Considine can gin-up similarities betwen Hitler and Mother Theresa? Of course he could!

Huffington Post likens "Prophet Muhammad" to George Washington

You remember when George Washington made the British line up beside a trench and beheaded 900 of them, don't you? And when he consummated his marriage with John Adams' nine-year-old daughter?
..............................

Yup—just the sort of comparisons I was going to make. This is just grotesque.

More:

In seventh century Arabia, a middle-aged man had a vision to create a new religious and social order for a largely pagan and tribal society. The man, Muhammad, told his band of followers to behave wisely and civilly. "The best among you," he said, "are those who have the best manners and character."
..............................

Does anyone at HuffPo have the wits to ask what sort of "character" the loathsome "Prophet" of Islam is praising? Of course not—but it included caravan raiding, pressing victims into slaver, including sex slaver, raping, pedophilia, and killing without conscience.

Not exactly the sort of character George Washington espoused.

More:

More than 1,000 years later, Muhammad's wisdom would be echoed again, this time in the British colony of Virginia, by a 13-year-old schoolboy jotting down a lengthy set of behavioral rules that would later be published as "Rules of Civility." The schoolboy was none other than George Washington, who would one day become the first president of the United States of America.
..............................

Excuse me...I'm going to hurl...

More:

Both men united a large swath of political territory and served as the founding father for two unprecedented social movements -- Islam and the United States of America -- whose universal ideals would both spread throughout the world respectively.
..............................

Might as well throw in Genghis Khan and Joseph Stalin, if that's the only criteria...

More:
More:

The connection between Muhammad and Washington can be explored further in the Holy Quran, the Islamic Scripture which documents God's revelations to Muhammad, and "Rules of Civility," a book which outlines Washington's advice for the proper conduct of young American gentlemen. For Muslims, the Holy Quran is the literal word of God, while "Rules of Civility" is less concerned with religious affairs and more focused on social rules and behavior. The Holy Quran and "Rules of Civility" have different frames, but both texts -- in a wider sense -- offer guidance toward achieving a more peaceful and noble life.
..............................

Well, yes—if part of what you consider a "noble life" includes genocide and raping small children...

More:

Along with his affinity for modest language, Washington also wrote about the importance of a modest appearance. "In your apparel, be modest and endeavor to accommodate nature rather than to procure admiration" (Rule 52), he wrote. "Keep to the fashion of your equals, such as are civil and orderly, with respect to times and places" (Rule 52). Modesty is also a theme in the Holy Quran: "Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and to be mindful of their chastity; in this they will be more considerate for their own well-being and purity..." (24:30-31). The Holy Quran requests that women "not display the charms of their bodies beyond what may be apparent thereof; hence, let them draw their head-coverings over their bosoms" (24:31). Muhammad and Washington wanted their peers to dress appropriately because a modest and clean appearance is an indication of healthy inner feelings and humble attitudes.
..............................

Did George Washington also stone women to death who failed to stick to his standards of modesty? I think not...

More:

Respect, especially for one's parents, is also mentioned in the Holy Quran and "Rules of Civility." Washington wrote that people should "[h]onor and obey" our natural parents, "although they may be poor" (Rule 108). Similarly, the Holy Quran calls for "good treatment" of parents...
..............................

Is that so? Here's how a Muslim cleric suggested that his pious followers treat their Infidel parents:

"#MyJihad in Tanzania: Muslim cleric tells converts to bury their Christian parents as if they were dead dogs"

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/01/myjihad-in-tanzania-muslim-cleric-tells-converts-to-bury-their-christian-parents-as-if-they-were-dea.html

Boston Tea Party wrote:

Another example of the curious Islamic inferiority complex, whereby they often aren't comfortable making the case for Islam and Muhammad on their own terms via the Quran and Islamic history, but instead have to try to compare them to and make analogies with respected Western figures, institutions or historical developments. It seems that, at least subconsciously, Muslims understand that Muhammad as a man doesn't warrant the praise that Islam bestows on him. Can you imagine a Christian apologist trying to make the case for Jesus by equating him with some secular Arab ruler?

