| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
When I speak of "moderate Muslims," I refer to people who identify themselves as Muslim but have genuinely renounced violent jihad and any intention, now or in the future, to impose Sharia on non-Muslim countries. The situation is complicated by many factors, however:
1. Taqiyya and kitman. Many Salafis and other radical Muslims have no trouble deceiving the unbelievers, in line with Muhammad's statement, "War is deceit."
2. Since most Muslims today are not Arabs but all Islamic worship must be in Arabic, and because the Qur'an itself is in difficult classical Arabic, a significant number of nominal Muslims in the U.S. and around the world have no clear idea of what the Qur'an actually says, or what the traditions of their religion in fact do teach.
This group, of course, is the radicals' largest recruiting ground: again and again they have radicalized such "moderates" simply by teaching them what the Qur'an says.
The smallest number is a third group: Muslims who know that the Qur'an and other Muslim sources teach violence against unbelievers but are ready to set that aside in all circumstances.
Also complicating the picture is the fact that jihad, while it has meant warfare against unbelievers throughout Islamic history, has indeed also meant, as Islamic apologists routinely claim, a spiritual struggle. A "moderate" may renounce violence but not jihad, which is similar to but not necessarily identical to the renunciation of terrorism by terrorists who prefer to call what they are doing "jihad."
In any case, Daniel Pipes in this FrontPage piece provides a useful summation of groups that tend more to be actual moderates as opposed to those that do not. (The original article at FP is full of links, which I have in the interests of time not imported here.)
This material must be approached with caution, because of the complications I have noted here and others — not least of which is the fact that the "moderate Islam" which is "the solution" is still in an inchoate state theologically, and is still a-borning as something more than a cultural habit that is ever-vulnerable to being overturned by by-the-book radicals.
Of course, another moderate Muslim spokesman, Stephen Schwartz, vehemently denies this. He recently reacted with supercilious and contemptuous indignation to the claim, advanced by an unnamed non-Muslim, "that Bosnian moderation has no basis in Islamic tradition, and that the absence of such means the country will always be susceptible to extremist infiltration." Of course, the problem isn't that Bosnian moderation, whose charms I believe he somewhat overstates, has no basis in Islamic tradition, but that it has but a slim basis in Islamic theology. In the same piece he notes that he "was alarmed during my recent trip to see a resurgence of 'street Wahhabism' among young people and others easily swayed by superficial influences." He asserts that "the appeal of Wahhabism in Bosnia has little to do with the history of Islam or its theology, and everything to do with poverty, hopelessness, and the failure of Europe and the United Nations to effectively assist in the reconstruction of the wartorn country." Yet this fails to explain why places that are relatively untouched by poverty and hopelessness — most notably, Wahhabism's birthplace of Saudi Arabia, but by no means limited to the Kingdom — have not been able to stop resurgences of "street Wahhabism."
(No, Stephen, I am not attacking you. Your characterization of my earlier attempts to raise questions about your assertions as "attacks" was false. In free societies we call this "dialogue.")
Anyway, here is Pipes:
There is good news to report: the idea that “militant Islam is the problem, moderate Islam is the solution” is finding greater acceptance over time. But there is also bad news, namely growing confusion over who really is a moderate Muslim. This means that the ideological side of the war on terror is making some, but only limited, progress.The good news: Anti-Islamist Muslims are finding their voice since 9/11. Their numbers include distinguished academics such as Azar Nafisi (Johns Hopkins), Ahmed al-Rahim (formerly of Harvard), Kemal Silay (Indiana), and Bassam Tibi (Göttingen). Important Islamic figures like Ahmed Subhy Mansour and Muhammad Hisham Kabbani are speaking out.
Organizations are coming into existence. The American Islamic Forum for Democracy, headed by Zuhdi Jasser, is active in Phoenix, Arizona. The Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism appears to be genuinely anti-Islamist, despite my initial doubts about its founder, Kamal Nawash.
Internationally, an important petition posted a month ago by a group of liberal Arabs calls for a treaty banning religious incitement to violence and specifically names “sheikhs of death” (such as Yusuf Al-Qaradawi of Al-Jazeera television), demanding that they be tried before an international court. Over 2,500 Muslim intellectuals from 23 countries rapidly signed this petition....
The bad news: There are lots of fake-moderates parading about, and they can be difficult to identify, even for someone like me who devotes much attention to this topic. The Council on American-Islamic Relations still wins mainstream support and the Islamic Society of North America still sometimes hoodwinks the U.S. government. The brand-new Progressive Muslim Union wins rave reviews for its alleged moderation from gullible journalists, despite much of its leadership (Salam Al-Marayati, Sarah Eltantawi, Hussein Ibish, Ali Abunimah) being well-known extremists.
Fortunately, the authorities kept both Tariq Ramadan and Yusuf Islam out of the United States, but Khaled Abou El Fadl got through and, worse, received a presidential appointment.
Even anti-terrorist rallies are not always what they seem to be. On Nov. 21, several thousand demonstrators, some of them Muslim, marched under banners proclaiming “Together for Peace and against Terror” in Cologne, Germany. Marchers shouted “No to terror” and politicians made feel-good statements. But the Cologne demonstration, coming soon after the murder of Theo van Gogh on Nov. 2, served as a clever defense operation. The organizer of the event, the Islamist Diyanet Iþleri Türk-Islam Birliði, used it as a smokescreen to fend off pressure for real change. Speeches at the demonstration included no mea culpas or calls for introspection, only apologetics for jihad and invocations of stale and empty slogans such as “Islam means peace.”
This complex, confusing record points to several conclusions:
· Islamists note the urge to find moderate Muslims and are learning how to fake moderation. Over time, their camouflage will undoubtedly further improve.
Posted by Robert at November 23, 2004 7:30 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Moderate Muslims according to the official doctrines of Islam are hypocrites who deserve extermination. Moderate Muslims pick and choose what they will and will not accept and practice within Islam. In Western terms, moderate Muslims are not only hypocrites but frankly liars who proclaim allegiance but practice deviance. From the perspective of Islam and from the perspective of the West, moderate Muslims are under enormous pressure to be orthodox.
These problems create well-founded distrust of moderate Muslims. "Liars" and "hypocrites" are not terms of admiration, after all.
Add to that the well-known deception techniques authorized and sanctioned by Islam: taqiyaa and kitman, and a few others popularized by Khomeini, based on 1400 years of official Islamic behavior.
