Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding to honor Reza Aslan, Board member of front group for Islamic Republic of Iran

How clueless and compromised are this country’s moneyed Leftist elites? This clueless and compromised:

“The 2013 Tanenbaum Awards Honor New York Times Bestselling Author and Activist Reza Aslan and Philanthropic Leader FJC,” PRWeb, April 29:

New York — The Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding will honor New York Times bestselling author Reza Aslan and FJC, A Foundation of Philanthropic Funds, at the 2013 Tanenbaum Award Ceremony, Tuesday, May 21 at 6:30 pm at The Plaza Hotel.

The Tanenbaum Award Ceremony, with entertainment featuring NCIS: Los Angeles series regular Barrett Foa and Broadway’s Ivan Rutherford, are open to the public. To purchase tickets and for more information about the Tanenbaum Awards, visit TanenbaumSpecialEvents.org or call 212.967.7707, x112.

“We are excited to honor both FJC and Reza,” said Joyce S. Dubensky, CEO of Tanenbaum. “All of Reza’s accomplishments–from his books, to his media efforts, to his activism and interfaith work–share a theme. All inform, build bridges of respect and enable greater understanding of Islam and religious extremism. Similarly, FJC is an innovator that creates opportunities in philanthropy and for charities that are building a better world for all of us.”

Tanenbaum will present Aslan with the Media Bridge-Builder Award and FJC with the inaugural Philanthropic Bridge-Builder Award.

The Media Bridge-Builder Award is presented to journalists and media personalities whose work focuses public attention on issues of human rights and intergroup relations.

“We are particularly excited about honoring Reza,” says Dubensky. “He is tackling hard issues and does it in a way that allows people to listen and learn. And that’s both unusual and critical if we are to achieve mutual respect.”

No one could be more laughably inappropriate as a recipient of this award than Reza Aslan. Far from being a “moderate,” Aslan is an Islamic supremacist who is a Board member of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC). NIAC has been established in court as a front group for the Islamic Republic of Iran. Aslan is an enemy of the freedom of speech, having called for the vandalism of our AFDI ads.

Aslan has tried to pass off Iran’s genocidally-minded President Ahmadinejad as a liberal reformer and has called on the U.S. Government to negotiate with Ahmadinejad himself, as well as with Hamas — that is, with two of the most barbaric, genocide-minded and murderous adherents of Sharia. Aslan has even praised the jihad terror group Hizballah as “the most dynamic political and social organization in Lebanon,” as well as the anti-Semitic, misogynist, Islamic supremacist Muslim Brotherhood, which is dedicated in its own words, according to a captured internal document, to “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.” Aslan wrote: “The Muslim Brotherhood will have a significant role to play in post-Mubarak Egypt. And that is good thing.” He has not revised this view despite the Muslim Brotherhood regime’s increasing authoritarianism and brutality toward its opponents, or its escalating persecution of Egyptian Christians.

Dubensky says that his works “inform” about Islam. Here is how informative they are, courtesy Jihad Watch reader Traeh:

How Reza Aslan whitewashes Muhammad’s caravan raids

First, notice how Aslan, on pages 82 and 83 of his book No god but God, makes Muhammad’s caravan raids look bloodless:

In pre-Islamic Arabia, caravan raiding was a legitimate means for small clans to benefit from the wealth of larger ones. It was in no way considered stealing, and as long as no violence occurred and no blood was shed, there was no need for retribution. The raiding party would quickly descend on a caravan — usually at its rear — and carry off whatever they could get their hands on before being discovered. These periodic raids were certainly a nuisance for the caravan leaders, but in general they were considered part of the innate hazards of transporting large amounts of goods through a vast and unprotected desert.

Though small and sporadic at first, Muhammad’s raids not only provided the Ummah with desperately needed income, they also effectively disrupted the trade flowing in and out of Mecca…

Why does Reza Aslan make no mention of what core Islamic texts say about those raids, for example, what happened at Nakhla, where for the first time Muslims succeeded in finding a caravan to target? See page 287 (425 in the Arabic) of the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad:

They [the Muslim raiders] encouraged each other, and decided to kill as many as they could of them and take what they had. Waqid [one of the Muslim raiders] shot Amr bin al-Hadrami [one of the caravan’s leaders] with an arrow and killed him…

————————————————————————-

How Reza Aslan misleads about Muhammad’s marriage to 9-year-old Aisha

Notice how Aslan, on pages 64 and 65 of his book No god but God claims that Muhammad did not consummate his marriage to Aisha when she was 9:

…Aisha…was nine years old when betrothed to the Prophet…And while Muhammad’s union with a nine-year-old girl may be shocking to our modern sensibilities, his betrothal to Aisha was just that: a betrothal. Aisha did not consummate her marriage to Muhammad until after reaching puberty…

Why doesn’t Aslan mention what the core Islamic texts tell us?

From Sahih al-Bukhari, the most canonical hadith collection:

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64:

Narrated ‘Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65:

Narrated ‘Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that ‘Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).”

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88:

Narrated ‘Ursa:

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).

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236:

Narrated Hisham’s father:

Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married ‘Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed [sic] that marriage when she was nine years old.

Dubensky also says that Aslan’s works promote “respect.” I doubt that she is aware that toward those he hates, Aslan behaves like an obnoxious, immature and sexually conflicted frat boy who’s had a few too many to drink. On the other hand, I doubt it would matter to her, because she would probably agree with him that those who do not share their world view or goals deserve no respect.

And by the way, I do mean “moneyed Leftist elites”: ticket packages for this event start at $350 and climb as high as $50,000. And they will rake it in, too, all the while whining about the supposedly well-heeled “Islamophobia industry.” It is indicative of how people like Reza Aslan, laden with spurious honors and pocketing huge ill-gotten sums to lull adoring marks to sleep all over the country and the world, are aware that they are propagating lies: even though they have all the money and all the power, they are desperately afraid of a few truth-tellers who have neither their resources nor their reach. They are afraid to debate us or discuss our assertions honestly; instead, they instantly resort to smears and lies. They know that even without money and their bully pulpits, we show them up for what they are, and can topple their ugly little empires with a word. And so, in their fear and rage, they do all they can to defame and destroy us.

US promises Pakistan that it will not carry out any drone strikes during any future peace talks with Taliban
Happy Easter!
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    All anyone has to do is read any book on Islam that is NOT a propagandist piece of work. You will discover very quickly what Islam really is, and what it’s purpose is. Islam is a world wide political movement. Islam’s purpose is to bring Sharia Law to every country on the planet. The ultimate purpose is to bring their ‘Messiah’, their 12th Imam to earth. To make the entire globe Islamic.

  2. says

    Honoring this egregious liar and supremacist Reza Aslan is a travesty.

    Mohammed was no more than the most successful highwayman in Arabia.

    His excuse for robbery and murder were his bogus, fraudulent revelations.

    Modern Muslims assume fraud and deceit are ‘good’ because this evil deceiver behave that way.

  3. says

    It’s a sad statement on the condition of the intellectual scene when a cagey propagandistic hack like Reza Aslan is passed off to the mainstream as a “scholar.”

  4. says

    Challenge Reza Aslan to a debate. You’ll perhaps have to invite other relevant participants to defuse the invitation and make it less of a head-on clash, but it might be interesting to hear a group debating the issues revolving around Islam and its impact on the world, both the world that has been dominated in the past by a Muslim overlord and countries such as the U.S. that were founded under different religious principles.

  5. says

    Ohhh, so Mr. Spencer has stated many times that he’s willing to debate Boy Reza anytime, anywhere? And Boy Reza responds to Mr. Spencer with adolescent personal insults laced with foul language? Oh. Who knew? So, guess I’d be wasting space here to suggest that, huh? But I’m so GOOD at it! And it gives me an excuse to post more stuff and I love to do that (has anyone noticed?). That’s everyone else’s problem if I’m ignorant, arrogant and make no sense!

  6. says

    Let’s flood the Tanenbaum Center with Boy Reza’s rants. Both Pam and Robert have reposted dozens of them.

    Come on, we could send tens of thousands of emails pointing out what a barbarian Boy Reza is.

    I’m starting now.

  7. says

    I know of no organization dedicated to “interreligious understanding,” such as the Tanenbaum Center, which isn’t either a dupe or a front for Islam’s intolerant, violence-prone, world-supremacist designs. Does anyone?

  8. says

    This Aslan knows one thing, that in order to make the stupid westerner infidals happy is to give them what they want to hear about islam. If lying like the devil will make them happy and give you awards he does it.

    These ignorant infidal don’t want the truth about islam they want the lies as told by muslims to make themselves feel good.

  9. says

    George, obviously I happen to feel that by expanding the debate both those men might feel it was less of a grudge match. Get it? It’s pretty straightforward. There’s less face lost if they meet on terms like these of a larger array of viewpoints. Get it?? I’m well aware based on what Robert Spencer has said in several threads on Aslan that it’s not on for it to be a two-man debate.

  10. says

    In modern terms, the participants in Nakhah committed felony murder, with the felony being armed robbery. Stealing by murder was not an accepted wealth transfer custom in western Arabia in the 7th century. That’s why the Arabs there at the time carried weapons: to enforce their property rights and their right to live despite the needs of murderers.

    Speaking of modern terms, it’s become a modern thing to twist definitions to the needs of the speaker and the willing listener. Betrothal means to promise or give in marriage. So Aisha was betrothed, which sounds innocent, when she was nine, according to modern sensibilities, when in fact she was married to him when she was six, and the marriage was consummated (i.e., the Holy Prophet penetrated her with is penis) when she was nine. The NYT award winner skirts the issues of the hadiths that hint at mutual masturbation when she was six, and asserts that she’d reached puberty at nine. These are the small victories of factual perversion that proved served the NYT well when its great writer Walter Duranty reported that Stalin was doing good at a time when tens of millions were either being starved to death or being executed by the tens of millions.

    I bet there was much piety, eye rolling, head waggling and self-congratulation at the Manhattan cocktail parties feting Rezla after he was given his humanitarian award that night. So goes modern America, and up goes the Cause for global Sharia.

  11. says

    Yeah, another religious Interfaith Conference would be great.
    Interfaith, a dialog within itself. Understanding that’s not too demanding,
    Haggling fine points of scripture, and theory, the stuff of studied theologians.
    Too much time on their hands, too much contributed money notwithstanding,
    Inter-relgion interfaiths with Islam result in Sharia compliant idea dungeons.

  12. says

    Who’s proposing another religious interfaith conference? I’m suggesting a knock-down, drag out debate over jihad and modern Islam vs. modern society… Featuring some of the Muslim military men who’ve had to fight jihad, along w/Spencer and Islan and some other notables.

    Ms. m, I’ll take for granted that every time I post, I’m getting the former ex-XX-ex-Muslim evil eye from you, alright?

  13. says

    Fragging, attempted fragging, or other traitorous crimes committed by US Muslim military personnel against their fellow soldiers, include but are not limited to,

    Hasan K.Akbar

    Naser Jason Abdo

    Eric Harroun

    And of course there is the continuing case of Major Nidal Hasan.

  14. says

    Lest we all forget, Spencer is also raking in the dough. This web site alone nets him $130,000 plus…and he’s a hired gun in the case of this web site. I’m sorry, I guess I don’t see either one of them as **winning** such a debate. I see them as being present and having their ideas filtered by the others who were invited. I don’t believe that if we got the additional debate cast I’d like to hear that either of them —- Spencer or Aslan — would be the most important characters in the debate.
    __________________________________________________________________

    Why invite some of the Pakistani military who’ve been fighting this jihad battle both within the Pakistani armed services and in the civilian population to be on this Spencer/Islan debate panel?? Because I get the feeling on this BB that none of you has any concept of what it must be like for these men and women who are making risk assessments on all sides — from their intelligence/military jobs, their colleagues and friends, and their families —- as they go forth each day knowing they are likely facing the very real risk of being blown up if they’re of any importance in the battle against jihad. Gen. Pervez Musharaff permitted the U.S. to use drones in many major strikes while he was President. How do you explain that little bit of history? You are ludicrous in your assertions sometimes. You avert your head every time there’s a fact rears its head.

  15. says

    “No one could be more laughably inappropriate as a recipient of this award than Reza Aslan. Far from being a “moderate,” Aslan is an Islamic supremacist who is a Board member of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC). NIAC has been established in court as a front group for the Islamic Republic of Iran. Aslan is an enemy of the freedom of speech, having called for the vandalism of our AFDI ads.”

    True, Robert; and Reza is a liar who rewrites history, so I see nothing honorable about this man. It’s shameful that men like Aslan receives and accepts “honor” through deceitful means.

  16. says

    ***PAID TROLL ALERT***

    AMERICANA *** BURQA TROLL *** AMERICANA

    MUXLIM *** BURQA TROLL *** MUXLIM

    AMERICANA who also posts as MUXLIM suddenly appeared here on JW in the last several weeks. I strongly believe *IT* to be a paid troll, *Paid* for each post IT makes. I also believe IT is a Muslim, or Muslim sympathizer, or at least an infiltrator to sow seeds of dissent, distraction and division. I have observed IT engage and enrage many regular posters here, in a short period of time, with banal counter-intuitive arguments. IT has annoyed “Champ”, “George”, “Miriam Rove” and many others. In an argument with Champ IT claimed to be a “Female”, which is why I call “IT” IT as IT’s writing style is distinctly masculine in nature.