Lorenzo Pilaf wrote, replying to Boston Tea Party:

Truth-telling, if it is something that reflects negatively on Islam, Mohammed, or Muslims, is "blasphemy" as far as Islamic supremacists are concerned.

Ah, but this puts Muslims in an odd place.

Muslims, by using or defining negative as understood in the West, are actually acknowledging that the West has set the worldwide standards on discourse concerning moral behavior, and importantly that those standards are in fact the standards of Muslims as well. And further that those standards are BETTER than Islamic standards.

Otherwise, why wouldn't Muslims be proud of Mohammed's character and past behavior if he is, in their view, the perfect man, Insaan-e-Kaamil. Shouldn't they be rejoicing in all of his behaviors especially his worldly lusts; his sexual lusts, his lust of the property of others, his lust for vengeance? In the Islamic view of reality, these things are worthy of imitation, a fact which Muslims regard highly by doing just that, imitating their last "prophet."

And shouldn't Muslims feel esteemed, certainly not offended, that we non-Muslims are recognizing Mohammed's character if in fact his character and behavior are, as Muslims believe, admirable?...
..................................

Interesting points, Boston Tea Party and Lorenzo Pilaf.

Here's my take on the issue: I believe that while some few more decent Muslims *are* rather discomfitted by Muhammed's terrible evil, that most of them really do admire his awful savagery.

Why, then, the dissembling?

I believe it is no more than a matter of Taqiyya. Pious Muslims may have the greatest respect for the vile "Prophet"—but they know that Infidels don't—not if they have the straight dope on him, in any case.

Hence, they welcome idiocy like that from the Huffington Post. Anything that makes it easier for Muslims to make headway in the West works for them.

The reason I believe this is the case is that Muslims certainly don't both with the whitewash when they are in full power—they are more than happy to threaten Infidels with Muhammed's terrible violence, they are more than happy to cite Muhammed's pedophilia when it comes to justifying the rape of 9-year-old girls, and they are more than happy to quote justifications of slavery and sex slavery.

I also don't believe that Muslims mind admitting that Muhammed did the4se terrible things—but they insist that such acknowlegment be in the form of praise.

Hence, it is fine to note that Muhammed raided caravans—but this must be put in terms of his being a 'great strategist'—*not* a vile warlord.

But in the face of civilized Infidels, Muslims realize that they have to whitewash the the profound ugliness of Islam, lest Infidels become too alarmed and fight back.

As loathsome—and terribly dangerous—as Taqiyya is, it is a back-handed acknowledgment of our being free people—for now, at least.

Supremacist Muslims screaming "Jew, Jew, the army of Muhammed is returning!" is exhibiting none of these niceties.

If Muslims ever come into full power here in the West, you can bet that they won't bother to compare the vile "Prophet" to George Washington—or any other respected Infidel.

The bizarre and blatant context dropping that was necessary before constructing the so-called 'reasoning' for this article is appalling.

It's thought processes like this guys that make me have no respect for anyone with a college degree in the "Liberal Arts".

Here is a response that I tried to post on the Huffington Post, but the moderator refused to post it:


Mr. Considine, is your next article going to cover the uncanny, warm and fuzzy similarities between German NAZI leader Adolf Hitler and Indian nationalist and non-violent spiritual leader Mahatma Gandhi??

Or perhaps, the Cambodian communist leader of the Khmer Rouge Pol Pot and Walt Disney?

Or how about Ghengis Khan and Mickey Mouse?

Or the Chinese communist statesman Zhou Enlai and the Cookie Monster??

Here is an idea for you...the ruthless Soviet statesman Joseph Stalin and Tinker Belle!!

Why didn't you mention in your article the more than 270,000,000 (Yes, that is 270 MILLION) non-believers (non-Muslims known as Kuffar) have been murdered in the name of Islam over the last 1400 years!!! Since Muslims attacked and killed almost 3,000 Americans on 9/11 there have been over 22,000 recorded and documented acts of violent jihad against non-Muslims!!