Add to that cracks one sees in the edifice erected and called "moderate Muslims." A recent example involves the gentleman who heads the Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism. This organization had been putting out admirable, pro-freedom, pro-reason statements until the death of Arafat. Nawash then published a document dumping causality on Israel for Arafat and requiring Israel to walk all of the extra miles to accommodate the "Palestinians" as if the Palestinians had been nothing more than neighbors who offended by having too much junk in their front yards. In one stroke, Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism showed that under its guise of moderation were typical Muslims, not to be trusted in any way, except to be typical Muslims.
I have every reason to distrust moderate Muslims because I cannot trust them. I can trust the orthodox Muslims. The latter plan to kill me and destroy my loved ones and my country. They will not stop until we put them out of our misery. They are fully predictable, and, as such, they merit a smidge more respect than do moderate Muslims.
I no longer accept the concept of moderate Muslim as valid. I would have to see very long, very consistent, very public behavior on the part of very many Muslims first. They made themselves totally untrustworthy, and the onus befalls them to correct it. Alas, I do not have enough years of life left to see this outcome. Besides, I do not think Muslims change their nature.
The naive may want to extend to them the very American gift of taking one at one's word. However, if you know their history, if you have studied their behaviors, and if you have studied their doctrines, you know perfectly well what the truth is: No Muslim can be trusted until he or she proves it beyond any form of doubt whatsoever.
Posted by: George Mason![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 23, 2004 9:02 AM
I must agree with George Mason. It is simply suicidal to trust any muslim.
When we begin to experience the turmoil that is occurring in Europe, the idiots who encouraged and assisted the Saudis in spreading their vile doctrine throughout our country will be dead and gone. Since many of them are nameless, faceless bureaucrats in the State Department, we'll probably never know who they were anyway.
The Shi'ite enclaves in Michigan and elsewhere will become like the ghettoes of Europe, and as their numbers increase, so will their bravado. I look forward to cult battles between Sunnis and Shi'ites to add to the fray.
President Bush has some good ideas about fighting terrorism, but I fear he is ignoring the most egregious threat: the menace of immigrant muslims in America, and disaffected converts.
I cringe every time I hear him laud Islam, with a pompous, arrogant Islamic cleric standing beside him with smirk on his wicked face.
The evil of Islam has yet to rear its ugly head in America, 9-11 notwithstanding. And that is only because muslims are still vastly outnumbered. But they're working on that that problem, as their obscene birthrates skyrocket.
There won't be any one person to blame for the inevitable conflict that lies ahead, no one to "lynch" for selling out America. It will be us against them in the end, and the law will be on their side. They already know that, but most of us don't.
at November 23, 2004 10:22 AM
Phony "moderate" Muslims condemn terrorism and the killing of innocents and children in Israel, the US and other places by ending their condemnations with , "but" and "however." They usually use the same circuitous language that lefties and the UN are famous for. VIVA LA RESISTANCE!!!
Posted by: Kemaste at November 23, 2004 10:24 AM
Dunno who said this but methinks its apt:
"There maybe moderate moslems but there is no moderate islam."
The problem is not muslims. The problem is islam itself. The prime requirement for a person identifying themselves as mulsim to be 'genuinely moderate' is to repudiate (or as Spencer politely says "set aside in all circumstances") tye basic tenets of islam. Yeah, try asking that of otherwise normal-looking people anywhere in the muslim world.
Doesn't look very good from where I'm standing.
at November 23, 2004 10:59 AM
Three cheers to George, Susan, and Kemaste!
After 1400 years of being bad boys, the Islamic world has a lot to make up for.
There are a few practicing "moderate Muslims" whom I would trust at the personal level--Irshad Manji and Mansoor Ijaz are examples (although in my fantasy life, I keep imagining that Mansoor wears Islam as a disguise so he can get close to some difficult sources of information).
I'm not so worried about them or some others of their generation; I'm worried that until and unless Islam transforms itself and its fundamental philosophy by disavowing the murderous and deceitful aspects of its canonical texts, it will grant to the next generation the moral authority to continue with the thinking and behavior that it has engaged in since its inception.
So long as the Koran and the ahadith remain as they are today, each generation will "have its pump primed," so that too many among them will be ready and willing to commit murder and mayhem around the world.
I also have a problem with truly "moderate" Muslims who understand the evil nature of their belief system, but who continue to cling to it anyway.
Even to have many people sequestering the evil and subscribing to the reasonable parts of it is insufficient. So long as the evil part remains as a moral guide, there will be, among each generation, those unhappy, angry people, perhaps never realizing that it is Islam which has made them so, who will continue to cause unremitting conflict with the civilized world.
Posted by: cubed
at November 23, 2004 11:14 AM
Ms. SusanP said "I must agree with George Mason. It is simply suicidal to trust any muslim".
I prefer the word reformist as opposed to moderate, I'm not really sure what moderate means in this context. I would say that to make ANY progress you have to have a mindset change and that needs to come from both sides. Your comments don't help to move the reformist programme along! Pretending that there will be no muslims in USA or that they don't exist is not realistic.
Ms. Sp further writes "and the law will be on their side. They already know that, but most of us don't".
Sure we, understand the law. We have to or be roasted alive by the likes of you. The law has to be impartial and no one above it. I'm up for that, it's not a different law that applies to us , it's the same, only you don't want it like that.
Please, for humanity, and for the sake of peace in the US....you need to reform as well as muslims.
Posted by: Naseem at November 23, 2004 11:14 AM
P.S. And three cheers for Voletti, too!
Naseem says: "Please, for humanity, and for the sake of peace in the US....you need to reform as well as muslims."
No, Naseem, we don't. We are right, and you are wrong.
Posted by: cubed at November 23, 2004 11:18 AM
Because of the tactics of taqiyya and kitman it is difficult to determine which Muslims are actually moderating their thinking. If speech can not be trusted, then a pattern of speech and behavior over the long term must be the measuring stick.
Nevertheless, the number of those that moderate or reform are small in comparison to those that are extreme or remain silent, and silence about extremism is the same as its acceptance. Until large numbers of Muslims refute extremism and integrate into the community, I will remain distrustful.
Posted by: epg at November 23, 2004 11:42 AM
There are at least two main types of "moderate" Muslims, and at least six sub-types in addition. There are moderate apologists and moderate reformists. Moderate apologists are really idealists who are wearting a psychological disguise, and who also walk in self denial. Moderate reformists at least actually speak out against radical Islam, but often lack authority, power or influence to stop reform the sources of radical Islam. I have often said that every "moderate" Muslim is an Islamist at heart. This condition originates from the brainwashing received at a young age. It doesn't necessarily mean they will act on it, but it does increase the deception and make identification more difficult. Groups like CAIR want us to understand Islam better when we really only need to understand the *deception* better.