    It is remarkable the amount of drivel IT has produced in a few short weeks and the number of posters IT has offended; and the actual number of IT’s posts is far beyond normal. IT claims to be from the Boston area but with “strong” British connections and British experience (now enhanced to include many international connections and influential family and other connections). IT is constantly morphing and Chameleon- like adopting and adapting to and with IT’s interactions here to become all things to all entities. The truth matters little to IT. IT salts its nonsense with half-truths and dis-information to elicit controversy, thus occasioning responses it can in turn, respond to in an ever-burgeoning morass of garbage. *BUT* IT is paid for each of these so the more we engage IT, the more it profits.

    IT tries to position itself as supporting the counter-jihad position but has a host of non-viable platforms, which clearly demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of the basic tenets of Islam or it is just deliberate obfuscation. IT’s basic argument is that Islam needs to self-reform and establish an international forum of “moderate” Mullahs to call for reform. Fat chance that. The quintessential non-starter.

    IT writes long puerile sections while trying to pretend IT is in agreement. IT”s intent is to draw posters into endless debate about issues that have no traction thus diminishing the value and information in the article thread. All Classic communist agitate/propaganda techniques.

    Ignore IT.

    Don’t waste your time engaging IT in any way. Trolls are paid for EACH post. This is why they begin arguments. The more the merrier, from their perspective. If there is no engagement, they move on eventually. Persona is difficult to camouflage. I will keep an eye for additional new monikers.

    Click here http://goo.gl/lwSsI for the profile, behaviour and tactics of a PAID TROLL.

    Max.

    ***PAID TROLL ALERT***

    AMERICANA *** BURQA TROLL *** AMERICANA

    MUXLIM *** BURQA TROLL *** MUXLIM

  17. says

    You gotta’ be kidding me! That last wretched post from troll “Americana” has taken tastelessness and insult to a new and unenviable low here. Man, if that’s not enough of this, what is?

  18. says

    I guess the “Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding” doesn’t know much about Reza Aslan and his thuggish goon Nathan Lean.

    Here’s the paragon of interfaith understanding himself, Aslan:

    “Reza Aslan “@rezaaslan
    Let the Third Intifada commence.”

    https://twitter.com/rezaaslan/status/306164094132682752

    “Reza Aslan “@rezaaslan
    Hey Italy. You deserve every miserable thing that happens to you from now on.”

    Reza Aslan threatens violence and killing:
    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/12/more-love-and-tolerance-from-our-moral-superiors.html

    Reza Aslan “@rezaaslan
    Let’s hunt down Dick Morris like a pig and skin him for breakfast.

    Aslan endorses both Hezbollah and Hamas, which include genocide of the Jewish people as an explicitly stated goal in their policies:

    From Kamala’s Critique of Reza Aslan’s
    How to Win a Cosmic War
    http://revuse.wetpaint.com/page/Book+Review%3A+How+to+Win+a+Cosmic+War

    Quote of Aslan, where Aslan explicitly and enthusiastically endorses the anti-Jewish genocidal groups:

    Aslan writes:
    “… while Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and Hizballah work to address … socioeconomic needs, populations throughout the region will continue to throw their support behind the Islamists–as well they should. (p. 166, emphasis added)

    So the Tanenbaum Center is actually supporting Reza Aslan, who in turn supports groups whose main goal is to exterminate the Jews.

  19. says

    Islamically-ignorant Glenn Greenwald continues to get a drubbing, this time from an atheist of Muslim background (Ali Rivzi):

    “Ali A. Rizvi “@aliamjadrizvi 23 Apr
    Wow. Not sure whose ass @GGreenwald has his head up in recently, but it must be really comfortable. What an astounding denial of reality.”

    Here’s Rivzi’s defense of the “New Atheists'” criticisms of Islam:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/an-atheist-muslims-perspective-on-the-root-causes-of-islamist-jihadism-and-the-politics-of-islamophobia_b_3159286.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
    An Atheist Muslim’s Perspective on the ‘Root Causes’ of Islamist Jihadism and the Politics of Islamophobia
    Ali A. Rizvi
    Pakistani-Canadian writer, physician and musician

  20. says

    What mask? These have been my thoughts ever since I really started delving into the issues. As for it being tasteless to post statements from the 9/11 hijackers and from Osama bin Laden as to why 9/11 happened, there seemed to be no other way to get through the JW Cosmic Curtain. We’ve got WORLD jihad happening in the U.S.??? No, we don’t. We are the target of one jihad —- from the Palestinians and the Saudis in support of the Palestinians and now in support of our Middle East policies in their entirety. If JWers wish to conflate all the other jihads going on in the world and pretend they have ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to do w/the Palestinian/Middle East jihad that is currently happening here in the U.S., be my guest. Just don’t be surprised if you get called on it because that is such intellectual chicanery, it’s vomit worthy.

    As for debate questions, I certainly wouldn’t devote two hours to an endless debate over what jihads occurred when and which Muslim groups did them. Jihad is just not that sophisticated a subject. Not when it can be delineated in a few choice words. I certainly wouldn’t bother w/wording the Israel question quite the way you put it. As for women in Islam, I’ve got quite a few questions. I wouldn’t bother spending the two hours of debate smearing Mohammed. Now THAT is an absolutely pointless exercise and although it might give you lot some shits and giggles, it’d be absolutely pointless. Why is it pointless? Because there are billions of Muslims in the world. If they’re not going to give up Mohammed, there’s not much point in our denigrating the man. He was what he was. We can only hope for reformation of the parts of his creed we consider highly undesirable in today’s world. But, as some of you have said, regardless of Spencer having said something along the same lines at some point, that reformation will never be allowed to happen because —- ta da! —- Islam is divinely inspired!!! However, other religions have been transformed at white heat when the right individual came along. But, OMGosh, Buraq claims that Robert Spencer is “rightly guided.” What the hell does that mean —– is that code for “divinely guided?” Is that what that term “rightly guided” means in JW reality? You know what? I’m tired of everybody and his brother pretending to have the lock on sanctity when what they have a lock on is sanctimony. That’s my biggest beef w/these religion issues. I’m just practical enough I’d shoot every high falutin’ cockamamie idiocy down to earth. Religions of any and all kinds have attempted to describe the mental states and visions of individual men. The religions that have outlasted all the others have been those that tried to inculcate the best ethical parameters for individuals and communities and societies at their greatest sizes. Religions have EVOLVED over the aeons of humankind just like every other aspect of mankind. We are no longer practicing human sacrifice w/abandon like the Mayans. (Hey, wait a cotton pickin’ minute, why have the Mayans never been compared w/the Muslims??? Boy, if ever there was a comparison that was ripe to be made, that’s one! The savagery, the plunder, the expansionism, the enslavement of conquered peoples, the Mayans had all those too!)

    As for being a tool of anyone else, never mind being Reza or Nathan in person, what a hoot! To have it suggested I’m being paid per post when Robert Spencer is being paid is really rich. This is just me. Thinking away… Years and years of thinking away. This is years of me being a Newton, MA resident hearing stories from parents of my Jewish friends of their families during WW II and the Holocaust. These Jews in Newton lost 60, 80, 98% of their European family members during the Holocaust. I don’t need coaching from you folks on what Israel means to the Jewish community. I know what it means.

    PS —- I’ll write to Reza Aslan and I’ll write to others whom I’d like to see at a debate on the principal issues. I’ll post it if I get any kind of response from Reza Aslan.

  21. says

    The story goes that The messenger, when not “revealing” Allah’s word, was running around servicing his 11 wives daily and who knows how many that his “right hand possesses”. Ha. No wonder he hijacked caravans and murdered the owners of the stolen goods. He didn’t have time or even apparently the education to hold down an honourable living. Scumbag. He wouldn’t even qualify for social security in this day and age. He’d be sent off to learn a trade. More likely a psychiatric assessment actually.

  22. says

    Islamic Apologists state that child betrothals were common in the 7thC “so dont judge the messenger”. How does that explain Khomeni taking a 10yo in the 20thC? There’s no escaping the fact that these people have a proclivity to mysoginy as evidenced by raping, stoning, burning etc women at the SLIGHTEST excuse, including their own near relatives. From a psychiatric perspective these men have very serious problems which would demand intervention in a civilised society.

  23. says

    Kinda reminds me of the last ‘Omega’ session I attended at my local parish. . The pastor was waxing lyrical about how faiths of all sorts had an open door to leave, however, as soon as he included Islam in his list I piped up and took him to task. . Donning my hat, I got up and left.

  24. says

    Americana, you said,

    Heck, there was a pretense for weeks here on JW that the jihad we Americans are facing has NOTHING to do w/the Israeli/Palestinian situation!!!! That it’s just some sort of vague worldwide jihad that’s hitting us at home here for no reasons whatsoever.

    You are mistaken. Spencer and others here don’t claim the worldwide jihad is hitting us “for no reasons whatsoever.” We point to the texts and teachings of Islam as the reason that non-Muslims are under attack worldwide, in Thailand, in the Philippines, in Indonesia, in Sudan, in Nigeria, and in a dozen other nations.

    Bernard Lewis, eminent historian of Islam and the Middle East, says Islam imposes, without limit of time or space, the duty to subjugate non-Muslims

    In The Political Language of Islam, p. 73:

    “…it is the duty of those who have accepted them [Allah’s word and message] to strive unceasingly to convert or at least to subjugate those who have not. This obligation is without limit of time or space. It must continue until the whole world has either accepted the Islamic faith or submitted to the power of the Islamic state.”

    Quoting Islam

  25. says

    Americana, you are mistaken in taking more or less at face value the complaints of jihadists to Westerners. You might be cured of that if you were to read Raymond Ibrahim’s Al Qaeda Reader. Ibrahim translated for the first time from Arabic the writings of key figures in Al Qaeda, and the translations show how and why people like you are being fooled by jihadist complaints to Western audiences.

    A blurb from the book explains:

    They [the theology and propaganda sections of the the Al Qaeda Reader] also highlight the double-speak of bin Laden and Zawahiri, who often say one thing to Muslims in their religious treatises (“We must hate and fight the West because Islam commands it”) and another in their propaganda directed at the West (“The West is the aggressor and we are fighting back merely in self-defense”).

    The complaints of jihadists are ultimately pretexts to justify jihad’s drive to establish Islamic law over the whole world. Jihadist attacks are motivated by the aggression in their own theology and core texts, not by things the West has done. They attack us because we are not Islamic, and to them, that’s equivalent to aggression against Islam. Israel is offensive to jihadists and Muslims for the same reason, but also because of the Jew hatred riddling the core Islamic texts. The reason the Middle East is such a seething, stinking, swamp of the most ignorant and disgusting anti-Semitism, is that such sentiments are well-rooted in the core Islamic texts.

  26. says

    Islamic Apologists state that child betrothals were common in the 7thC “so dont judge the messenger”. How does that explain Khomeni taking a 10yo in the 20thC? There’s no escaping the fact that these people have a proclivity to mysoginy as evidenced by raping, stoning, burning etc women at the SLIGHTEST excuse, including their own near relatives. From a psychiatric perspective these men have very serious problems which would demand intervention in a civilised society.

  27. says

    Americana, the reason the Palestinian troubles cannot be solved by anything Israel does (short of total national suicide) is sentiments profoundly rooted in the very beginnings of the Muslim world:

    The Head of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar University, the chief center of Islamic and Arabic learning in the world, lists twenty evil qualities of the Jews according to the Qur’an

    The following article, with its numbered list of Qur’an-sourced statements of anti-semitism, used to be posted at IslamOnline.net, but the scandal of it apparently made Islam Online decide it prudent to remove the article for the time being. It can still be found, however, at numerous other sites on the web by pasting some of the below text into Google. Sheikh ‘Atiyyah Saqr (died 2006), the Head of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar University, the chief center of Islamic and Arabic learning in the world, wrote the article. Here it is:

    “The Qur’an has specified a considerable deal of its verses to talking about Jews, their personal qualities and characteristics. The Qur’anic description of Jews is quite impartial; praising them in some occasions where they deserve praise and condemning them in other occasions where they practice blameworthy acts. Yet, the latter occasions outnumbered the former, due to their bad qualities and the heinous acts they used to commit.