You conveniently left out that the so-called "religion" of Islam is a violent dualistic totalitarian, supremacist, ideology of racism, bigotry, hatred, misogyny, pedophilia, child rape, honor killings, institionalized anti-Semitism, slavery, genocide, subjugation, domination, terrorism, deceit, lies, disinformation, dissembling, propaganda (taqiyya and kitman), mass murder, war crimes, and has a history of the domination, subjugation, and the annihilation of all native Western cultures.

Quite frankly, from the Muslim perspective, you are nothing more than a "useful idiot" doing their dirty work in their agenda against the West...America and Israel, in particular. Time for you to remove your "veil of ignorance" and go back to school, because you must have been sleeping through your classes on Islam.

Actually, talking about misunderstood characters, Genghiz Khan fits that bill perfectly. He was expanding his empire - par for the course at the time - and did send envoys to various rulers trying to set up agreements. The khan of Khwarzheim - today's Turkmenistan area south of the Aral Sea - beheaded one or more of his messengers. After that, Genghiz took that as a declaration of war and set off on a military campaign against the Muslims. Yeah, the methods the Mongols used were barbaric, but didn't even come close to those employed by Muslims. They got along fine w/ the conquered peoples, unless the conquered peoples tried to sabotage them - like they tried in Herat. Yeah, the Mongols sacked Baghdad, Allepo and a lot of Muslim cities, but since the bulk of the accounts here come from Muslim historians, they've more likely than not tarred the Mongols just like they tar the Israelis.

If the Mongols were really as barbaric as has been alleged about them, they would have wiped out Islam from Turan, Iran and even West Asia.

As if their credibility wasn't already in the sewer. It does serve some good, in as much as we can now legitimately point out that they have compared mad dog mo to George Washington, and then talk abot some of mo's track record.

Quote:

Here is a response that I tried to post on the Huffington Post, but the moderator refused to post it:


Mr. Considine, is your next article going to cover the uncanny, warm and fuzzy similarities between German NAZI leader Adolf Hitler and Indian nationalist and non-violent spiritual leader Mahatma Gandhi??

Or perhaps, the Cambodian communist leader of the Khmer Rouge Pol Pot and Walt Disney?

unquote

So you tried to post this reply but the admins refused to accept it?
In the interest of free speech they should have accepted it, but of course Dhimmis are not interested in free speech. They've already given away their own speech, willingly and cowardly, to the Islamic machine. Do you think that they're interested in letting you keep yours?

I Wish some publication would have the courage to do a more realistic comparison of Mohammed with tyrannical rulers like Hitler and Stalin.
When will honesty prevail the fear of a sword over one's head? Even so called scholars like Bart Ehrman fear for their lives rather than speak the truth about Islam. Shame on them.
The West will pay dearly for it's cowardice someday...

Quite correct, Abraham L. Surely the most important commonality between Muhammad and Washington is the fact that they owned slaves. Remarkable, though not surprising, that the Huffington Post would try to cover up the most obvious and important commonality. I.e., Huffington Post is covering up slavery in order to whitewash Islam--that's how bad things have gotten these days.

While both Muhammad and Washington owned slaves, and both owned black slaves, I'm reasonably sure that Washington would have never agreed with Muhammad on the following:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 46, Number 731:
Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid: The Prophet said, "If a slave-girl (Ama) commits illegal sexual intercourse, scourge her; if she does it again, scourge her again; if she repeats it, scourge her again." The narrator added that on the third or the fourth offence, the Prophet said, "Sell her even for a hair rope."

By the way, the above hadith is considered sahih, is reported in at least the "two sahihs" (Bukhari and Muslim), and is ranked mutawatir. No chance of "invalid hadith" apologetics there, unless the apologist wants to deny the Islamic validity of the entire Hadith per se--which, of course, some of them do, temporarily, for the purposes of debates in front of the infidels.

p.s., and the Huffington post is not just whitewashing, but soft-pedaling, soft-selling Islam.