"Adherents of militant Islam account for some 15-20 percent of the Muslim world, according to Daniel Pipes, an expert on the subject. This means that more than 150 million people are part of the problem. To make matters worse, they hide among the moderates. They don't wear uniforms and rarely identify themselves."
http://www.meforum.org/article/168
at November 23, 2004 12:32 PM
Until such time as their bona fides can be confirmed, being distrustful of self-proclaimed Muslim "moderates", "progressives" or whatever you wish to call them, is prudent.
Talking about extermination (with a presumption of guilt) isn't. We just end up sounding like the Islamofascists.
As far as Naseem's "plea" that we reform, honey, the west has been very, very tolerant for far too long a time, with the greater price being paid not by westerners, but Muslims living under unspeakable totalitarian regimes, admittedly with Western complicity. Some day, history will hold France, Russia, China and UN employees accountable for helping Saddam subvert the sanctions. Ditto for the western nations who trade with the Islamic Republic of Iran, Syria, etc..
And what of the complicity of the Muslim world for that matter. Their complaints about westerners imposing regime change in the face of unspeakable human rights abuses is stomach-turning.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at November 23, 2004 12:39 PM
The attitude of an Islamist.
Naseem said:
"I prefer the word reformist as opposed to moderate, I'm not really sure what moderate means in this context. I would say that to make ANY progress you have to have a mindset change and that needs to come from both sides. Your comments don't help to move the reformist programme along! Pretending that there will be no muslims in USA or that they don't exist is not realistic."
Word games. Naseem doesn't *want* to know what moderate means.
He wants a "mindset change from both sides" because Islam simply cannot be responsible on it's own.
"Your comments don't help..." Help us help us help us, we're stuck in this terrible Islam thing and we can't get out.
If Islam does not reform it will not be tolerated. What part of that do you not understand "Naseem?"
You are an Islamist and apologist at heart. Your whining and excuses and lack of being able to provide any reasonable assurance proves this.
No doubt "Naseem" will be so offended by my comments that he would like to see a fatwa issued against me for criticizing Islam.
Posted by: Report at November 23, 2004 12:40 PM
The truth about what Mulsums believe??
Read and learn about the peace they bring to your door??
Tabari VII:148 “Amr said, ‘Let’s wait here until the cry has died down. They are sure to hunt for us tonight and tomorrow. I was still in the cave when Uthman bin Malik came riding proudly on his horse. He reached the entrance to our cave and I said to my Ansar companion, ‘If he sees us, he will tell everyone in Mecca.’ So I went out and stabbed him with my dagger. He gave a shout and the Meccans came to him while I went back to my hiding place. Finding him at the point of death, they said, ‘By Allah we knew that Amr came for no good purpose.’ The death of their companion impeded their search for us, for they carried him away.”
LET'S WAIT HERE UNTIL THE CRY HAS DIED DOWN?? THEN SNEEK UP AND KILL THEM?? nOT GOOD??
Tabari VII:149 “I went into a cave with my bow and arrows. While I was in it, a one-eyed man from the Banu Bakr came in driving some sheep. He said, ‘Who’s there?’ I said [lied], ‘I’m a Banu Bakr.’ ‘So am I.’ Then he laid down next to me, and raised his voice in song: ‘I will not believe in the faith of the Muslims.’ I said, ‘You will soon see!’ Before long the Bedouin went to sleep and started snoring. So I killed him in the most dreadful way that anybody has ever killed. I leant over him, struck the end of my bow into his good eye, and thrust it down until it came out the back of his neck. After that I rushed out like a wild beast and took flight. I came to the village of Naqi and recognized two Meccan spies. I called for them to surrender. They said no so I shot and arrow and killed one, and then I tied the other up and took him to Muhammad.”
Tabari VII:150 “I had tied my prisoner’s thumbs together with my bowstring. The Messenger of Allah looked at him and laughed so that his back teeth could be seen. Then he questioned me and I told him what had happened. ‘Well done!’ he said, and prayed for me to be blessed.”
YES LIE AND THEN KILL THEM WE ARE SEEING THIS TODAY?? DO NOT BE FOOLED??
Tabari VIII:22/Ishaq:458 “‘Allah forgive you, daughter of Abd al-Muttalib,’ Hassan said. ‘You know that I am not the man to do it.’ When he said that to me I saw that nothing could be expected from him. I girded myself, took a club, and, having gone down from the fortress to the man, I struck him with the club until I killed him. When I had finished with him, I returned to the fortress and said, ‘Hassan, go down to him and strip him—only his being a man kept me from taking his clothes.’ Hassan replied, ‘I have no need for his spoils.’”
WHAT HAVE WE HEARD FROM ALL THE MULSUM[MORDRATES] WOMEN ARE NOT PART OF THE WARRIORS?? YES THEY LIE!!!
Tabari VIII:38 “The Messenger of Allah commanded that all of the Jewish men and boys who had reached puberty should be beheaded. Then the Prophet divided the wealth, wives, and children of the Banu Qurayza Jews among the Muslims.”
AND AGAIN ANOTHER LIE MO-HAM-OD WAS A KILLER!!
THIS IS WHO THEY WORSHIP!! KEEP THEM IN THEIR LANDS AND US IN OURS THEN THEY CAN KILL EACH OTHER AND LEAVE US ALONE!!
Tabari VIII:122/Ishaq:515 “The Prophet gave orders concerning Kinanah to Zubayr, saying, ‘Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah’s chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him.”
TORTURE?? HOW IS THIS ABOUT PEACE?? WE ARE BEING LIED TO!! AND IF WE LET THIS GROW IN 25 YEARS IT WILL BE A HARDER FIGHT WE HAVE TO DESTORY THOSE WHO WOULD DESTORY US...
Bukhari:V4B52N260 “Ali burnt some [former Muslims alive] and this news reached Ibn Abbas, who said, ‘Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, “Don’t punish with Allah’s Punishment.” No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, “If a Muslim discards his Islamic religion, kill him.”’”
HOW DO THEY DEAL WITH THIS IN THE WEST OH! YEA! KILL THEM LIKE VAN GOGH!!
Bukhari:V4B54N487 “The Prophet said, ‘The Hell Fire is 69 times hotter than ordinary worldly fires.’ So someone said, ‘Allah’s Apostle, wouldn’t this ordinary fire have been sufficient to torture the unbelievers?’”