    The Qur’an praises them on the verse that reads: ” And verily We gave the Children of Israel the Scripture and the Command and the Prophethood, and provided them with good things and favored them above (all) peoples.” i.e. the peoples of their time. (Qur’an 45:16)

    Among the bad qualities they were characterized with are the following:

    1. They used to fabricate things and falsely ascribe them to Allah. Allah Almighty says: ” That is because they say: We have no duty to the Gentiles. They speak a lie concerning Allah knowingly.” (Qur’an 3:75) Also: “The Jews say: Allah’s hand is fettered. Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so. Nay, but both His hands are spread out wide in bounty. He bestoweth as He will.” (Qur’an 5:64)

    In another verse Almighty Allah says: “Verily Allah heard the saying of those who said, (when asked for contributions to the war): “Allah, forsooth, is poor, and we are rich! We shall record their saying with their slaying of the Prophets wrongfully and We shall say: Taste ye the punishment of burning!” (Qur’an 3:181)

    2. They love to listen to lies. Concerning this Allah says: “and of the Jews: listeners for the sake of falsehood, listeners on behalf of other folk” (Qur’an 5:41)

    3. Disobeying Almighty Allah and never observing His commands. Allah says: “And because of their breaking their covenant, We have cursed them and made hard their hearts.” (Qur’an 5:13)

    4. Disputing and quarreling. This is clear in the verse that reads: “Their Prophet said unto them: Lo! Allah hath raised up Saul to be a king for you. They said: How can he have kingdom over us when we are more deserving of the kingdom than he is, since he hath not been given wealth enough?” (Qur’an 2:247)

    5. Hiding the truth and standing for misleading. This can be understood from the verse that reads: “…distort the Scripture with their tongues, that ye may think that what they say is from the Scripture, when it is not from the Scripture.” (Qur’an 3:78)

    6. Staging rebellion against the Prophets and rejecting their guidance. This is clear in the verse: “And when ye said: O Moses! We will not believe in thee till we see Allah plainly.” (Qur’an 2:55)

    7. Hypocrisy. In a verse, we read: “And when they fall in with those who believe, they say: We believe; but when they go apart to their devils they declare: Lo! we are with you; verily we did but mock.” (Qur’an 2:14) In another verse, we read: “Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practice it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense?” (Qur’an 2:44)

    8. Giving preference to their own interests over the rulings of religion and the dictates of truth. Allah says: “…when there cometh unto you a messenger (from Allah) with that which ye yourselves desire not, ye grow arrogant, and some ye disbelieve and some ye slay?” (Qur’an 2:87)

    9. Wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them. This is clear in the verse that reads: “Many of the People of the Scripture long to make you disbelievers after your belief, through envy on their own account, after the truth hath become manifest unto them.” (Qur’an 2:109)

    10. They feel pain to see others in happiness and are gleeful when others are afflicted with a calamity. This is clear in the verse that reads: “If a lucky chance befall you, it is evil unto them, and if disaster strike you they rejoice thereat.” (Qur’an 3:120)

    11. They are known of their arrogance and haughtiness. They claimed to be the sons and of Allah and His beloved ones. Allah tells us about this in the verse that reads: “The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones.” (Qur’an 5:18)

    12. Utilitarianism and opportunism are among their innate traits. This is clear in the verse that reads: “And of their taking usury when they were forbidden it, and of their devouring people’s wealth by false pretences.” (Qur’an 4:161)

    13. Their impoliteness and indecent way of speech is beyond description. Referring to this, the Qur’anic verse reads: “Some of those who are Jews change words from their context and say: “We hear and disobey; hear thou as one who heareth not” and “Listen to us!” distorting with their tongues and slandering religion. If they had said: “We hear and we obey; hear thou, and look at us” it had been better for them, and more upright. But Allah hath cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, save a few.” (Qur’an 4:46)

    14. It is easy for them to slay people and kill innocents. Nothing in the world is dear to their hearts than shedding blood and murdering human beings. They never give up this trait even with the Messengers and the Prophets. Allah says: “…and slew the prophets wrongfully.” (Qur’an 2:61)

    15. They are merciless and heartless. In this meaning, the Qur’anic verse explains: “Then, even after that, your hearts were hardened and became as rocks, or worse than rocks, for hardness.” (Qur’an 2:74)

    16. They never keep their promises or fulfill their words. Almighty Allah says: “Is it ever so that when ye make a covenant a party of you set it aside? The truth is, most of them believe not.” (Qur’an 2:100)

    17. They rush hurriedly to sins and compete in transgression. Allah says: “They restrained not one another from the wickedness they did. Verily evil was that they used to do!” (Qur’an 5:79)

    18. Cowardice and their love for this worldly life are their undisputable traits. To this, the Qur’an refers when saying: “Ye are more awful as a fear in their bosoms than Allah. That is because they are a folk who understand not. They will not fight against you in a body save in fortified villages or from behind walls. Their adversity among themselves is very great. Ye think of them as a whole whereas their hearts are divers.” (Qur’an 59:13-14). Allah Almighty also says: “And thou wilt find them greediest of mankind for life and (greedier) than the idolaters.” (Qur’an 2:96)

    19. Miserliness runs deep in their hearts. Describing this, the Qur’an states: “Or have they even a share in the Sovereignty? Then in that case, they would not give mankind even the speck on a date stone.” (Qur’an 4:53)

    20. Distorting Divine Revelation and Allah’s Sacred Books. Allah says in this regard: “Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands anthem say, “This is from Allah,” that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby.” (Qur’an 2:79)

    After this clear explanation, we would like to note that these are but some of the most famous traits of the Jews as described in the Qur’an. They have revolted against the Divine ordinances, distorted what has been revealed to them and invented new teachings which, they claimed, were much more better than what has been recorded in the Torah. It was for these traits that they found no warm reception in all countries where they tried to reside. Rather, they would either be driven out or live in isolation. It was Almighty Allah who placed on them His Wrath and made them den of humiliation due to their transgression. Almighty Allah told us that He’d send to them people who’d pour on them rain of severe punishment that would last till the Day of Resurrection. All this gives us glad tidings of the coming victory of Muslims over them once Muslims stick to strong faith and belief in Allah and adopt the modern means of technology.”

    End of the Al-Azhar Sheikh’s Qur’an citations about the Jews.

  28. says

    Americana, as someone else commented,

    Modern Muslims have religious conflict with: Hindus in Kashmir; Christians in Nigeria, Egypt, and Bosnia; atheists in Chechnya; Baha’is in Iran; Animists in Darfur; Buddhists in Thailand; each other in Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen; Jews in Israel; Why is Islam involved in more sectarian and religious conflicts than any other religion today? In fact, why is Islam the only religion in conflict with every single one of today’s major world religions?

    But you think belligerent pugnacious Islam has legitimate grievances in this constant conflict, and that, for example in Palestine, Islam is just defending its own reasonable interests?

    No, not at bottom. At bottom what we have in Islam is a violent, expansionist totalitarianism. That’s why Islam is in conflict all over the world with every other religion.

  29. says

  30. says

    Americana, here’s another quote from Bernard Lewis that shows what the Palestinian jihad, like other jihads, is essentially about. It’s not essentially about the grievance du jour that jihadist propagandists employ to play upon and manipulate the compassion of naive Westerners:

    Bernard Lewis says Jihad is an unlimited offensive to bring the whole world under Islamic law; Christian crusades a defensive, limited response to, and imitation of, jihad. From pp.233-234 of The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2000 Years

    Even the Christian crusade, often compared with the Muslim jihad, was itself a delayed and limited response to the jihad and in part also an imitation. But unlike the jihad it was concerned primarily with the defense or reconquest of threatened or lost Christian territory…The Muslim jihad, in contrast, was perceived [by Muslims] as unlimited, as a religious obligation that would continue until all the world had either adopted the Muslim faith or submitted to Muslim rule.… The object of jihad is to bring the whole world under Islamic law.

  31. says

    I have been wondering, why on the one hand our country is becoming so liberal that we want to give birth control hormones to teenagers, but on the other hand have this fascination with Islam and Shira Law? So much for the Liberals having any intelligence!

  32. says

    By the time I read the comments, I have forgotten what the article was about…Oh yeah, something to do with Interreligious Understanding…or, how to hug Reza without getting greasy…
    Interreligious Understanding does not really exist because of religious supremacist bigotry…The only thing to understand is that my religion is superior to yours…any other understanding is invalid…

  33. says

    “they are desperately afraid of a few truth-tellers who have neither their resources nor their reach. They are afraid to debate us or discuss our assertions honestly; instead, they instantly resort to smears and lies. They know that even without money and their bully pulpits, we show them up for what they are, and can topple their ugly little empires with a word. And so, in their fear and rage, they do all they can to defame and destroy us.”

    This is the same for Muslims all over the world.( and their supporters)name calling,spin,twisting of facts,fooling westerners.

  34. says

    Palestine…One state, two states or ten states, the jihad against Israel will continue…
    Nearly everyone posting here knows why that is…

  35. says

    Once again, gravenimage, you attempt to totally twist my words out of context. I’ve never met such a complete and utterly determined idealogue dominatrix. For what it’s worth, there’s quite a wild amount of speculation about exactly when and how many and which armed forces’ members of the Pakistani military knew Osama bin Laden was hiding in Abottabad, Pakistan, so inviting someone who’s known to have taken quite a few unpopular decisions that pitted him against the jihadist terrorists wouldn’t be dishonest for purposes of debate. (((By the way, I wouldn’t reach for a Jihad Watch thread TO PROVE who knew what about bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad. Rather, go to an intelligence site for the real skinny.))) No, we in the general public, probably wouldn’t know if the person we invited to the debate, w/a 95% probability had known he was helping to hide bin Laden, but it’s not necessary for the upper echelon of the Pakistani military to have known it to make bin Laden’s hiding place a successful intelligence coup for those who helped achieve it.

    I haven’t elevated Mohammed to any level. I simply refused to make him the focus of the debate in the way you’ve insisted. I’ll insist on the validity of doing that based on the fact, the guy isn’t going to be eliminated from human history whether you or I wants to do so. Since Robert Spencer won’t be able to get through any debate without spilling that kind of attitude at some point, it’s not exactly being banished! As for Islam not “evolving” like all religions everywhere have done over time, American Muslims are not like Middle Eastern Muslims. There are significant differences. As for Islam never undergoing a transformation, there can certainly be a reformation/transformation if the right person(s) come along. All it takes is conviction. As for my “ignorance” of the oneness of jihad ideology, no, I’m not ignorant of it, CGW. Of course, jihad is practiced like jihad anywhere against any of Islam’s perceived enemies. Like I said, it doesn’t take a sophisticated researcher to understand that SIMPLE FACT. Jihad is jihad. Got it. But if the alternative is true, jihads are geopolitical in nature, then we don’t have the Indonesian Archipelago jihad affecting the Boston Marathon.

    Now, I’ve been raised to the level of government plant??? Do you folks not recognize free speech and free thought when you see it? I’ve been accused of being a hired gun, a Muslim apologist, a Muslim convert or Muslim by marriage or Muslim by sex w/Muslims, and now I’m being labeled a government plant!!!!! Would you please stop w/the Inimitable Fifth Columnist Ladies Detective Society which operates a bit more like the Pink Panther in failing to hit the mark on their guesswork? Who gives a rip what I am if the posts are accurate. I notice you didn’t bother to even question the quotes from Osama bin Laden et al. I’m laughing at the preposterous thought of my thoughts having to display exactly the terminology you all use. CGW, go right ahead, email her “with what you know.” It’ll certainly keep her on the right track and she can share that mistaken identity w/the Fifth Columnist Ladies Detective Agency w/the others.

  36. says

    Well, you really seem to have stirred the pot. You wrote above:
    “Do you folks not recognize free speech and free thought when you see it?… Would you please stop w/the Inimitable Fifth Columnist Ladies Detective Society which operates a bit more like the Pink Panther in failing to hit the mark on their guesswork? Who gives a rip what I am if the posts are accurate.”

    I agree that, ultimately, all that matters is whether your posts are accurate. No one disputes your right to say whatever it is you want to say so there’s no need to complain about your right to post. If you can’t stand the heat of debate, get out of the kitchen.

    I’ve read your posts and frankly I have a problem with not only the accuracy but the actual points you wish to make. Perhaps English is not your first language and,if so, I could cut you some slack, but please do try to express your ideas more succinctly and clearly.

    So far, I get that you think any debate with Spencer and Azlan ought to include others and that it is possible to reform Islam if the right person would come a long. As to the first, it will never happen since Azlan doesn’t have the balls to share a podium with Spencer WITH OR WITHOUT others. As to the second, it is highly unlikely in view of the death penalty for apostasy and blasphemy both of which have a rather chilling effect on Islamic reform. Wouldn’t you agree?

    My view is that the US ought to get the hell out of the Mideast except to align with Israel and other states that ally with the US. And then to bomb the smithereens out of any Islamic jihadis and governments / nations, (e.g., military installations, factories, energy plants, transportation networks) who opt to START a shooting war.

  37. says

    I wonder if Americana knows Abdullah Mikhail of old. Perhaps Americana is Abdullah Mikhail. Don’t really know since once Muzzie can sound awfully similar to other Muzzies. After all, they do think a lot alike, if you can call what they say or write “thinking.”

  38. says

    At some point (and I reached it from the beginning) one must ask what the motives of this “Americana” troll might be–what’s her (?) purpose here? It appears to me that this toxic sociopath is here to toy with us for nothing more than her(?) personal enjoyment and gratification. Ask yourself if you would continue to FORCE yourself on any person or group who rejected you–in no uncertain terms– personally and philosphically? Even if you were running a game, would you give it up when it became obvious that you’d been unmasked–that you’d slipped-up one too many times and everyone could see it? And yet this “Americana” seems to feed from it! This is irrational behavior, at least, deliberately disruptive, like one who would crash a party, make an ugly scene and refuse to leave. That would be a disturbed individual.

    OK, so much for troll-analysis. I think the good folks here deserve better than this, but it is what it is. Off to play golf here and enjoy some (barely) spring weather…

  39. says

    Americana said,

    I notice you didn’t bother to even question the quotes from Osama bin Laden et al.

    Actually, I did. I notice you ignored that.

    I also made four or five other comments offering responses to a couple of your main claims. You seem to have made no response to my responses.

    I’m only interested in the substance of your remarks, not who you are or aren’t, which seems to me an ad hominem concern and therefore not relevant to the debate. But you seem to have no response to my criticisms of your positions, so I’ve no reason to think those criticisms wrong.

  40. says

    Rabbi Tanenbaum was a great man who did a lot of good for a lot of people. It’s a shame that those who inherited the organization (founded by his widow) would honor a lying weasel of a quisling like Reza Aslan.

  41. says

    I don’t like the idea of banning anyone from an Internet discussion forum (I’m not just saying that as an ex-Banné myself several times over), partially because I value free speech even of speech that has flaws or is repellent; partially because the venue of an Internet discussion forum and its virtual qualities make it eminently easy to ignore or bypass the speech one doesn’t like.