BTW, the author of this piece which deceptively covers up slavery to soft-sell Islam to the American public was Craig Considine. Here's his blurb:

"Craig Considine is currently a doctoral candidate in the Department of Sociology at Trinity College Dublin. He served as film director and research assistant to Ambassador Akbar Ahmed's unprecedented study Journey into America: The Challenge of Islam. Craig's film-work and photography has been vetted by CNN and his numerous articles on issues relating to religion and American society have been published around the world. He also holds an MS.c. in International Relations from the University of London. Craig's a native of Needham, Massachusetts."

None of the elements of that description surprises me. Indeed, with a profile like that, I'd fall out of my chair if he had wrote anything that showed any aspect of Islam and Muhammad in a less than flattering light.

It is practically impossible that this Considine character does not know that both Washington and Muhammad were slave owners; and yet he is telling us about how they both advocated "hygiene" etc. In other words, when Considine prattles on about hygiene, he knows he's covering up a major evil in Islam. He's mentioning hygiene etc. specifically for the purpose of covering up Muhammad's slavery. He's far worse than a mere fatuous "dhimmi asshat" then; he is actually evil, engaging in deliberate deception, actively working to promote an evil system (Islam) which approves such evils as slavery.

Craig Considine is evil.

Yes, Ghengis Khan does more than qualify as a brutal warlord, just a bit more than Mickey Mouse. Something that the Huff Po writer, and quisling, Mr. Considine could compare, I'm sure! For example, both have two legs, walk in the upright position, both eat lots of cheese, sing and dance, etc. I'm sure Mickey's first wife was 6 years old, that Mickey had lots of cute little mice as sex slaves, etc. I'm sure that his next article will be entitled, "An Unlikely Connection Between the Prophet Muhammad and Mickey Mouse."

An interesting quote that is attributed to Ghengis Khan is, "The greatest happiness is to scatter your enemy and drive him before you. To see his cities reduced to ashes. To see those who love him shrouded in tears. And to gather to your bosom his wifes and daughters. - Ghengis Khan, 1226" Sounds as though this could as easily have been said by Muhammad.

I submitted several posts in a variety of versions, but nothing was posted! I wrote the moderator directly and told him the following:

"You can't handle the truth!!

Son, we live in a world that has savage and violent Muslims, and the West has to be guarded by men with guns. Who's going to do it? You?

I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Considine and curse the Kuffar. You have that luxury.

You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Considine's dhimmitude and ignorance, while tragic, is probably costing lives. And my existence while grotesque and incomprehensible to you...saves Kuffars.

You don't want the truth, because deep down in places that you don't talk about at jihad parties...you don't want me to defend the West...you despise me for defending the West.

We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as a backbone of a life defending against Islamists and the violent totalitarian ideology of Islam. You use them as a punchline.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a thumbsucking and spineless moderator who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.

I would rather that you just posted my response and said thank you and went on your way; otherwise, I suggest that you pull your dhimmi head out of your liberal anti-American socialist, Obama supporting ass and get out of my way!!

Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to moderate!!!"

Darsh wrote:

Hey Guys!

I'm an Indian man, living in the UK.
I have been reading Jihad Watch for 4 years now....
......................

Welcome, Darsh! I'll keep an eye out for your posts in the future.

And don't forget that the Shakespeare plays were really stolen from the writings of Sheikh al-Sbir during the Crusades and recycled into English by the 16th century...

Welcome friend!
Good to have you here with us. Let's hear from you soon.
Best wishes to you and yours
thomas_h

Leave a comment

NOTE: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.







Not Peace But A Sword by Robert SpencerDid Muhammad Exist? The Muslim Brotherhood in America, by Robert SpencerIslamophobia: Thoughtcrime of the Totalitarian FutureMuslim Persecution of Christians, by Robert Spencer Obama and IslamThe Ground Zero Mosque: Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks
The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran


Stealth Jihad


The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam


The Truth About Muhammad


What they’re saying about Robert Spencer
“My comrade-in-arms, my pal, my buddy.”
Oriana Fallaci