HOW MANY HOUSES OF HUMAN TORTURE HAVE OUR MEN FOUND IN IRAQ?? HOW MANY WILL WE FIND IN OUR COUNTRY IF WE LET THIS GROW??
Qur’an 9:5 “When the sacred forbidden months for fighting are past, fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”
AGAIN THIS IS THEIR BOOK AND THERE WILL ALWAYS BE THOSE WHO DO THIS BECAUSE THE MODRAN ARE WHIMPS AND REALLY DO BELIEVE THIS AND AT LEAST FUND IT IF NOT DO IT??
Qur’an 5:37 “The [Christian] disbelievers will long to get out of the Fire, but never will they get out there from; and theirs will be an enduring torture.”
LIKE POOR MR. BIGSLY OR POOR MR. JOHNSON??
Tabari IX:6 “The chief sheep tender sent out spies to obtain intelligence. But they came back with their joints dislocated. When he asked what had happened, they said, ‘We saw white men on black horses. Before we could resist, we were struck as you see us now.”
YEA THEY ARE SENDING OUT THEIR SPIES NOW TO LIE??
WE ARE NOT THE FOOLS THEY TAKE US FOR??
Qur’an 8:12 “Your Lord inspired the angels with the message: ‘I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.”
TERRORIZE??
Tabari VII:133/Ishaq:387 “When Muhammad saw Hamzah he said, ‘If Allah gives me victory over the Quraysh at any time, I shall mutilate thirty of their men!’ When the Muslims saw the rage of the Prophet they said, ‘By Allah, if we are victorious over them, we shall mutilate them in a way which no Arab has ever mutilated anybody.”
WE CAN NOT LET THEM WIN...IT IS KILL OR BE KILLED...
Tabari VIII:96 “A raiding party led by Zayd set out against Umm in Ramadan. During it, Umm suffered a cruel death. Zyad tied her legs with rope and then tied her between two camels until they split her in two. She was a very old woman. Then they brought Umm’s daughter and Abdallah to the Messenger. Umm’s daughter belonged to Salamah who had captured her. Muhammad asked Salamah for her, and Salamah gave her to him.”
WHAT HAVE THEY TOLD US THAT WE DON'T KILL WOMEN?? AGAIN A LIE!!!
Ishaq:327 “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”
THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE TEACHING AND PREACHING IT IS IN THEIR BOOKS!!
Ishaq:307 “The ‘Spoils of War’ Surah came down from Allah to His Prophet concerning the distribution of the booty when the Muslims showed their evil nature. Allah took it out of their hands and gave it to the Apostle.”
WE CALL THIS THE MOB TODAY YES THIS IS WHO THEY WORSHIP??
THEIR EVIL NATURE??
Tabari VII:65 “Allah’s Messenger came back to Medina, bringing with him the booty which had been taken from the polytheists.... There were forty-four captives in the Messenger of Allah’s possession. There was a similar number of dead.”
SO ALL YOU LIBS OUTTHERE THAT WILL NOT SAVE YOU LOOK AT POOR VAN GOGH??
Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The captives of Khaybar were divided among the Muslims. Then the Messenger began taking the homes and property that were closest to him.”
WILL EUROPE BE TAKEN BY MULSUMS BECAUSE THEY ARE TO WHIMPY TO STAND AND FIGHT ???
Tabari VIII:116/Ishaq:511 “So Muhammad began seizing their herds and their property bit by bit. He conquered home by home. The Messenger took some of its people captive, including Safiyah and her two cousins. The Prophet chose Safiyah for himself.”
YEA RAPE ANOTHER WOMAN??
Ishaq:511 “When Dihyah protested, wanting to keep Safiyah for himself, the Apostle traded for Safiyah by giving Dihyah her two cousins. The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims.”
REMEMBER THEY THINK WOMEN AS DOMISTIC AMINALS??
Tabari IX:38 “In this year, the Messenger sent Amr to collect the zakat tax from Jayfar and Amr, the clans of Julanda and Azd.... He collected the jizyah from the Zoroastrians.”
THIS WAS THE PEOPLE OF IRAN WHO WERE NOT MULSUMS WHAT HAPPEN THEY WHIMPED OUT ??
Tabari IX:75 “He who holds fast to his religion, Judaism or Christianity, is not to be tempted from it. It is incumbent on them to pay the jizyah protection tax. For every adult, male or female, free or slave, one full denarius, or its value in al-ma’afir [fine cloth]. He who pays that to the Messenger has the protection of Allah and His Messenger, and he who holds back from it is the enemy of Allah and His Messenger.”
SOME WHERE THIS CHANGES TO KILL THEM ALL??WE WONT PAY...
WE WILL WIN THIS WAR YOU HAVE STARTED AGAINST US YOU THREW THE FIRST PUNCH AND NOW WE WILL FINISH IT!!
KILL YOUR KILLERS OR WE WILL DO IT FOR YOU AND YOU MIGHT JUST BE IN THE WAY??
Ishaq:564 “The Muslims stole our goods and divided them. Their spears pierced us not once but twice. Their squadrons came at us like a swarm of locusts. Were it not for the religion of Muhammad’s people, their cavalry would never have attacked us.”
AGAIN THE TRUTH OF WHAT THEY ARE IN THEIR OWN BOOK??
Qur’an 59:6 “What Allah gave as booty to His Messenger He has taken away from them [the Jews]. For this you made no raid. Allah gives His Messenger Lordship over whomsoever He wills. Whatever booty Allah has given to His Messenger and taken away from the [Jewish] people of the townships, belongs to Allah and to His Messenger.... So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you.”
GUESS HE DIDN'T HEAR OF GOD BEING PISSED ABOUT THE GOLDEN COW?? AND THE CURSE TO WANDER FOR 40 YRS??
NOT THE SAME GOD THAT TOO IS ANOTHER LIE! LIE! LIE!
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom,Sight and Courage to stay te course to Victory to Destory ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Amen
at November 23, 2004 12:53 PM
As I just wrote to Robert:
I see the problem this way: while we wait the (possibly) hundreds of years for Islam to 'reform itself', we will be overrun.
My answer is, I think the fairest possible thing: ban Islam as treasonous, seditious and not worthy of religious protection until such time as Saudi Arabia has freedom of religion, including Mecca and Medina. (In other words, never).
They say 'tu quo que', I say 'quid pro quo'.
at November 23, 2004 1:08 PM
The war no terror will stop these psychopathic murders and I'll leave it up to Allah to sort out the "True" Muslims from the
"Un-Islamic" killers of Gods children for his glory.