    However, there is one condition under which I would like to see a banning implemented. It would be the condition we see manifested on this very comments thread, which I now adumbrate:

    1) When one person makes claims objected to by the majority

    2) when one or more members of that majority offer up copious and detailed refutations of those claims (as, for example, in seven different comments by commenter “Traeh” above; or by the one comment particularly the last one by “gravenimage” above)

    and

    3) when the person of #1 fails to adequately respond to all the substantive points of the refutations mentioned in #2.

    A 48-hour period should be granted. If Americana does not respond to all substantive points in traeh’s seven comments, Americana should be banned. (The case would be the same if there were only one comment challenging Americana, or even one point, which Americana fails to address.)

  42. says

    No one web site gets to unilaterally decide what the truth of the matter is on jihad. FYI, most people around the world, not just in the U.S., would agree w/me as to the nature of the jihad the U.S. is facing. Are there other jihad movements going on in the world? YES. Will they EVENTUALLY coalesce into one ginormous jihad that swallows Western Christian civilization? Possibly. According to you all, that’s the greatest fear you have about jihad — that’s it’s a massive single worldwide movement over which the West has no influence whatsoever and that these jihads will eventually coalesce and consume the U.S. I’d say we’re decades UPON MILLENIA UPON DECADES from that point of a Muslim-dominated world. For what it’s worth, I don’t believe that’s the political aim except from a few of the oddball jihadis. I see the principal hemispheric breakdown of what is the Christian West and the Muslim East continuing into the foreseeable future.

    I see too much evidence of disparate jihadi movements and different and distinct jihad leadership all around the world. Not only can the jihad not be considered a single universal movement because the geopolitical aims are not necessarily compatible between groups, but their religious factionalization precludes anyone suggesting the various jihads are one big movement. Sure, there are a few who are suggesting it might be time to pursue jihad for the largest ever historical Caliphate. But no one really believes that’s going to happen.

    darmanand — My points of error have been pretty damn minor and were self-corrected as to my meaning. You can live w/a modicum of bloopers, especially if the majority of points are correct. If mistakes are going to be made out to be a big issue, then what does the following indicate? A bunch of JWers challenged my sister being the dean of a women’s university and tried to say that Arab universities NEVER would hire international infidels as staff heads. Now THAT is a pretty darn egregious error especially because those attempting to discredit me didn’t even bother to check what Arab universities are doing. No, what the JWers did is throw out hadiths of what the supposed relations are that demanded by the situation of the superior Muslims and the inferior infidels. Disagreeing w/my perspective re Islam and how I see the Muslim world relating to Western civilization are not strictly a factual matter on which you can gauge my accuracy (or on which I can gauge yours). There is plenty of room for divergent opinions on the score of what’s going to happen where and when w/the world’s Muslim populations.

    LemonLime —- You don’t get to drum up banning procedures to SUIT YOUR PURPOSES just because you don’t think I march to the same freakin’ drummer that you do. You don’t get to dictate the content of someone’s posts. You’re supposed to argue substantively, as opposed to constantly trying to insert doubts about who I am or what I’ve said or what the sources for my materials are IF THEY PROVE ACCURATE (like the KAUST University recruitment of infidel university professors from all over the world). You don’t get to try to popularize your “ban the troll” movement you’ve been pushing for weeks. This is the last time this will happen, get it? Don’t pull this Fifth Columnist Ladies Detective Agency business w/me again. Same for you, David. I didn’t say, “BISMALLAH.” EVER. I have repeatedly laughed at a male JWer who’s trying to pretend he’s ME by creating “Muxlim” and I mentioned his expression about Tamerlan’s wife, “MASHALLAH, but she’s gorgeous.” (Thank heavens for chauvinists making tactical boo boos!) You want to keep it up, keep it up. It’ll be really amusing if it’s known that Jihad Watch attempts to keep its posters in line by harassing posters into leaving or squelching dissent in other ways. It is also highly amusing that there’s a constant stream of invective if anyone is suspected of being anything other than WASPy and wimpy and oh, soooooo conservative. If this free speech issue weren’t such a key issue for preservation of our Western societies, it wouldn’t be so terrifying and so sad that’s the way the game is played here on Jihad Watch.

    traeh —- I’ve responded to these questions of yours before so I don’t understand why you’re throwing down the gauntlet yet again…. Jihad is not a universal continuum other than in its tactics. jihad is a practice whereby Islam consolidates its religious control over an area and serves to help foster homogeneity. But the jihad we are facing here in the U.S. doesn’t share the same driving forces that are motivating other regional jihad movements elsewhere. There are elements of both NATIONALISM and SUPRANATIONALISM that drive some of the larger jihad movements. But what we face here in the U.S. and across the North and South American continents is not the imminent intention of Muslims forcing our being absorbed into the Muslim world. What the U.S. is facing is jihad in order to sway our political decisions and policies in the Middle East and toward Israel and the Palestinians.

    It doesn’t matter if America’s Muslim community EXPORTS jihadis to other jihad movements. The fact is, if these Muslim jihadis remain in this country (as the Tsarnaev brothers did) and they execute a jihad action WITHIN THE U.S., they are doing so on behalf of the Palestinians. That’s WHY Tamerlan Tsarnaev asked his mother about going to Palestine and then bowed out of going to Palestine when he decided he didn’t want the hassle of not speaking the language. We have not had (thus far) Indonesian jihadists bombing the World Trade Centers around this country or hijacking airliners or bombing malls and then issuing a list of demands they want met

    If you don’t see the point of isolating one jihad movement from another, I don’t know what else to say to you. You’re obviously completely undesirous of seeing each jihad movement as something solvable, that it’s possible to find a political means of shutting each jihad movement down. Even if that solution is the creation of a Muslim state, it means that the jihad is no longer being pursued in that region. Jihad certainly can seem like it’s universally interconnected, but it’s not. Not when each and every REGIONAL Muslim community decides they want to hark back to the good old days and tries to reinstate their Muslim roots. The truth is, we have had long periods of peace before the present conflagration of jihad movements. There have been periods when there’s been quiet around the world. Not absolute quiet, but certainly a modicum of quiet in comparison w/the present day. Indonesia has only recently erupted again after several decades because the Muslim majority in the South wants the Muslim caliphate to be reinstated.

  43. says

    Just FYI, traeh, the reason I didn’t answer your posts yesterday evening is because my internet service has been intermittent for 2 days. As for not answering them earlier today, it’s because I do about 4.5 hours of Search and Rescue training w/my NASAR team of search/rescue dogs and their handlers on Sundays. I wasn’t avoiding responding to your posts for any reason whatsoever.

  44. says

    “Americana” wrote:

    Once again, gravenimage, you attempt to totally twist my words out of context.
    ………………………………….

    Hmmm….where have I heard that before? Oh, right”from virtually every Muslim apologist.

    More:

    I’ve never met such a complete and utterly determined idealogue dominatrix.
    ………………………………….

    If responding to false information and apologia for evil makes me a “dominatrix”, so be it. I always did look good in black leather…

    More:

    For what it’s worth, there’s quite a wild amount of speculation about exactly when and how many and which armed forces’ members of the Pakistani military knew Osama bin Laden was hiding in Abottabad, Pakistan…
    ………………………………….

    If Pakistan’s only obvious complicity with Jihad was bin Laden’s setting up shop right outside the country’s premier military academy, I might just chalk it up to third world corruption or even ineptitude.

    But Pakistan has long been involved with playing footsie with the Taliban and other violent Jihadists, with waging violent Jihad against India, particularly in Kashmir. The horrifying attacks on Bombay has Pakistan’s fingerprints all over it. Then there is the terrible, violent oppression of minority Hindus Sikhs, and Christians there.

    And right now, the doctor who helped us locate bin Laden is languishing in a brutal Pakistani prison. If Pakistani authorities largely backed the raid on bin Laden, this injustice done this poor man simply would not be happening.

    More:

    (((By the way, I wouldn’t reach for a Jihad Watch thread TO PROVE who knew what about bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad. Rather, go to an intelligence site for the real skinny.)))
    ………………………………….

    Actually, I didn’t. The JW story I linked to was one from way back in 2004 regarding Musharraf, since you laughably cited him as being a fine example of Pakistan’s fight against Jihad.

    By the way, Jihad Watch covered the raid on bin Laden quite thoroughly. The idea that you have access to information that Robert Spencer does not is highly questionable.

    More:

    No, we in the general public, probably wouldn’t know if the person we invited to the debate, w/a 95% probability had known he was helping to hide bin Laden, but it’s not necessary for the upper echelon of the Pakistani military to have known it to make bin Laden’s hiding place a successful intelligence coup for those who helped achieve it.
    ………………………………….

    Glad to see that so admire the cosseting of mass-murdering terrorists. Certainly, there are many such, all over the Muslim world…

    In any case, as I’ve noted, the question of hiding bin Laden, while a huge issue, is far from the only one vis-a-vis the appalling “Land of the Pure”.

    More:

    I haven’t elevated Mohammed to any level. I simply refused to make him the focus of the debate in the way you’ve insisted. I’ll insist on the validity of doing that based on the fact, the guy isn’t going to be eliminated from human history whether you or I wants to do so.
    ………………………………….

    Grotesque, and an absolutely false accusation. As a historian, I oppose having any figure scrubbed from history”even if it were possible, which is certainly is not.

    Note”the question of Muhammed’s strict historicity as an individual is not what I’m arguing here”he may or may have existed. What I mean is that the figure of Muhammed has had a major impact on the course of human history, and I have *no* interest in trying to obscure that fact.

    In fact, just the opposite”I believe it is important to *expose* the vile nature of the “Prophet”, and the baleful effect he has had on the vicious creed he founded.

    More:

    As for Islam not “evolving” like all religions everywhere have done over time, American Muslims are not like Middle Eastern Muslims. There are significant differences.
    ………………………………….

    More falsehood. Muslims in the United States represent less that *one percent* of the population, yet they represent a threat to American Infidels out of all proportion to their numbers.

    Muslims become increasingly aggressive the larger percentage of the population they represent. We can see that in European countries, where Muslim now are approaching 10% of the population, and are increasingly pushing for Shari’ah. You can see it in places like Nigeria, where Muslims are making a final, bloody push for dominance of the nation.

    And even given their tiny numbers, polls of Muslims in America (I won’t say “American Muslims”) consistently show that they support Shari’ah and violent Jihad in alarming numbers.

    More:

    As for Islam never undergoing a transformation, there can certainly be a reformation/transformation if the right person(s) come along. All it takes is conviction.
    ………………………………….

    Unfortunately, this hasn’t happened in over *1300 years*. Millions of Infidels have suffered and died at the hands of pious Muslims during this period. If only they’d had more “conviction”, perhaps this wouldn’t have happened! sarc/off

    The idea that Infidels should do nothing and wait for Islam to “reform itself””perhaps courtesy of the Mahdi, as “Americana” has suggested”could not be more suicidal.

    More:

    As for my “ignorance” of the oneness of jihad ideology, no, I’m not ignorant of it, CGW. Of course, jihad is practiced like jihad anywhere against any of Islam’s perceived enemies. Like I said, it doesn’t take a sophisticated researcher to understand that SIMPLE FACT. Jihad is jihad. Got it. But if the alternative is true, jihads are geopolitical in nature, then we don’t have the Indonesian Archipelago jihad affecting the Boston Marathon.
    ………………………………….

    Actually, as I pointed out, even this is not correct. The horrific Bali bombings primarily targeted American tourists.

    Moreover, though, this argument means little”if pious Muslims are attacking America over Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, any support for slightly more ‘moderate’ leaders in Dar-al-Islam, and just generally being a great big honking wealthy and successful Infidel land, then the assertion that Muslims are unlikely to attack us over Aceh or the Filipino Muslims’ assault on Borneo offers scant comfort.

    But, of course, “Americana’s” main stance here is the constant false assertion that the only “grievance” against the US is our support of Israel.

    More:

    Who gives a rip what I am if the posts are accurate.
    ………………………………….

    Unfortunately, “Americana’s” posts are anything but.

    More:

    I notice you didn’t bother to even question the quotes from Osama bin Laden et al.
    ………………………………….

    No one has ever disputed that the foul bin Laden”and every other pious Muslim”abhors the Jews and seeks the destruction of Israel. As much as they’d like to see that stretch of the Levant reconquered by Islam, though, that is very far from their only goal, or their only “grievance” against the United States.

    Your suggesting, in any case, that we abandon Israel because of pressure from mass-murdering terrorists is *simply grotesque*. This is like Chamberlain declaring “peace in our time”, waving the paper that detailed Britain’s appalling betrayal of Czechoslovakia.

    And not only was this betrayal of the civilized land disgusting, it was also a complete failure. Months later, Fascist forces would roll into Poland.

    And any betrayal of Israel would be *just the same*. Not only would it be reprehensible in and of itself, the destruction of Israel, were they able to achieve it, would also do nothing but embolden Muslims for the next assault on Dar-al-Harb.

    More:

    I’m laughing at the preposterous thought of my thoughts having to display exactly the terminology you all use.
    ………………………………….

    What crap. Posters here have a large range of styles, and hardly all use the same terminology. In many cases, in fact, I can tell the poster by their distinctive voice”this would hardly be possible if everyone expressed themselves in the same manner.

    Moreover, posters here regularly disagree on the best approaches to combat Jihad. I highly respect most posters here, but I have differed with many of them from time to time, as they have with me.

    What Anti-Jihadists find offensive is your sly apologia for the savagery of Islam.