“Robert Spencer incarnates intellectual courage when, all over the world, governments, intellectuals, churches, universities and media crawl under a hegemonic Universal Caliphate’s New Order. His achievement in the battle for the survival of free speech and dignity of man will remain as a fundamental monument to the love of, and the self-sacrifice for, liberty.”
Bat Ye’or

“Robert Spencer is indefatigable. He is keeping up the good fight long after many have already given up. I do not know what we would do without him. I appreciate all the intelligence and courage it takes to keep going despite the appeasement of the West.”
Ibn Warraq

“America's most informed, fearless, and compelling voice on modern jihadism.”
Andrew C. McCarthy, Senior Fellow at National Review Institute

“Robert Spencer is the leading voice of scholarship and reason in a world gone mad. If the West is to be saved, we will owe Robert Spencer an incalculable debt.”
Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs

"The consummate Islam critic and expert." — Bruce Bawer

“Over the years, we have become friends, and I have received his assistance on several pieces of legislation I proposed.”
Former Congressman Tom Tancredo

“Few people are capable of applying scholarship, analytical reasoning, and objectivity to their topic -- while simultaneously being readable and witty -- as can Robert Spencer.”
Raymond Ibrahim

“A national treasure...The acclaimed scholar of Islam.”
Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy

“I am indeed honored to call him my friend.”
Brad Thor, novelist

“A top American analyst of Islam....A serious scholar...I learn from him.”
Daniel Pipes

“A brilliant scholar and writer.”
Douglas Murray

"One of my best teachers."
Ashraf Ramelah, Voice of the Copts

“Thank God there’s at least one man with balls left in the West.”
Kathy Shaidle, Five Feet of Fury

“I read people like [Mark Steyn] and Bob Spencer and the rest of them, and I say, ‘Boortz, you’re pretending you’re an author. These people really are. They really write some entertaining, some standup stuff.’”
Neal Boortz

“Robert Spencer is the Stephen King of Jihad.”
Chris Gaubatz, Muslim Mafia

“Armed with facts and fearlessness, Spencer stands up for Western civilization.”
Michelle Malkin

“Widely read in conservative foreign policy circles.”
New York Times

“Widely read in many quarters in Washington.”
Washington Post

“A canny operative who likely has the inside track on the State Department’s Middle East affairs desk should the tea party win the White House.”
New York Magazine

“A hero of the American right.”
Karen Armstrong

"The leading anti-Islamic intellectual in the United States....The go-to Islam expert for the right wing."
Salon Magazine

“Robert Spencer is an Edward Said turned upside down.”
Stephen Suleyman Schwartz

“One of the nation's most notorious Islamophobes.”
Hamas-linked CAIR

"Geller and Spencer are probably the most important propagandizing Islamophobes in the world. These people's voices speak very loudly — not just here in the United States but overseas."
Heidi Beirach, Southern Poverty Law Center

“Satanic ignoramus.”
Khaleel Mohammed

“The Likud anti-Christ.”
Dar al-Hayat newspaper (Saudi Arabia)

“Zionist Crusader, missionary of hate, counter-Islam consultant.”
Al-Qaeda’s Adam Gadahn, “Azzam the American”



Follow me on Twitter
facebook islam
RSS feed

Monthly Archives



Donate
Jihad Watch is a 501 (c) 3 organization. Donations are tax-deductible.


Robert Spencer debates on The Quran Teaches WarVideo: Robert Spencer on CPAC Breitbart News
SIOAFreedom Defense InitiativeJihad Watch VideosAmerican Freedom Law Center
Note: Listing here does not imply endorsement of every view expressed at every linked site.