ALA SUX big time
at November 23, 2004 2:08 PM
Naseem
((Please, for humanity, and for the sake of peace in the US....you need to reform as well as muslims))
What absolute pompous arrogant rubbish. What does America have to "reform" about itself?
Do you honestly believe all these things you come out with? Or are you one of these taqiyya practising fanatics who hopes to fool some clueless lefty into offering you sympathy?
America has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to reform itself for for the sake of Islam, do you understand that?
Every type of Christian from all four corners of the world, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs from Europe Asia and Africa have emigrated and found a home in peace in America.
And now pompous conceited arrogant Muslims like you say America has to change for you?
The arrogance and impudence is unbelievable!
I look forward to your response, to try to get some choice examples of the amazing mentality of Muslims, who think the world should change for them, the imperialistic stupidity of Islam, its processes and beliefs.
at November 23, 2004 2:29 PM
For all I care there can be 1001 variations of
muslims,but they all have one thing in common they all worship the same god.
I would not even trust a beer drinking,bacon eating muslim,because his/her faith is based on some of the foulest scriptures ever written.
A muslim is a muslim is a muslim
OT.Ozzy has been ripped for 4 million Quid.
Posted by: hawkwind at November 23, 2004 3:13 PM
what about the muslims who where born into islam and had ISLAM pasted onto there ID cards,they did not choose to be muslim.There are a few million of this type of muslim,and a big procent hate islam,the only way out for them is death.
There is only two groups of muslims,the ones who choose to be muslim.and the ones who do not have any choice.
Fear is the islamists best friend
at November 23, 2004 3:41 PM
One aspect that strikes me is the keenness of clever people like Mr. Spencer to entangle himself in dialectical battles against self-proclaimed moderate islamists. To spend his valuable time doing so is in my opinion a terrible waste insofar as Islam is an essentially immoderate creed. If ever is to be a decent muslim, he wouldn’t by definition be preaching the true Islam, the one that matters and the only possible. Things been what they irremediably are, either we engage in naive discussions with a deceitful turbanted automaton or waste our time interchanging honest views with someone who is not islamist at all and presumably is not aware of it, for there are not credible middle roaders in this totalitarian, monolithic faith whose basic tenets are written on the steel of a sword blade. If the former, we must take for granted that no amount of persuasive reasoning will ever convince our counterpart that he belongs to a belief-system invented by a rapacious, barbaric psychopath preying upon tribal greed and dominance through torture, treason, abduction and murder. After all, a good muslim knows by heart and recites several times a day the suras that contain the evil doctrine he blindly adheres to, thus rendering void the excuse by ignorance. If the latter, we will always arrive to the empty conclusion awaiting the one who chooses the wrong debating partner who in the case here contemplated would only be representing himself.
My personal suggestion is that of dedicating time and action to prepare ourselves for what I presume is the inevitable and imminent war ahead. No, I am not referring to the one against the muslim hordes, something that indeed has to be addressed immediately after having concluded victoriously the first one… directed against the traitors and collaborators amongst us.
at November 23, 2004 3:45 PM
OT.Ozzy has been ripped for 4 million Quid.
Posted by: hawkwind at November 23, 2004 03:13 PM
And was fussing about the cos not protecting him??HUH??
Yea remember a gun in hand is better than 2 cops on the phone? The American Way?
nasseem is not in paki she is in Iran and is worried about what we will do looks like she can't escape her fate??
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH,WISDOM,SIGHT AND COURAGE TO STAY THE COURSE TO VICTORY TO DESTORY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM AMEN
PS
Smoking that salmon and turkey!! YUM!!
at November 23, 2004 3:46 PM
It's my humble opinion there's a larger group of so-called "moderate" Muslims that are utilizing taqqiyah and kitman very effectively. There's a "moderate" Muslim representative (Kamal Nawash)regularly on FOX News. I used to think he was sincere until Arafat was on death's door. Here is a quote from his website 11/04/2004: http://freemuslims.org/
"It is in the best interest of Israel to allow Arafat to be buried in Jerusalem. This move would show enormous good well by Israel and it will make it easier for the new Palestinian leadership to stop the violence and begin a new future with Israel. We hope Israel has the wisdom to do this."
'Enormous goodwill' my *@^! .... Does this sound like a rather odd statement from a 'moderate' Muslim? If he's moderate than I'm out of my freaking mind (And let me tell you, I'm not crazy -- everybody else is, but not me)
Posted by: Kemaste at November 23, 2004 4:02 PM
TEN THINGS TO THINK ABOUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT MUSLIM "MODERATES"
1. Not only Muslims, but "islamochristians" who objectively promote and push the propagandistic line that disguises the Jihad (evidence of which can be found world-wide), and who mislead as to both what prompts that Jihad (not "poverty" or "foreign policy" but the precepts of the belief-system 0f Islam) and what will sate it (not Kashmir, not Chechnya, not the absurd "two-state solution," not continued appeasement in France and Holland -- there is nothing that will sate or satisfy it, as long as part of the globe is as yet resistent to the rule of Islam). That is why "Christians" such as Fawaz Gerges or Rami Khoury, or someone who was born a Christian, as Edward Said, are Arabs whose views are colored by that self-perception, and their loyalty to the community, and history, of Arabs, causes them to be as loyal to the Islamic view of things as if they had been born Muslim. Whether stoutly defending Islam against all of Western scholarship (in "Orientalism"), or diverting attention away from Islam and constantly asserting, in defiance of all the evidence, from Bali to Beslan to Madrid, that the "problem of Israel/Palestine" -- the latest, and most sinister formulation of the JIhad against Israel -- is the fons et origo of Muslim hostility and murderous aggression throughout the world. Save for the Copts and Maronites, who regard themselves not as Arabs but as "users" of the ""Arabic language" (and reject the idea that such "users" therefore become "Arabs"), many Arab Christians have crazily embraced the Islamic agenda, the agenda, that is, of those who have made the lives of Christians in the MIddle East so uncertain, difficult, and at times, imperilled. The attempt to be "plus islamiste que les islamistes" -- the approach of Rami Khoury and Hanan Ashrawi -- simply will not do, for it has not worked. It is Habib Malik, and other Maronites in Lebanon, who have analysed the problem of Islam in a clear-eyed fashion. Indeed, the best book on the legal status of non-Muslims under Islam is that of the Lebanese (Maronite) scholar Antoine Fattal.