    More:

    No one web site gets to unilaterally decide what the truth of the matter is on jihad. FYI, most people around the world, not just in the U.S., would agree w/me as to the nature of the jihad the U.S. is facing. Are there other jihad movements going on in the world? YES. Will they EVENTUALLY coalesce into one ginormous jihad that swallows Western Christian civilization? Possibly. According to you all, that’s the greatest fear you have about jihad — that’s it’s a massive single worldwide movement over which the West has no influence whatsoever and that these jihads will eventually coalesce and consume the U.S. I’d say we’re decades UPON MILLENIA UPON DECADES from that point of a Muslim-dominated world.
    ………………………………….

    Decades upon decades away from a full takeover of the US? No worries then…sarc/off

    Islam took *eight hundred years* to bring down the Byzantine Empire.

    Moreover, Islam can distort our culture and erode our freedoms quite severely short of a full takeover.

    Also, the United States is *far* from the only nation threatened by Islam, or the only concern of Anti-Jihadists. Not only do Americans like myself concern themselves with the Jihad world-wide, but there are many readers here at Jihad Watch personally concerned with the fate of Europe, of India, of southeast Asia, of China and Russia, of sub-Saharan Africa, of Australia and New Zealand, and of minorities and women in Dar-al-Islam itself. People from all over the world post here.

    More:

    For what it’s worth, I don’t believe that’s the political aim except from a few of the oddball jihadis. I see the principal hemispheric breakdown of what is the Christian West and the Muslim East continuing into the foreseeable future.
    ………………………………….

    Pious Muslims have long indicated that they have their sights on the West. Moreover, Muslims *right now* have made serious inroads into Europe, the heart and font of the West.

    More:

    I see too much evidence of disparate jihadi movements and different and distinct jihad leadership all around the world. Not only can the jihad not be considered a single universal movement because the geopolitical aims are not necessarily compatible between groups, but their religious factionalization precludes anyone suggesting the various jihads are one big movement.
    ………………………………….

    This is like saying that because the Brown Shirts and the Black Shirts were at each other’s throats in a bloody power struggle in pre-war Germany that the Nazis had no overarching goals and presented no threat to the world…

    More, to LemonLime:

    You don’t get to try to popularize your “ban the troll” movement you’ve been pushing for weeks. This is the last time this will happen, get it?
    ………………………………….

    Who are you to dictate what is permissible for LemonLime or any other poster here? And that last was oddly threatening. If he refuses to comply with your demand, what then?

    More:

    It is also highly amusing that there’s a constant stream of invective if anyone is suspected of being anything other than WASPy and wimpy and oh, soooooo conservative.
    ………………………………….

    What rot. There are posters from all over the world at JW. The idea that everyone here is a “WASP” is ridiculous.

    More:

    If this free speech issue weren’t such a key issue for preservation of our Western societies, it wouldn’t be so terrifying and so sad that’s the way the game is played here on Jihad Watch.
    ………………………………….

    The idea that rationally challenging disinformation is somehow against free speech is ludicrous”this *is* free speech.

    More, in reply to Traeh:

    f you don’t see the point of isolating one jihad movement from another, I don’t know what else to say to you. You’re obviously completely undesirous of seeing each jihad movement as something solvable, that it’s possible to find a political means of shutting each jihad movement down. Even if that solution is the creation of a Muslim state, it means that the jihad is no longer being pursued in that region.
    ………………………………….

    *What crap*. The creation of Pakistan did not end Jihad against India, and the creation of a “Palestinian” state will not end Jihad against Israel. Instead, it will only foster it.

    In just the same way, the allowance of Shari’ah in northern Nigeria has not lessened Boko Haram’s bloody Jihad against the Christian and animist south.

    More:

    The truth is, we have had long periods of peace before the present conflagration of jihad movements. There have been periods when there’s been quiet around the world. Not absolute quiet, but certainly a modicum of quiet in comparison w/the present day.
    ………………………………….

    And what caused this (comparative) waning of violent Jihad? It certainly wasn’t enabling Islam’s aims around the world. Instead, it was the hard push back against Islam by the technologically and culturally superior West.

    The resurgence of Jihad is largely due to Islam’s amassing of unearned oil wealth and the spread of PC/MC in the West. We are also, to some extent, the “victims” of our own success”many Westerners have simply forgotten how violent and expansionist Islam is, and are not students of history enough to find out.

    More:

    As for not answering them earlier today, it’s because I do about 4.5 hours of Search and Rescue training w/my NASAR team of search/rescue dogs and their handlers on Sundays.
    ………………………………….

    “Americana” has gone from supposedly fighting against FGM to crusading against human trafficking, and now she has added her courageous work with search and rescue dogs to her resume.

    Is fighting supervillains next? sarc/off

  45. says

    Great, if not herculean, efforts at heavy lifting from both traeh and gravenimage. As I’ve argued before, I don’t agree with Wellington that they’re a waste of time because of Americana’s obtuse (or, more likely, quite canny and cunning) imperviousness to the rules of reasonable debate. Americana is no longer the point here. The point is the intelligent exposure of fallacious and specious defenses of various aspects of Islam. Americana, in my mind, has long solidified into a mere object — providing an extended object lesson for the many readers (known and unknown) who come here, through the brilliant lenses of contributors like traeh and gravenimage engaging the fallacies of this object. (Granted, it’s likely that psychologically speaking, traeh and gravenimage may not have been motivated to respond as well and muster their talents, had they not harbored some feelings that Americana is a human being who needs to be persuaded and/or shown up to be wrong.)

    As far as I’m concerned, Americana already vacated the premises long ago; and all that lives on are the various incisive refutations of his fallacies.

    When I advocated that banning proposal, I was more fantasizing about a useful use of Spencer’s power to ban — by forcing Americana to stop tap-dancing and actually respond (though it’s likely he is existentially and constitutionally incapable of this). It doesn’t really matter, at any rate; since, as I’ve argued, his refutations have transformed him into an object lession for our cause anyway. So thanks, Americana (I say, figuratively and rhetorically speaking).

  46. says

    Considering you’d like dogs to defecate on the unmarked graves of jihadists, I would think you’d have agreed that the more INFIDEL DOGS running around full of poop the merrier… Ah, but even my avocations are suspect. Do you know how ridiculous you are in this attempt to make even my “fun, fun, fun activities” suspect?? I collect sea shells, too. Think I do that to make fun of the Jewish claim to God parting the Red Sea just for them so they could escape from Egypt (brain glitch, was it Egypt?) vs. simply get to a new beach???

    For pete’s sake, this hazing is beyond ridiculous. Do all of you know that there weren’t enough SAR dogs to cycle through Ground Zero to get any survivors out fast enough w/the amount of residual heat there was in the remains of the Twin Towers?? Not that there were vast numbers of survivors. Only one, in fact, from somewhere near the subterranean concourse. Either way, Search and Rescue is an avocation I’m proud to be involved with. It’s got nothing to do w/heroism. I like dogs. They’re smart. They’re loyal. They respond to love. They don’t require excessive intellectual wrangling. They don’t give a pig’s ear whether I’m smart or not. Best of all, they don’t bitch about religion.

  47. says

    Americana, I’m with you on dogs. You said:

    I like dogs. They’re smart. They’re loyal. They respond to love. They don’t require excessive intellectual wrangling. They don’t give a pig’s ear whether I’m smart or not. Best of all, they don’t bitch about religion.

    Actually, I think it would be pretty cool if dogs bitched about religion sometimes! But the rest I agree with you about.

  48. says

    LemonLime, thanks for the appreciation. Likewise to you, gravenimage. I appreciate your comments too.

  49. says

    gravenimage, need some antipsychotic drugs? I didn’t say word one about anti-jihadists not wanting to have victims of jihad rescued. What I wrote is because I’m not going to be insulted about doing SAR work w/my dogs. If you get trapped in a building bombing, it’ll be dogs like mine that come find you. I’ll go for the practical anti-jihad end of the stick along w/a lot of other skilled SAR handlers whose SAR groups are linked to all the FEMA dispatch locations in the U.S.

    http://www.disasterdog.org/

    Oh, and as for Mohammed saying terrible things about dogs. Did you know that many of the Muslim nations w/large number of shepherds, have guardian dogs —- Anatolian shepherds, Komondors, Kangals, and on and on… Even Mohammed couldn’t eliminate the need humans have for the skills that dogs possess.

    traeh, finally a moment’s respite on an innocent subject!

  50. says

    Americana, I’m not too original: I like labradors and golden retrievers.

    Islam’s core texts are mostly very negative about dogs, but not always. In certain hadiths, Muhammad orders all dogs to be killed, especially black dogs. But I think we learn in other hadiths or sources that Muhammad permitted owning dogs for certain limited purposes, perhaps shepherding or hunting or guard dogs, I can’t remember now. In another series of hadiths, we learn that one of the things that keep angels from entering a house is a dog. I suppose that Muhammad probably witnessed wild dogs eating corpses on one of his countless corpse-covered battlefields, and that might have influenced him some.

    Normally I cite the horrifying hadiths, since they are more relevant, but there is one hadith I really like, a very unusual Sahih Bukhari hadith that seems like something transplanted accidentally from Buddhism or something:

    Allah’s Apostle said,”While a man was walking he felt thirsty and went down a well and drank water from it. On coming out of it, he saw a dog panting and eating mud because of excessive thirst. The man said, ‘This (dog) is suffering from the same problem as that of mine. So he (went down the well), filled his shoe with water, caught hold of it with his teeth and climbed up and watered the dog. Allah thanked him for his (good) deed and forgave him.” The people asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! Is there a reward for us in serving (the) animals?” He replied, “Yes, there is a reward for serving any animate.”

    As I say, the above hadith is extremely atypical. I’d say it’s one of the very few places in the Islamic canon where one really feels compassion at work, rather than a sort of formal lip service to compassion. Normally, the talk of mercy in Islam seems a kind of high flown pseudo-theocratic lingo or hot air in service to Muhammad’s expansionist totalitarian goals.

  51. says

    That’s a fascinating hadith, traeh. I had never heard of one advising being kind to dogs because they’re “animates.” Well, that hadith isn’t really in praise of dogs though, it’s more like encouraging tolerance of them as living, breathing beings that need water.

    Another of my ideas for breaking down Islamist ideas by exposure to other concepts and world views is something that comes out my work w/SAR dogs and personal assistance dogs. I’ve thought how wonderful it would be if we trained some Afghans and Syrians and other nationalities in the region about how to train personal assistance dogs for those grievously wounded in their wars. Yes, I was laughed at by SAR friends who know that dogs are reviled in Islam. Like all my ideas of religious outreach, it’ll take a lot of hard-working, hard-loving personal assistance dogs to trash that Muslim belief that dogs are evil. But the fact is, like much of the suspect claims in the Qur’an, there is another perspective on these issues that is diametrically opposed to the Islamist perspective. Like the Baha’i, I have faith in ultimately prevailing in my worldview. Especially when it comes to what dogs mean to humans. If my SAR group does get funding, we may follow through on this attempt to bring personal assistance dogs to the Middle East.

  52. says

    P.S. I can see Americana, a man wearing a nurse’s wig and lipstick (shades of Heath Ledger’s Joker) at the smoking ruins of a scene of a terror attack with his SAR dogs in tow — at a certain point handing their care over to colleagues while he hurriedly cleans his hands, arms and face with non-alcoholic antiseptic gel, followed by obligatory ablutions with water, that he may get in the third of his five prayers of the day on a mat generously provided by the Fire Department of the Irish-Catholic neighborhood of the Northeastern American city he claims to have been born and raised in.

  53. says

    “Americana” wrote:

    gravenimage, need some antipsychotic drugs?
    ………………………………..

    Why, no, I don’t. I’m not the one hysterically ranting about ‘dogs defecating on the unmarked graves of jihadists’.

    More:

    I didn’t say word one about anti-jihadists not wanting to have victims of jihad rescued. What I wrote is because I’m not going to be insulted about doing SAR work w/my dogs. If you get trapped in a building bombing, it’ll be dogs like mine that come find you. I’ll go for the practical anti-jihad end of the stick along w/a lot of other skilled SAR handlers whose SAR groups are linked to all the FEMA dispatch locations in the U.S.
    ………………………………..

    Now “Americana” has gone from her supposed work with rescue dogs to being the first line of response to Jihad terror attacks. I predicted her claims would become steadily more self aggrandizing, and so they have.

    More:

    Oh, and as for Mohammed saying terrible things about dogs.
    ………………………………..

    He didn’t just “say terrible things about dogs”. After the vile “Angel” Jibreel supposedly failed to keep an appointment with the “Prophet” because he had a small black puppy under his bed, he uttered the infamous lines that “no Angel will enter a house with a dog or a statue”. Then he and his thug buddies went on a murderous rampage, slaughtering every dog they could find.

    Finally, desperate landowners came to him, and begged him at least to spare working dogs used to guard property and herd sheep. Muhammed reluctantly agreed.

    More:

    Did you know that many of the Muslim nations w/large number of shepherds, have guardian dogs —- Anatolian shepherds, Komondors, Kangals, and on and on… Even Mohammed couldn’t eliminate the need humans have for the skills that dogs possess.
    ………………………………..

    Of course I knew that”as do most readers here. This says nothing good about Islam.

    More:

    Another of my ideas for breaking down Islamist ideas by exposure to other concepts and world views is something that comes out my work w/SAR dogs and personal assistance dogs. I’ve thought how wonderful it would be if we trained some Afghans and Syrians and other nationalities in the region about how to train personal assistance dogs for those grievously wounded in their wars. Yes, I was laughed at by SAR friends who know that dogs are reviled in Islam. Like all my ideas of religious outreach, it’ll take a lot of hard-working, hard-loving personal assistance dogs to trash that Muslim belief that dogs are evil. But the fact is, like much of the suspect claims in the Qur’an, there is another perspective on these issues that is diametrically opposed to the Islamist perspective. Like the Baha’i, I have faith in ultimately prevailing in my worldview. Especially when it comes to what dogs mean to humans. If my SAR group does get funding, we may follow through on this attempt to bring personal assistance dogs to the Middle East.
    ………………………………..