» ACT for America
» Always on Watch
» American Center for Democracy
» American Coptic Association
» American Council for Kosovo
» American Freedom Alliance
» American Freedom Law Center
» American Islamic Forum for Democracy
» American Sheepdogs
» American Thinker
» Americans Against Hate
» Americans for Legal Immigration
» Amerisrael
» Amillennialist Contra Mundum
» Annaqed
» A New Dark Age Is Dawning
» Answering Islam
» Answering Muslims
» Anti-CAIR
» Apostates of Islam
» Aramaic Broadcasting Network (ABN)
» Armies of Liberation
» Assyrian International News Agency
» Atlas Shrugs
» Atour — The State of Assyria
» Australian Islamist Monitor
» Biafra Nation
» Blazing Cat Fur
» Bosch Fawstin
» Brad Thor
» Brussels Journal
» CAIR Watch
» Campus Watch
» Caroline Glick
» Christians Under Attack
» Citizen Warrior
» Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights
» Conservative Nation News
» Copts.com
» Creeping Sharia
» Daniel Pipes
» David Horowitz Freedom Center
» The David Project
» David Thompson
» David Yerushalmi Law
» D. C. Watson
» Dearborn Underground
» DEBKAfile
» Dhimmitude.org
» Dry Bones
» Ellis Washington Report
» Europe News
» Eye On Islam
» Ezra Levant
» Faith Freedom International
» Father Zakaria
» Federale
» Five Feet of Fury
» Foundation for Democracy in Iran
» Free Congress Foundation
» The Free Copts
» Freedom Defense Initiative
» FrontPage Magazine.com
» Geert Wilders
» Genocide1915.info
» Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center
» History of Jihad
» Hizb ut-Tahrir Watch
» Honest Reporting
» Honor Killings
» Human Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities
» India Defence
» Infidel Blogger’s Alliance
» Infidels Are Cool
» The Intelligence Summit
» International Analyst Network
» International Free Press Society
» Internet Haganah
» The Investigative Project on Terrorism
» IOwnTheWorld.com
» IranPressNews
» Iran va Jahan
» Islam Review
» Islam Speaks
» Islam Versus Europe
» Islam Watch
» Islamic Terrorism in India
» Islamist Watch — Middle East Forum
» Israel Matzav
» JihadOnBuddhists.org
» Kejda Gjermani
» KRSI: Radio Sedaye Iran
» Liberated
» Logan's Warning
» Looking At the Left
» Mahdi Watch
» Mapping Sharia
» Mark Steyn
» Martin Kramer
» MEMRI TV
» Middle East Facts
» Middle East Quarterly
» Middle-East-Info.org
» Middle East Media Research Institute
» Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA)
» Militant Islam Monitor
» Morning Star
» Muhammad Tube
» The Muslim Issue
» Muslim World Today
» Myths and Facts
» National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition
» NewsReal Blog
» No Mosques At Ground Zero
» Nonie Darwish
» Northeast Intelligence Network
» Occidental Jihadist
» One Jerusalem
» Open Speech
» Operation Give
» Operation Gratitude
» Organiser
» Orwellian Culture
» Palestinian Media Watch
» PamelaGeller.com
» Panun Kashmir
» Pedestrian Infidel
» The People's Cube
» The People of the Book
» Persecution Project
» Political Islam
» Politically Incorrect
» Politiskt Inkorrekt
» Q Society of Australia
» Radio Farda
» Radio Jihad
» RAWA: Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
» Raymond Ibrahim
» Red Alerts
» Refugee Resettlement Watch
» Religion of Peace
» Republican Riot
» Reuters Middle East Watch
» The “Reverend” Jim Sutter
» SANE: Society of Americans for National Existence
» The Second Draft
» Shire Network News
» SITE Intelligence Group
» Small Wars Journal
» Smoke-Filled World
» The Snooper Report
» Snow Report Blog
» StandWithUs
» Steve Lackner
» The Stiletto Blog
» STOP! Honour Killings
» Sultan Knish
» Tell the Children the Truth
» Terrorism Awareness Project
» Theodore’s World
» Tom Gross Media
» Translating Jihad
» Una via per Oriana
» Undaunted
» United States Central Command
» Urban Infidel
» Walid Shoebat
» Winds of Jihad
» Women Against Shariah
» World Council for the Cedars Revolution
» Yid With Lid
» Z Street
» Zilla of the Resistance
» Zionist Conspiracy
Crucified Again by Raymond IbrahimDavid LittmanOriana Fallaci Thousands of Deadly Terror Attacks Since 9/11The incredible Reza Aslan automated insult generator! iGoogle Gadget
Site Meter