Any "islamochristian" Arab who promotes the Islamic agenda, by participating in a campaign that can only mislead Infidels, and put off their understanding of Jihad, and its various instruments, is objectively, as much part of the problem as the Muslim who knowingly practices taqiyya in order to turn aside the suspicions of non-Muslims. Whoever acts so as to keep the unwawry Infidel unwary, is helping the enemy.
Think, for a minute, of Oskar Schindler. A member of the Nazi Party, but hardly someone who followed the Nazi line. But what if Schindler had at some point met with Westerners -- and had continued, himself, to deny that the Nazis were engaged in genocide, even if he himself deplored it and would later act against it? Would we think of him as a "moderate"? As someone who had helped the anti-Nazi coalition to understand what it was up against?
Or for another example, think of Ilya Ehrenburg, who in 1951 or so was sent abroad by Stalin, to lie about the condition of Yiddish-speaking intellectuals whom Stalin had recently massacred. Ehrenburg went to France, went to Italy. He did as he was told. "Peretz? Markish? Oh, yes, saw Peretz at his dacha last month with his grandson. Such a jovial fellow. Markish -- he was great last year in Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District -- you should see how it comes across in zhargon, Yiddish..." And so it went. Eherenburg lied, and lied. He was not a Stalinist. He hated Stalin. He of course hated the destruction of Peretz, Markish, and many others who had been killed many months before -- as Ehrenburg knew perfectly well. When he went abroad, and lied to the editors of Nouvelle Revue francaise, what was he? Objectively, he was promoting the interests of Joseph Stalin, and the Red Army, and the Politburo. We need not inquire into motives. We need only see what the results of such lying were. And the same is true of those Christian Arabs who lie on behalf of Islam -- some out of fear, some out of an ethnocentric identification so strong that they end up defending Islam, the religion of those who persecuted the Christian Arabs of the MIddle East, and some out of venality (if Western diplomats and journalists can be on the Arab take, why not Arabs themselves?), some out of careerism (if you want to rise in the academic ranks, and your field is the MIddle East, unless you are a real scholar -- Cook or Crone or Lewis -- better to parrot the party line, which costs you nothing and gains you friends in tenure-awarding, grant-giving, reference-writing circles. There is at least one example, too, among those mentioned, in a sitatuion where an Arabic-speaking Christian, attempting to find refuge from Muslim persecution needed the testimony of an "expert," which "expert" instead of offering a pro-bono samaritan act, demanded so much money to be involved, in a fantastic display of greed, that the very idea of solidarity among Arab Christians was called by this act permanently into question.
2. The word "moderate" cannot be reasonably applied to any Muslim who continues to deny the contents -- the real contents, not the sanitized or gussied-up contents -- of Qur'an, hadith, and sira. Whether that denial is based on ignorance, or based on embarrassment, or based on filial piety (and an unwillingness to wash dirty ideological laundry before the Infidels) is irrelevant. Any Muslim who, while seeming to deplore every aspect of Muslim aggression, based on clear textual sources in Qur'an and hadith, or on the example of Muhammad as depicted in the accepted sira -- Muhammad that "model" of behavior -- is again, objectively, acting in a way that simply misleads the Infidels. And any Muslim who helps to mislead Infidels about the true nature of Islam cannot be called a "moderate." That epithet is simply handed out a bit too quickly for sensible tastes.
3. A Muslim who says -- there are terrible things in the sira and hadith. We must find a way out, so that this belief-system can focus on the rituals of individual worship, and offer some sustenance as a simple faith for simple people. This would require admitting that a great many of Muhammad's reported acts must either be denied, or given some kind of figurative interpretation, or otherwise removed as part of his "model" life. As for the hadith, somehow one would have to say that Bukhari, and Muslim, and the other respected muhaddithin had not examined those isnad-chains with quite the right meticulousness, and that many of the hadith regarded as "authentic" must be reduced to the status of "inauthentic." And, following Goldziher, doubt would have to be cast on all of the hadith, as imaginative elaborations from the Qur'an, without any necessarily independent existence.
4. This leaves the Qur'an. Any "moderate" who wishes to prevent inquiry into the origins of the Qur'an -- whether it may be the product of a Christian sect, or a Jewish sect, or pagan Arabs who decided to construct a book, made up partly of Christian and Jewish material mixed with bits and pieces of pagan Arab lore from the time of the Jahilliya -- or to prevent philological study (of, for example, Aramic and other loan-words), anyone who impedes the enterprise of subjecting the Qur'an to the kind of historical inquiry that the Christian and Jewish Bibles have undergone in the past 200 years of inquiry, is not a "moderate" but a fervent Defender of the Faith, and one whose unwillingness to encourage such study -- which can only lead to a move away from literalness for at least some of the Believers -- again is not "moderate."
5. The conclusion one must reach is that there are, in truth, very few moderates. For if one sees the full meaning of Qur'an, hadith, and sira, and sees how they have affected the behavior of Muslims both over 1400 years of conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims, and in stunting the development -- political, economic, moral, and intellectual -- of Muslims everywhere.
What must an intelligent Muslim, living through the hell of the Islamic Republic of Iran, start to think of Islam? Or that Kuwaiti billionaire, with houses in St. James Place and Avenue Foch and Vevey, as well as the family/company headquarters in Kuwait City, who sends his children to the American School in Kuwait, boasts that they know English better than they know Arabic, helps host Fouad Ajami when he visits Kuwait, truly heartsick to see Kuwait's increasing islamization, allow himself to say, in public, or in front of half-brothers, or to friends -- knowing that at any moment, they may be scandalized by his free-thinking views, and he may run the risk of losing his place in the family's pecking order and, what's more, in the family business.
5. The mere fact that Muslim numbers may grow in the Western world represents a permanent threat to Infidels, whether some, or many, of those Muslims are "moderates" -- i.e. do not believe that Islam has some kind of divine right, and need, to expand until it covers the globe, and swallows up dar al-harb. For if they are still to be counted in the Army of Islam, not as Deserters (Apostates) from that Army, their very existence in the Bilad al-kufr helps to swell Muslim ranks, and therefore perceived Muslim power. And even the "moderate" father may sire immoderate children or grandchildren -- that was the theme of the Hanif Kureishi film, quasi-comic but politically acute, "My Son the Fanatic." Whether through Da'wa or large families, any growth in the Muslim population will inhibit free expression (see the fates of Pim Fortuyn andTheo van Gogh, and the threats made to Geert Wilders, Carl Hagen, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and many others), for politicans eager to court the Muslim vote will poohpooh Muslim outrages, and strive to have the state yield to Muslim demands -- for the sake of short-term individual gain. And Muslim numbers, even with "moderates," increases the number of Muslim missionaries -- for every Muslim is a missionary -- whether conducting "Sharing Ramadan" OUtreach in the schools (where a soft-voiced Pakistani woman is usually the soothing propagandist of choice), or Da'wa in a prison, the more Muslims there are, the more there will be -- and no one knows which "moderate" will end up distinctly non-moderate in his views, and then in his acts.