    What crap. Now her rescue group is also doing outreach to the Middle East. What will “Americana” claim next?

    And does she believe that we are unaware of the frequent Fatwas against the use of guide dogs for the blind and disabled?

    Here’s one such story:

    “Forbidden a seeing-eye dog, blind Muslim woman relies on mini-horse”

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/04/forbidden-a-seeing-eye-dog-blind-muslim-woman-relies-on-mini-horse.html

    And there are an increasing number of stories of Muslim bus drivers and cabbies refusing to allow dogs in their vehicles, even in obvious contravention of Infidel law. I’ve even had Muslim cab drivers balk at transporting cats in carriers.

    “Taxi driver told blind woman – put guide dog in the boot or get out”

    http://sheikyermami.com/2010/05/17/taxi-driver-told-blind-woman-put-guide-dog-in-the-boot-or-get-out-2/

    Moreover, given the endless stories of dogs neglected, abused, tortured and killed for fun in Dar-al-Islam, any scheme to export guide dogs to the Muslim world would either have to be absurdly naïve, or else actually sadistic.

    Here’s Hugh Fitzgerald’s classic, “On dogs and statues in Islam”:

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/06/fitzgerald-on-dogs-and-statues-in-islam.html

  54. says

    gravenimage —- Have you asked your “journalist” hubby about the differences between accuracy, plagiarism, falsification, etc, etc.? You might want to do that. It’d be terrible if you lost out on bonus points for harassment because you didn’t opt to nail the right categories of misstatement and misappropriation and misrepresentation.

    dumbledore’sarmy —– Why not ask me if you’re confused about the differences between what the terms for dogs mean? A guard dog is trained to attack and subdue humans vs. flock guardians that are bred to be the guardian of whatever herding animal they’re exposed to as puppies. Why wouldn’t you think that a shepherd dog would be named a “flock guardian” because he’s a guardian breed rather than be called a guard breed? What a silly, silly issue over which you all are patting yourselves on the back!!! Honestly, the hysterics of you all playing your roles in the Fifth Columnist Ladies Detective Society never ceases to amaze me.

    From Wikipedia (Because I’m not going to type out something like this) —– Both guard dogs and watchdogs bark loudly to alert their owners of an intruder’s presence and to scare away the intruder. The watch dog’s function ends here; a guard dog is capable of attacking, or restraining the intruder. livestock guardian dogs are often large enough, 100-200lbs and strong enough to attack and drive away livestock predators such as wolves. Some smaller breeds (such as Keeshonden) are excellent watchdogs but not guard dogs because they bark loudly to alert their masters of intruders but are phyically small and not given to assertive behavior. Guardian breeds will bark to alert their master and to warn off an approaching animal, or human threat, prior to their interception of the trespasser. They are different from the smaller watchdogs in that they do not continue barking, they take action. The human shepherd would in many cases come to the guardian dog’s aid with a weapon, not letting the dog fend for itself.

    As for die English of mine, which is seemingly always in question (what a crock), here’s a delightful spew of sentences using ‘onslaught’ in many and sundry ways:

    Now it was the turn of leros to try to withstand the german onslaught.
    The relentless onslaught is almost too much for wonder woman to bear!
    onslaught game mode in particular.
    Undoubtedly there will be a propaganda onslaught, financed by the tax payer, to persuade the british people to change their minds.
    onslaughts of the enemy upon the child of god are many and serious.
    onslaught from severe weather.
    Most of the young men never survived the next onslaught.
    Can christie survive the ferocious onslaught leveled against him.
    For five months, a concerted media onslaught launched against republicans followed the northern bank robbery and the murder of robert mccartney in belfast.
    onslaught of attacks.
    Secondly, on measures to be taken to help russia to resist the hideous onslaught which hitler has made upon her; thirdly.
    For the greater part of the day, the british held their own against the furious onslaughts of the french.
    The dh productions ‘ ” stable of knuckleheads ” are back with yet another heavy metal onslaught of broken bikes, bones and blood.
    That he had to suffer the onslaught of rob dixon’s crazy logic in the dispute over first place was a great shame.
    Following the imperialist onslaught in iraq, cuba is under threat of invasion by the us.
    A year later, a new media onslaught has begun against venezuela.
    He wants the believers to be able to face the onslaught of false teachers triumphantly.
    The church has not escaped the onslaught of the expert mentality.

  55. says

    ”As for die (sic) English of mine, which is seemingly always in question (what a crock), here’s a delightful spew of sentences using ‘onslaught’ in many and sundry ways:”

    ” … many and sundry ways” ?

    No.

    In every single example the troll gives, ”onslaught” is used to describe something pejorative and/or threatening.

    The fact that the troll chose to use the word ”onslaught” to describe **Christians** fleeing in terror from murdering muslims is a clear indicative of how it sees Christians in the Islamic world, and how it sees these persecuted Christians looking for sanctuary and safety in the West. Pejorative and/or threatening.

    But more and more muslims coming to subjugate the West, and destroy our civilisation and culture ? **That** the troll is perfectly OK with.

  56. says

    Love that reference to Walter Duranty, Mr. Farmer. Yes, the grateful masses are prospering under the steady hand of the “Great Helmsman” Khamenai. Onward to victory!

    I’m hoping Reza will be genuine with these folks at the dinner; you know, open up to them and reveal himself. He could start off by calling Joyce S. Dubensky a “sexy water buffalo.” Then compliment her on her beard, suggest she should lose some weight, toss in some F-bombs and question her sexual preferences. “Hey, I’m just gettin’ started here, I got a million of ’em!”

  57. says

    Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding to honor Reza Aslan, Board member of front group for Islamic Republic of Iran
    ……………………………..

    What fools these dhimmis be!

    “Americana” wrote:

    Challenge Reza Aslan to a debate.
    ……………………………..

    Robert Spencer has, of course, done this many times. The meretricious Reza Aslan has *no* interest in debating about Islam”especially with an Anti-Jihadist of Spencer’s caliber.

    More:

    You’ll perhaps have to invite other relevant participants to defuse the invitation and make it less of a head-on clash, but it might be interesting to hear a group debating the issues revolving around Islam and its impact on the world both the world that has been dominated in the past by a Muslim overlord and countries such as the U.S. that were founded under different religious principles.
    ……………………………..

    More bland phrasing from “Americana”. Yes, the U.S. was founded on rather different principles from barbaric Islam”you might say that…

    More:

    George, obviously I happen to feel that by expanding the debate both those men might feel it was less of a grudge match. Get it? It’s pretty straightforward. There’s less face lost if they meet on terms like these of a larger array of viewpoints. Get it?? I’m well aware based on what Robert Spencer has said in several threads on Aslan that it’s not on for it to be a two-man debate.
    ……………………………..

    What crap. The sharp and eloquent Robert Spencer is not going to “lose face” debating a foul-mouthed non-entity like Reza Aslan. And are you implying that Spencer would feel any different about Aslan’s vile apologia for evil if it were somehow diluted by the presence of other, more consistent Taqiyya artists? How bizarre.

    Reza Alsan knows that Robert Spencer would surgically expose his meretricious bs. Reza Aslan would much rather address the hopeful and clueless Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding, instead.

    More:

    Who’s proposing another religious interfaith conference? I’m suggesting a knock-down, drag out debate over jihad and modern Islam vs. modern society…
    ……………………………..

    What is “modern Islam”? Islam is *not* modern, by definition”although pious Muslims will often adopt modern weaponry to fight it.

    More:

    …… Featuring some of the Muslim military men who’ve had to fight jihad, along w/Spencer and Islan and some other notables.
    ……………………………..

    Very sly. “Americana” here is positing that Muslims are as apt to fight against Jihad as to wage it themselves.

    This is utterly false.

    In all but a few cases, Muslims only fight against Jihadists who directly threaten their power.

    You find Saudi Arabia and Pakistan sporadically fighting Jihadists who consider them “insufficiently Islamic”, but that does not mean that they are anti-Jihad themselves.

    You can see this in the schizophrenia of Pakistan, where the army occasionally fights the Taliban, and the ISI actively enables those same Jihadists.

    Even more common, you see the situation in places like Saudi Arabia and Yemen where the authorities encourage Jihadists, just so long as the Jihad is not specifically aimed against themselves.

    And in Muslim hell-holes like Somalia, you actually have rival bands of Jihadists murdering each other and jockeying for power, each claiming to be the real Jihadists, and their foes to be “insufficiently Islamic”.

    So, this is just more of the usual crap from “Americana”.

  58. says

    And what posses you to think that raza wants to debate RS when he knows very well that RS will kick his lousy ass in any debate on islam?
    NO, raza would rather keep lying about islam to the ignorant masses, while raking in the dough.

  59. says

    Well, Amrika, you’ve really let the troll mask slip today, haven’t you.

    However, for the record, Reza has refused to debate Robert Spencer. So, you’ll have to contact Reza and get him to change his mind.
    And with that in mind, I see your suggestion for a debate consists of wishy-washy stuff like discussing the impact of Islam on society today. Why not something a little more focused and meaty, like, Was Mohammed a ‘moderate’ an ‘extremist’, or just a Muslim? Or: ‘Do women get a good deal in Islam?’ Or: ‘Why do Islamic Theocracies focus on the destruction of Israel?’
    Y’know, a debate that would really expose Islam’s misogyny, racism and psychopathic, genocidal nature.
    How about *you* debating Robert Spencer? Then we can all see who you are. Are you Reza, or paid by him and that clown Nathan to hang around here ‘causing mischief’ in our land. Have you been sent to muddy the waters of the ‘rightly guided’ Robert Spencer?

    Clown!

  60. says

    gravenimage,

    Thanks for picking up on very subtle crap from Americana that many would gloss over:

    Who’s proposing another religious interfaith conference? I’m suggesting a knock-down, drag out debate over jihad and modern Islam vs. modern society…
    ……………………………..

    What is “modern Islam”? Islam is *not* modern, by definition”although pious Muslims will often adopt modern weaponry to fight it.

    Americana slips in “modern Islam” as though it’s coherent and makes sense, let alone as though it’s not a deadly meme threatening our lives.

    American is remarkably subtle. But he doesn’t get by the best of us here.

  61. says

    Kinana,

    Thanks for that link. I didn’t agree with everything in Rizvi’s article, but it has a lot of good points…

  62. says

    Lest we all forget, Spencer is also raking in the dough. This web site alone nets him $130,000 plus.

    It’s interesting that Robert shares his financial information with you…You do have evidence of all this money money don’t you? Bank deposit slips, bank statements etc…

    Do you know where the term, ‘raking it in’, comes from?

  63. says

    Hi Amrika!
    You wrote: ‘If JWers wish to conflate all the other jihads …….’

    Jihads?! Plural? There’s Jihad, period. Every Islam inspired attack from Boston to Timbuktoo is jihad. It’s all part of the same Islamic doctrine of shedding blood ‘in the way of Allah’.

    And you’ll notice my ‘rightly guided’ reference to Mr Spencer has inverted commas, because it’s a reference to the so-called ‘rightly guided’ Caliphs who guided Islam at the beginning of its bloody ascendancy. It’s irony, because I’m having a dig at the Caliphs, certainly not Mr Spencer.

    And your mock outrage when saying that the Mayans were no different in terms of their behavior from Islam is hardly relevant now. The Mayans have long since gone, but Islam is with us now, threatening out freedoms and rights. Focus on that!

    And as for Islam evolving, the doors to Ijtihad closed 1,000 years ago. The chance to evolve from within Islam is totally blocked. Moral and spiritual constipation is an integral part of Islam.

  64. says

    I hope he is raking in the dough, as he’s going to have significant security costs to pay for the rest of his life. But there’s no way you can know how much he’s making from this site; there are too many unknowns involved. You also have no way to know he’s a “hired gun” as you called him. Calling him that is equivalent to saying he’s not in it for the passion and the principle of the thing, that he’s in it for the cash. Apart from the fact that you are glibly spouting about things you are not in a position to know, you’re conclusion makes no sense in itself. If money were his main interest, he could have found ways to make money that don’t involve him watching his back for assassins for the rest of his life. No, there is passion and principle there. In any event, for you to call him a “hired gun” is nothing but ad hominem, which is a logical fallacy. You have to defeat an argument on the merits, not by ad hominem. Ad hominem is what people use when they can’t win on the merits. You come here talking your head off about all these issues, and offering your opinions about Robert Spencer, yet you, though a self-professed Catholic of some sort, haven’t even read Spencer’s new book addressed to Catholics (as you told me in another comment). Why spout so glibly about what you don’t know yet? Why spout that you “know” the exact minimum the website makes, and offer like a careless throw-away line that Spencer is a “hired gun?” You should slow down and digest your thoughts a bit more before you express them.

  65. says

    “Americana” wrote:

    Lest we all forget, Spencer is also raking in the dough. This web site alone nets him $130,000 plus…and he’s a hired gun in the case of this web site.
    ………………………………….

    “Raking in the dough””I’m sure the accomplished Robert Spencer could find ways to “rake in the dough” that would not be so hazardous to his health, in the form of pious Muslims constantly threatening his life. If he were not so passionate about standing against Jihad, he could no doubt save himself a lot of grief.

    And calling him a “hired gun” is not only pejorative, it is false. This is his site.