And this brings up the most important problem: the impermanance of "moderate" attitudes. What makes anyone think that someone who this week or month has definitely turned his back on Jihad, who will have nothing to do with those he calls the "fanatics," if he does not make a clean break with Islam, does not become a "renegade" or apostate, will at some point "revert" not to Islam, which he never left, but to a more devout form, in which he now subscribes to all of its tenets, and not merely to a few having to do with rites of individual worship?
6. The examples to the contrary are both those of individuals, and of whole societies. As for individual Muslims, some who started out as mild-mannered, largely indifferent to Islam, who then underwent some kind of crisis, and reverted to a much more fanatical brand of Islam. That was the case with urban planner Mohammad Atta, following his disorienting encounter with modern Western ways in Hamburg, Germany --- Reeperbahn and all. That was also the case with "Mike" Hawash, the Internet engineer earning $360,000 a year, who seemed completely integrated (American wife, Little League for the children, friends among fellow executives at Intel who would swear up and down that he was innocnet), until one fine day, after the World Trade Center attacks, he made out his will, signed the house over to his wife, and set off to fight, alongside the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan (he got as far as China), against his fellow Americans. In other words, if fanatical Muslims exist, it does not mean that they all start out as fanatics -- Islam is the necessary starting place, and what sets off a "moderate" may have little to do with anything the Infidels do, any question of foreign policy -- it may simply be a crisis in an individual Muslim's life, to which he seeks an answer, not surprisingly, in --- more Islam.
7)Much the same lesson can be drawn from the experience of whole societies. In passing, one can note that the position of Infidels under the Pahlevi regime was better than it had been for centuries -- and under the regime that followed, that of the Islamic Republic of Iran, that position of Infidels became worse than it had been for centuries. "Secularism" in Islamic countries is never permanent; the weight and the threat of Islam is ever-present.
The best example of this is Turkey since 1924, when Ataturk began his reforms. He tried in every way he could -- through the Hat Act (banishing the salat-friendly fez), commissioning a Turkish translation of the Qur'an and an accompanying tafsir (commentary) in Turkish, ending the use of Arabic script for Turkish, establishing government control of the mosques (even attacking recalcitrant imams, and destroying their mosques), giving women the right to vote; establishing a system that discouraged the wearing of the hijab, encouraged Western dress, and discouraged, in the army, preferment of any soldier who showed too great an interest in religion. And this attempt to constrain Islam was successful, and it was reinforced by the national cult of Ataturk.
But the past few decades have shown that Islam does not die; it keeps coming back. In Turkey, it never went away, despite the creation of a secular stratum of society that amounts perhaps to 25% of the population, with another 25% wavering, and 50% still definitely traditional Muslims. But Turks in Germany become not less, but more fervent in their faith. And Turks in Turkey, of the kind who follow Erdogan, show that they may at any moment emerge and take power -- and slowly (very slowly, as long as that EU application has not been acted on, one way or another)they can undo Ataturk. He was temporary; Islam is forever.
8. That is why even the designation of some Muslims as "moderates" in the end means almost nothing. They swell Muslim numbers and the perceived Muslim power; "moderates" may help to mislead, to be in fact even more effective practitioners of taqiyya/kitman, for their motive may simply be loyalty to ancestors or embarrassment, not a malign desire to fool Infidels in order to disarm and then ultimately to destroy them.
9. For this reason, one has to keep one's eye always on the objective situation. What will make Infidels safer from a belief-system that is inimical to art, science, and all free inquiry, that stunts the mental growth, and that is based on a cruel Manichaen division of the world between Infidel and Believer? And the answer is: limiting the power – military, political, diplomatic, economic power -- of all Muslim polities, and Muslim peoples, and to diminish, as much as possible, the Muslim presence, however amiable and plausible and seemingly untroubling a part of that presence may appear to be, in all the Lands of the Infidels. This is done not out of any spirit of enmity, but simply as an act of minimal self-protection -- and out of loyalty, and gratitude, to those who produced the civilization which,however it has been recently debased by its own inheritors, would disappear altogether were Muslims, for example, to successfully islamize Europe -- and then, possibly, other parts of the world as well.
10. "There are Muslim moderates. Islam itself is not moderate" is Ibn Warraq's lapidary formulation. To this one must add: we Infidels have no sure way to distinguish the real from the feigning "moderate" Muslim. We cannot spend our time trying to perfect methods to make such distinctions. Furthermore, in the end such distinctions may be meaningless if even the "real" moderates hide from us what Islam is all about, not out of any deeply-felt sinister motive, but out of a humanly-understandable ignorance (especially among some second or third-generation Muslims in the West), or embarrassment, or filial piety. And finally, today's "moderate" can overnight be transformed into today's fanatic -- or tomorrow's. Shall we entrust our own safety to the dreamy consolations of the phrase "moderate Muslim" and the shapeshifting concept behind it that can be transformed into something else, in a minute?
at November 23, 2004 4:05 PM
what do all ye descendents of pilgrims who butchered and celebrate the butchery of the peqout indians on thanksgiving day have to asy for this.
Religious persecution or not, they immediately turned to their religion to rationalize their persecution of others. They appealed to the Bible, Psalms 2:8: "Ask of me, and I shall give thee, the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession." To justify their use of force to take the land, they cited Romans 13:2: "Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."
I say all you followers of books and false/invented/non-existent prophets need to embrace hinduism/buddhism to know peace and what a real religion/civilization is/was and the world will know peace.
Posted by: Peqout at November 23, 2004 4:23 PM
Master K. Boy says "What absolute pompous arrogant rubbish. What does America have to "reform" about itself"?
I am afraid that you misunderstood what I was trying to say but it is this: So many US citizens are now "programmed almost" to hate muslims it's untrue.
They spit at anything and everything muslim.
and it is this attitude that needs reforming. And if you don't well... does it really matter, well lets think about that.
Muslims in the West are there to stay, I think we can all agree with that. So it is best that you all try to get along, with friendship, trust and without hate.
I honestly believe now that some muslims in the USA are more friendly than US citizens becaue of this "programming".
So, all have to be careful and not have a role reversal.