    And, as someone mentioned, it is odd that Robert Spencer has decided to share the contents of his tax return with “Amriki”, in any case…sarc/off

    More:

    I’m sorry, I guess I don’t see either one of them as **winning** such a debate. I see them as being present and having their ideas filtered by the others who were invited.
    ………………………………….

    Sure”a truth-teller, a vile shill for the “Islamic Republic of Iran””who could possibly win out in such a case? Really, it’s just the sharing of ideas…

    And your implication that the ‘extreme’ positions of Robert Spencer and Reza Aslan could be “filtered” by apologists of a somewhat more ‘moderate’ stripe is just bizarre.

    After all, if one leavens ice cream with dog excrement, the result tastes more like the latter than the former. You can’t leaven freedom and decency with evil and expect any good result.

    More:

    Why invite some of the Pakistani military who’ve been fighting this jihad battle both within the Pakistani armed services and in the civilian population to be on this Spencer/Islan debate panel?? Because I get the feeling on this BB that none of you has any concept of what it must be like for these men and women who are making risk assessments on all sides — from their intelligence/military jobs, their colleagues and friends, and their families —- as they go forth each day knowing they are likely facing the very real risk of being blown up if they’re of any importance in the battle against jihad. Gen. Pervez Musharaff permitted the U.S. to use drones in many major strikes while he was President…
    ………………………………….

    This is *grotesque* The Pakistani military sheltered *Osama bin Laden* for over ten years. The Pakistanis make periodic moves against Jihad when it directly threatens their regime, but that is as far as it goes.

    The military and ISI enables Jihad against India and against the West.

    The Pakistani military actually uses the slogan “Islam, Pakistan, Jihad” as a recruitment tool.

    The idea that *Pakistan* represents a great example of fighting Jihad simply could not be more ludicrous.

    Here’s some more information:

    “Jihad and Musharraf”

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2004/02/jihad-and-musharraf.html

    More:

    We’ve got WORLD jihad happening in the U.S.??? No, we don’t. We are the target of one jihad —- from the Palestinians and the Saudis in support of the Palestinians and now in support of our Middle East policies in their entirety.
    ………………………………….

    “Americana” has been flogging this horse for some time now”that all Jihad against America is due to our support of Israel. This is simply false. Osama bin Laden, Malik Nidal Hasan, and Tsarnaev brothers all inconveniently neglected to mention the “Palestinian” situation as their reason for attacking us.

    “Americana’s” reason for this assertion is clear”if only The US were to abandon Israel, the Jihad threat would simply disappear. This suggestion is both abhorrent and utterly false.

    More:

    If JWers wish to conflate all the other jihads going on in the world and pretend they have ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to do w/the Palestinian/Middle East jihad that is currently happening here in the U.S., be my guest. Just don’t be surprised if you get called on it because that is such intellectual chicanery, it’s vomit worthy.
    ………………………………….

    Ludicrous. The Jihad against Israel is *exactly* on the basis of Jihad everywhere”extending the rule of Islam and oppressing and slaughtering the Infidels.

    Islam is encroaching on many others besides the Israeli Jews”Christians in Nigeria, Hindus in Pakistan, Buddhists in Thailand, atheists in Chechnya”and always on the basis of the texts and tenets of Islam.

    Moreover, many Jihadists quite overtly make the point that all Jihad is one.

    More:

    As for women in Islam, I’ve got quite a few questions. I wouldn’t bother spending the two hours of debate smearing Mohammed. Now THAT is an absolutely pointless exercise and although it might give you lot some shits and giggles, it’d be absolutely pointless.
    ………………………………….

    How is telling the truth about the baleful “Prophet”, *per Islam’s own texts*, “smearing”? And this is hardly pointless. The horrors of Islam are entirely on the model of Muhammed”Muslims today “marry” nine-year-old girls on the model of Muhammed, they wage violent Jihad on the model of Muhammed, they beat their wives on the model of Muhammed, they stone women to death on the model of Muhammed, they condone slavery and rape and Jizya on the model of Muhammed.

    Implying that criticism of Islam’s “perfect man” is gratuitous is absurd.

    More:

    Why is it pointless? Because there are billions of Muslims in the world. If they’re not going to give up Mohammed, there’s not much point in our denigrating the man. He was what he was.
    ………………………………….

    Firstly, “Americana” is falsely implying that the only possible reason for criticizing the appalling Muhammed is to convince Muslims to ‘give him up’. This like saying that the only legitimate reason to criticize Adolph Hitler during his lifetime was to convince Fascist to give him up.

    Instead, of course, the main purpose was to *warn* anti-Fascists about him, and to expose what he was.

    More:

    We can only hope for reformation of the parts of his creed we consider highly undesirable in today’s world.
    ………………………………….

    If Muhammed is to be considered beyond criticism as you counsel”and as Shari’ah demands”then on what basis would we suggest “reformation”? He himself embodied all this barbarism.

    And Islam was *always* indescribably savage. The idea that Infidels were fine with being conquered, slaughtered and oppressed during some time in the past is ludicrous and offensive. Why did Infidels fight at the Battle of Tours and the Gates of Vienna centuries ago, if violent Jihad is only considered undesirable in today’s world?

    More:

    But, OMGosh, Buraq claims that Robert Spencer is “rightly guided.” What the hell does that mean —– is that code for “divinely guided?” Is that what that term “rightly guided” means in JW reality?
    ………………………………….

    Buraq’s use of irony is masterful. Amriki, however, appears to be tone deaf. This is, of course, a play on the “Rightly Guided” Caliphs.

    More:

    You know what? I’m tired of everybody and his brother pretending to have the lock on sanctity when what they have a lock on is sanctimony. That’s my biggest beef w/these religion issues.
    ………………………………….

    Well, of course”how dare we be so “sanctimonious” as to oppose divinely inspired pedophilia, rape, slavery, and terrorism? This sort of “sanctimony” is *much* more offensive than the crimes themselves…sarc/off

    More:

    The religions that have outlasted all the others have been those that tried to inculcate the best ethical parameters for individuals and communities and societies at their greatest sizes. Religions have EVOLVED over the aeons of humankind just like every other aspect of mankind.
    ………………………………….

    Not all of them. Islam is not “evolving”. This is “Americana” using the Western model of social progress, and pretending to apply it to a creed that *categorically rejects the concept of progress*.

    More:

    We are no longer practicing human sacrifice w/abandon like the Mayans. (Hey, wait a cotton pickin’ minute, why have the Mayans never been compared w/the Muslims??? Boy, if ever there was a comparison that was ripe to be made, that’s one! The savagery, the plunder, the expansionism, the enslavement of conquered peoples, the Mayans had all those too!)
    ………………………………….

    Actually, that comparison has been made many times. As for the Mayans themselves, I’ll focus on them the next time some Mayan bombs the Boston Marathon.

    More:

    This is just me. Thinking away… Years and years of thinking away…
    ………………………………….

    What a terrible shame that you have so little to show for it…

    More:

    This is years of me being a Newton, MA resident hearing stories from parents of my Jewish friends of their families during WW II and the Holocaust. These Jews in Newton lost 60, 80, 98% of their European family members during the Holocaust. I don’t need coaching from you folks on what Israel means to the Jewish community. I know what it means.
    ………………………………….

    And yet, you are slyly stumping for abandonment of Israel. There is nothing that would so set up a second Holocaust than that. “Palestinians”, in fact, evoke the Holocaust all the time.

    More:

    PS —- I’ll write to Reza Aslan and I’ll write to others whom I’d like to see at a debate on the principal issues. I’ll post it if I get any kind of response from Reza Aslan.
    ………………………………….

    We will, no doubt, be waiting with bated breath…

  66. says

    Thanks so much, LemonLime. You and other posters here have been very astute at exposing “Americana’s” repulsive apologia, as well.

  67. says

    I’ve done a complete 180 on the troll issue, graven. I may email you with what I know.

    In any event, thanks for taking on the tedious task of responding to the kindergarten-level perception of the inherent issues.

    A HUGE tip-off is ignorance of the term “rightly-guided”. NO ONE who has a modicum of knowledge about islam and its bloody history is unaware of its usage. Probably not a mohammedan, possibly an apologist, more likely a governmental “plant” (witness the staunch defense of the dearth of valuable info on islam from governmental training materials). The latter would explain that ignorance of terminology and awareness of the “oneness” of jihad ideology.

  68. says

    You’re about as boring as they come…I told you before if you can cram all your great thoughts in a two inch paragraph, your interesting index
    ‘might’ rise significantly…

  69. says

    Like I said, it doesn’t take a sophisticated researcher to understand that SIMPLE FACT. Jihad is jihad. Got it.

    You seem to agree with that simple fact, but then in the next breath, you say:

    But if the alternative is true, jihads are geopolitical in nature, then we don’t have the Indonesian Archipelago jihad affecting the Boston Marathon.

    So it seems you insist you must be allowed to eat your cake at one moment and yet the next moment be allowed to have the slice you’ve already eaten.

    It’s clear that jihadis travel all over the world to join foreign jihads. Do you deny that? And if you don’t deny it, why keep harping on the supposed isolation of one jihad from another?

  70. says

    I would argue, David, that it’s time that everyone at JW no longer respond to Americana. This doesn’t mean regular commenters here at JW should cease altogether writing about Americana but directly responding to him/her/it should end in my opinion. I certainly won’t respond to this troll under the present name of “Americana” ever again, as I indicated over a week ago on a different thread.

    Hope you’re doing well, my friend. Ah, Islam and trolls are made for each other, no?

  71. says

    traeh —- I’ve responded to these questions of yours before so I don’t understand why you’re throwing down the gauntlet yet again….

    You do not respond to the specific evidence I give you; you simply repeat yourself.

    Jihad is not a universal continuum other than in its tactics. jihad is a practice whereby Islam consolidates its religious control over an area and serves to help foster homogeneity. But the jihad we are facing here in the U.S. doesn’t share the same driving forces that are motivating other regional jihad movements elsewhere.

    If what drives jihad is as local as you say, and there is no unifying element except “tactics,” as you put it, then why is it only Islam that produces anything like violent jihads all over the world? The answer is that they are all motivated by the core Islamic texts’ supremacism and totalitarianism.

    There are elements of both NATIONALISM and SUPRANATIONALISM that drive some of the larger jihad movements. But what we face here in the U.S. and across the North and South American continents is not the imminent intention of Muslims forcing our being absorbed into the Muslim world. What the U.S. is facing is jihad in order to sway our political decisions and policies in the Middle East and toward Israel and the Palestinians.

    You still avoid addressing the two criticisms I expressed, of which I’ll repeat one now: you fail to take account of the Al Qaeda Reader, in which texts translated from Bin Laden and Zawahiri, the Al Qaeda top dogs, show that they are very conscious of how Westerners just like you think, and that they seek to manipulate you by bringing up “grievances” against the West, when their real concern is to advance Islam. You quote bin Laden. Why then are you selective about what you quote? Read the Al Qaeda Reader, to see what he says about propaganda methods against marks like you. You’ll see that the Palestinian business is irrelevant.

    It doesn’t matter if America’s Muslim community EXPORTS jihadis to other jihad movements.

    You conveniently miss my meaning. I didn’t refer only to exports of jihadis only from America to other jihad movements. Jihadis move from all over the globe to foreign jihads all over the globe. Do you deny that? Jihad the world over has common motives, contained in the core texts of Islam: to spread the rule of Islamic law, or prepare its spread.

    The fact is, if these Muslim jihadis remain in this country (as the Tsarnaev brothers did) and they execute a jihad action WITHIN THE U.S., they are doing so on behalf of the Palestinians. That’s WHY Tamerlan Tsarnaev asked his mother about going to Palestine and then bowed out of going to Palestine when he decided he didn’t want the hassle of not speaking the language. We have not had (thus far) Indonesian jihadists bombing the World Trade Centers around this country or hijacking airliners or bombing malls and then issuing a list of demands they want met.

    You are mistaken. Not only was Tamerlan a devout Muslim motivated by the traditional purposes of jihad that have been similar for the last 1400 years, but here from D.C. Watson, is a list of hundreds of U.S. Muslims in trouble with law for jihad/sharia activities. They are from all over the world, and they are not here because of Palestinian gripes, as one can see if one looks into the details of their cases.

    If you don’t see the point of isolating one jihad movement from another, I don’t know what else to say to you.

    I can see why you are at a loss to present evidence for your position. It’s in short supply. You also conveniently ignore the copious evidence I gave of the truly pathological swamp of anti-Semitism in the Middle East and in the Qur’an. I pointed out that the Palestinians are not open to a solution, and would not accept anything but conflict, because of that anti-Semitism dating back to Muhammad, and because of the culture of Islamic supremacism. That supremacism is universal in all jihads and is what drive them and make them impossible to resolve, except with force or bribes.

    You’re obviously completely undesirous of seeing each jihad movement as something solvable, that it’s possible to find a political means of shutting each jihad movement down. Even if that solution is the creation of a Muslim state, it means that the jihad is no longer being pursued in that region.

    So you consider that a viable solution to jihad? Set up an Islamic state? Gee, why don’t infidels all just shoot themselves. That’s a great solution. And I’ll tell you what I’m “undesirous” of. I’m undesirous of pretending that the various jihads around the world have nothing in common but tactics, as you put it. They have in common theological supremacism and totalitarianism.

    Jihad certainly can seem like it’s universally interconnected, but it’s not. Not when each and every REGIONAL Muslim community decides they want to hark back to the good old days and tries to reinstate their Muslim roots.

    You say that “each and every” regional Muslim community wants to reinstate their Muslim roots of primitive Islam. In your own words what you are talking about is universal, not regional! Your argument is incoherent.

    The truth is, we have had long periods of peace before the present conflagration of jihad movements. There have been periods when there’s been quiet around the world. Not absolute quiet, but certainly a modicum of quiet in comparison w/the present day.

    All that shows is that previously Islam has been kept in its cage by stronger cultures or by its own weakness. We’ve now entered an era when technology makes it possible for backward Islamic cultures to do huge physical damage (by taking over a plane, for example, or a nuke, or bio-weapons), and also makes it possible for jihadis through the internet and other means to network, indoctrinate, and communicate globally. Now politically correct culture, and Western guilt and self-hatred, together with Western technology, makes jihad more practicable everywhere.

    The fact that there has been “quiet” at times does nothing to show that jihad is not a global movement to establish Islamic law, rather than, as you claim, a bunch of regional political gripes that for some mysterious reason you can’t explain, are prosecuted so fanatically and so globally only by Muslims. Nor do you respond to the quotes from Bernard Lewis, who accurately represents the viewpoints of mainstream Islamic scholars throughout history, that jihad is above all warfare to establish Islamic law.

  72. says

    With respect, traeh, I think you need to give up on Americana. Yes, you have brilliantly dissected one argument after another of this troll but, don’t you see, that reason, logic and knowledge-infused arguments, which are very much your domain, matter nothing to those, like Americana, for whom ideology trumps everything?

    In fact, and I hope you don’t mind this comment of mine, Americana is yanking your chain. Time to put a lid on it, traeh, although it’s your call in the final analysis.

  73. says

    Thank you, friend Wellington. I’ll certainly take it under advisement.

    But even if she’s here in bad faith, I’m not sure such people are bad for Jihad Watch. I recall the days when there are four comments on a thread. That’s not necessarily good. Enemies stay away in part because an argument is sometimes a very good thing for Jihad Watch, no? Controversy is not necessarily a bad thing. Isn’t “controversial” one of the epithets that sells the most books?

  74. says

    Thank you traeh, that is a very valuable link. I’m going to book mark that one.

    I don’t thank you enough for all work that you’ve done. Last weekend I was at a party and there was a pastor there with whom I got into a conversation about Islam. (He had heard that I have been frowned upon in my parish for casting a bad light on Islam.) He told me that, as far as he understood it, Islam was an evil religion but he didn’t know why. I gave him a list of books – which included Mr. Spencer’s works of course – and I sent him to your site as well as to David Wood’s Acts 17. He is going to get an education now; and in part, thanks to you, there will be one more clergyman who will know the truth about Islam.

  75. says

    I too, traeh, have argued that the deceitful must be answered now and again lest their deceitfulness take on an extended life of its own precisely because the deceitful are never responded to. Nonetheless, there comes a point where further response to a deceitful human being serves no purpose. Of course, this is a judgment call and reasonable minds can differ on the timing here. Your judgment of things is at least as good as mine and so I leave it to you when to call it quits with a most deceitful human being—Americana.

    Hope you and yours are doing well, friend traeh. As always, I value your input here at JW. Take good care.

  76. says

    And I value your input likewise, Wellington.

    As for the point at which response serves no purpose, I certainly respect your judgement and doubt my own. On the other hand, I think of bystanders who haven’t made up their minds yet on these issues, for whom the discussion might be useful, even when one of the interlocutors is arguing in bad faith.

  77. says

    classicus, thank you. I’ve appreciated your comments as well. Sounds like you did yeoman’s work at that party.

    You are probably already aware of it, but in addition to Spencer’s books, a great book, perhaps especially for pastors, is Mark Durie’s The Third Choice.

  78. says

    LemonLime wrote:

    Great, if not herculean, efforts at heavy lifting from both traeh and gravenimage.
    ………………………….

    Thank you, LemonLime. And I very much agree with you re Traeh’s excellent comments.

    More:

    Americana, in my mind, has long solidified into a mere object — providing an extended object lesson for the many readers (known and unknown) who come here, through the brilliant lenses of contributors like traeh and gravenimage engaging the fallacies of this object. (Granted, it’s likely that psychologically speaking, traeh and gravenimage may not have been motivated to respond as well and muster their talents, had they not harbored some feelings that Americana is a human being who needs to be persuaded and/or shown up to be wrong.)
    ………………………….

    Actually, LemonLime, I will respectfully remonstrate with someone so long as I believe them to be a misguided but honest and well-meaning actor. I have long since ceased to regard the meretricious “Americana” in that manner.

    Ergo, any response I make at this point is actually for any readers here who may take “Americana’s” sly innuendo at face value if not rebutted.

  79. says

    A partial corrective, LL. I have argued that arguing with trolls becomes a waste of time after a point, though it’s a judgment call by each reasonable mind when that point is arrived at.

  80. says

    “Americana” wrote:

    Considering you’d like dogs to defecate on the unmarked graves of jihadists, I would think you’d have agreed that the more INFIDEL DOGS running around full of poop the merrier…
    …………………………..

    Ludicrous. This is nothing I’ve ever said. I have no great fantasies about desecrating the graves of Jihad terrorists”I just want them to stop plotting to oppress and murder us.

    More:

    For pete’s sake, this hazing is beyond ridiculous. Do all of you know that there weren’t enough SAR dogs to cycle through Ground Zero to get any survivors out fast enough w/the amount of residual heat there was in the remains of the Twin Towers?? Not that there were vast numbers of survivors. Only one, in fact, from somewhere near the subterranean concourse…
    …………………………..

    “Americana” is now pretending that Anti-Jihdists don’t want victims of Jihad rescued. Appalling and false.

    More:

    I like dogs. They’re smart. They’re loyal. They respond to love. They don’t require excessive intellectual wrangling. They don’t give a pig’s ear whether I’m smart or not. Best of all, they don’t bitch about religion.
    …………………………..

    They “don’t bitch about religion”? Is that how “Americana” characterizes the fight against violent Jihad? There would have been no need for rescue dogs at the World Trade Center were it not for Islam and its vile devotees.

    It’s not as though the Twin Towers’ collapse were due to an earthquake or poor construction.

    By the way, a love of dogs is not permitted under Islam. The “Prophet” himself slaughtered dogs. Dogs may not “bitch” about religion, but they do not fare well under Islam themselves.

  81. says

    Among Americana’s first impulses in reaction to traeh’s corrective about dogs was:

    Oh, and as for Mohammed saying terrible things about dogs. Did you know that many of the Muslim nations w/large number of shepherds, have guardian dogs…

    The mask slipped again. I’m surprised traeh didn’t pick up on this classic Muslim response to the charge that Islamic culture inculcates a phobia and hatred of dogs. Indeed, I recall one of the Muslim trolls of yore (some guy who called himself “Abdullah” I believe and claimed he was a revert who hailed from, and still lived in, Texas) who did the same thing in the same dialogical circumstance — even going so far as to aver proudly that he himself had a couple of “guard dogs” himself, as it to prove that Muslims aren’t programmed and brainwashed by their Big Brother, Mohammed (when in fact, having “guard dogs” is just what the Doctor Demonicus ordered). Our Americana goes the extra mile, by going the preposterous extra mile in his claim that he moonlights with the hounds for Search and Rescue missions that he pointedly links with gross metal heartstrings to the dogs used to try to save survivors at Ground Zero. He’s almost entertaining.

  82. says

    CGW wrote:

    I’ve done a complete 180 on the troll issue, graven
    ………………………………

    CGW, thanks. But it’s completely understandable that you would give “Americana” the benefit of the doubt. If I hadn’t seen her first, ugly incarnation, I wouldn’t have been sure of her stance, either.

    Since her “makeover” she is a markedly subtle troll, but her mask”as is common with the type”is slipping more and more.

    As always, CGW, I hope you are doping well.

  83. says

    LemonLime wrote:

    P.S. I can see Americana, a man wearing a nurse’s wig and lipstick (shades of Heath Ledger’s Joker) at the smoking ruins of a scene of a terror attack…
    ……………………….

    LemonLime, this is grimly hilarious”your piece is a darkly comic masterpiece, and, I think, symbolically quite accurate. Kudos.

  84. says

    Thanks for getting and appreciating it, graven. Part of my sense of Americana’s persona derives from a nagging sense I had run-ins with him almost 10 years ago on another forum (a philosophy forum), under another name I’ve not ever seen anywhere since. At about that time, just before he (and that other forum) disappeared from the Internet, I tried to facilitate a running debate between him and Hugh Fitzgerald, by copy-pasting each other’s commentary and posting it there, then here, then back again. This didn’t last too long, but went on longer than I thought Hugh would have patience for — until that finally ran out. Anyway, that guy was a strange bird, able to put on a multiplicity of masks and voices; so much so, one got a sense he had no real center — sort of a philosophical sociopath. Once, early in his “career”, he fooled the entire forum for two or three months (many grad students, post-grads, or professors) by pretending to be a female librarian from Leipzig, Germany, carrying on defending a position of sophisticated skepticism. He later donned another costume, briefly for a couple of weeks, pretending to be a female Muslim professor from Pakistan or Bangladesh who was subtly defending moderate Islam.

  85. says

    You say, of someone you encountered who reminds you of our latest Disruptor/ Dementor, that “that guy was a strange bird, able to put on a multiplicity of masks and voices; so much so, one got a sense he had no real center..”.

    That’s what’s been nagging at me, about ‘americana’.

    The phrase that occurs to me, as I think of her/ his/ its postings, is “all over the place”.

  86. says

    Just a further thought.

    I don’t think this one’s a native English speaker.

    Very, very fluent, and can mimick styles and registers.

    But not, I think, native.

    I can think of at least two occasions when the poster has used a word or an idiom that *no* native English speaker, whatever their dialect, would naturally use.

    It has said ‘guardian dogs'; now, as far as I know, all over the Anglosphere, the normal phrasing is ‘guard dog’. *No* native English speaker, in the context in which that phrase was used by our Disruptor, would have said ‘guardian dogs’.

    And it talked, in commenting on the mess in Syria, that we should expect an ‘onslaught’ of Christian refugees from that country. I found that very odd, because a native English speaker – again, no matter where in the Anglosphere you were from – would probably say ‘an influx’. One might even use a word like ‘avalanche’ or ‘flood’. But not ‘onslaught’.

    Those are the two ‘standout’ items.

  87. says

    ” … a strange bird, able to put on a multiplicity of masks and voices; so much so, one got a sense he had no real center — sort of a philosophical sociopath. Once, early in his “career”, he fooled the entire forum for two or three months (many grad students, post-grads, or professors) by pretending to be a female librarian from Leipzig, Germany, carrying on defending a position of sophisticated skepticism. He later donned another costume, briefly for a couple of weeks, pretending to be a female Muslim professor from Pakistan or Bangladesh who was subtly defending moderate Islam”

    Interesting info, LL !

    However, if this ‘Americana’ *is* the same person you described, clearly it’s losing it’s touch. It has only been on *this* forum for what, 2 weeks ? and some were suspicious right from its *first* posting; and it has received a thorough drubbing ever since.

    So, are we at JW more perspicacious than philosophers, or just naturally more suspicious ? :)

  88. says

    Even though he seems all over the place, if it is that guy I knew, this “Americana” would be merely one face out of a thousand at his disposal. And if it is him, everything he’s done here to date is small fry and peanuts to him: he hasn’t even begun to deploy his real weaponry. He’s quite talented, if not brilliant, in his own way. I called him Hugh’s “Moriarty” (if only Hugh would have seen that, we could have had a real dressing down of him).

    Another little detail: His penchant for calling me “Sourpuss” fits his style.

  89. says

    I am somewhat reminded of something from J K Rowling: ‘The boggart in the Wardrobe’ (Prisoner of Azkaban, chapter 7).

    ..”What is a boggart?”

    …”It is a shape-shifter…It can take the shape of whatever it thinks will frighten us most”.

    ‘Couldn’t have put it better myself”, said Professor Lupin…”So the Boggart sitting in the darkness within has not yet assumed a form. He does not yet know what will frighten the person on the other side of the door. Nobody knows what a Boggart looks like when he is alone, but when I let him out, he will immediately become whatever each of us most fears.”
    “This means”, said Professor Lupin…”That we have a huge advantage over the boggart before we begin. Have you spotted it, Harry?”

    “Er – because there are so many of us, it won’t know what shape it should be?”

    “Precisely”, said Professor Lupin…”It’s always best to have company when you’re dealing with a Boggart. He becomes confused. Which should he become, a headless corpse or a flesh-eating slug? I once saw a Boggart make that very mistake – tried to frighten two people at once and turned himself into half a slug. Not remotely frightening”.

    (Of course, what *our* current problem poster seems to be about, is Confusion rather than Fear; but the broad analogy holds: ‘because there are so many of us, it won’t know what shape it should be.”

    And what comes next in the same chapter reminds me forcibly of what you did in your posting above, May 6, 1.18 pm, which posting I would, speaking metaphorically, describe as excellent use of the ‘Riddikulus’ charm)

    “The charm that repels a Boggart is simple, yet it requires force of mind. You see, the thing that really finishes a Boggart is laughter. What you need to do is force it to assume a shape that you find amusing.”

  90. says

    dda, you mentioned ‘Americana’s’ use of the word ”onslaught” as an example of usage not normally employed by a native English speaker.

    There’s also a sense in which ”onslaught” can be used as :

    n.
    1. **A violent attack.** (my emphasis: Jan)
    2. An overwhelming outpouring: an onslaught of third-class mail.

    It used the word ”onslaught” with reference to **Christians** fleeing, and coming to the West. A telling choice of word, apart from the not native English aspect.