If we don't get along, muslims will have Islamic schools, shops, supermarkets, clothes shops exclusively selling Jilbabs, Hijabs etc. Over a number of years you will get communities living within communities having an almost sharia type living.
"Is this vision what you really want boy"? Who will be responsible for this...I'll tell you...it's your programming of hate...we'll be putting out hand of friendship to you and you'll spit in it....forcing muslims to live in small exclusive muslim enclaves...ironically already there in parts of the UK which postees like Mr. Rikki and Albion complain about.
So, now you tell me... do you have to reform?
at November 23, 2004 4:25 PM
The hostilty of non-Muslims "forcing Muslims to live in small exclusive enclaves" in Infidel lands -- is that the only conceivable outcome the poster above can imagine? Perhaps there is a simpler solution, which would mean as complete a separation of Muslims and all non-Muslims as is conceivable. How about that for limiting problems, hostility, the threat perceived by wrong-headed Infidels -- my,how cruelly quick are Infidels to take offense, and to exhibit such baseless suspicion toward Muslims and the belief-system of Islam -- so we can all get along, Muslims in their lands, and the rest of us in ours. Wouldn't that make the most sense, and cause the least worry, and the slightest friction?
Posted by: Hugh at November 23, 2004 4:47 PM
Hurrah, she's back ! nazi-eem ! The classic example of the so-called "moderate muslim". See , how in the space of two posts, she goes from reaching out in "friendship" to babbling about Americans wanting to "roast muslims alive"? This is the same "moderate muslim" who was driven to fury by the death of that old moderate murderer, yassir arabfat. But , like most muslims, nazi-eem is in denial. A pakistani muslim who refuses to belive that her hindu or buddhists ancestors were terrorised into becoming muslims. A woman who boasts about being pakistani but who yearns (as befits a victim of arab imperialism) to be an arab. Your arguments are increasing like specks of dirt in the wind nazi-eem, we barely notice them and they don't slow our progress. The non-muslim world is learning more by the day about your filthy death cult and you don't need to be so smug about your little outposts of hate in the West either. In a storm many things that might seem permanent are destroyed or washed away. The hate is on your side nazi-eem, it has been for 1400 years, but sooner or later the moslems will reap the harvest they have sown.............
Posted by: Son Of Albion at November 23, 2004 5:15 PM
Mr. Hugh says "so we can all get along, Muslims in their lands, and the rest of us in ours. Wouldn't that make the most sense, and cause the least worry, and the slightest friction?"
Yes, it certainly would I agree but there is one pressing problem here. The West's wandering mentality let's it down. It doesn't like to leave it there...they like to invade willy nilly, poking their business, their guns and soldiers where they are not wanted...even insisting that it is their oil under muslim sands.
They occupy land and then build homes on it, they invade when they feel like it...now that's a problem....you won't let live or leave alone.
Now, let's take this a step further, lets assume that muslims did go back, naturally they will want to protect themselves against maurading Western countries (& Israel) they decided to arm themselves by say Pakistan/N. Korea providing the know how, materials etc. to every Islamic country with nucleur arms...they are doing this for their own defence you understand, not for offense means...we would have signed treaties with you of course.
Now tell me, will you invade to stop this proliferation of arms or will you honour your commitments not to invade?
Answers on a small postcard please......
Posted by: Naseem at November 23, 2004 5:19 PM
British foil 9/11-style attacks on London:
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1348572004
Posted by: Mike at November 23, 2004 5:29 PM
Naseem:
Muslims in America do not extend a hand of friendship ordinarily. More commonly they are aloof and adhere to the Quranic dictum that they are superior to us 'impure' kafir.
When Muslims come to our country and say to eachother on their websites and in their mosques that they want to make the US an Islamic country it causes the rest of us a legitimate concern. When they preach in their mosques that Americans and Jews should be killed for Allah it causes me, a Jew and an American, great concern.
When you state that we non-Muslims in America need to change our attitude it only underscores the lack of self criticism in the Muslim community. The West constantly dissects itself in an effort to improve and understand itself. There are very few in the Muslim community, considering their overall numbers globally, that are sincerely introspective.
We aren't programmed to hate. If anything there are attempts in our media and society to brainwash us to accept and embrace every person, every culture and every act of terrorism unconditionally and in relative terms -- even if it destroys us.
What WE ARE is a people who for the most part had our eyes opened on 9/11. Muslims here and all over the world self-righteously celebrated the death of 3,000 innocent people on that day. Since then we have had many opportunities to analyze Islam and the actions of its adherents including the slaughter of more that 300 children in Beslan, the unspeakable torture and beheadings of innocents in Iraq and the hundreds and hundreds of unarmed men, women and children murdered in Israel. There is so much more that I can include among the horrors inflicted in the name of Islam, each one more brutal and terrifying than the next.
You should ask yourself why we and all countries accepting Muslims into their societies have to transform society to make Muslims resistant to assimilation more 'comfortable' while furtively working towards for Sharia law.
We're not having it. We are willing to fight to keep our country free for our children and grand children. If you think their is a prayer rug and hijab in the future of our grand children, you're dead wrong.
Please don't mistake our patience and our self-effacing humor for weakness. That would be a big mistake ...
Posted by: Kemaste at November 23, 2004 5:30 PM
Oh you make me laugh nazi-eem ! (not too much though) . The wandering West indeed ! What about your wandering Arab imperialism ? Tell me nazi-eem , what were your ancestors ? Did muslims always live in your part of the world ? Did islam just somehow sprout there like some vile, choking weed ? Or maybe (the shocking truth) muslims murdered tens of millions of Hindus and Buddhists and destroyed their civilisations under the bloody banner of allah. And what of the black Africans murdered and enslaved by muslims for over 1,000 years (indeed until this very day) ? Hugh is right , we're safer with you bloodsuckers all back in the arab wastelands whence you came. There you can beat and stone your women, kill children for eating during ramadan, hang homosexuals, behead apostates and indulge in your disgusting cult without worrying about modernity or democracy. I'd love to have a battle of wits with you nazi-eem but I never fight an unarmed women.
Posted by: Son Of Albion at November 23, 2004 5:32 PM
Mr Albion, Thank you for your warm welcome.
You said "Your arguments are increasing like specks of dirt in the wind".
Mr. Albion...but together they form a deadly sandstorm.
Am I in denial....I hope not, do you know the heartache one faces in reading comments that are written here. If I was really in denial I would go a friendly Islamic website (which I also do sometimes).
I try to progress each day, freely admitting that insurgents too say that they are muslims, that they are the true ones.
They hold us all back, but if you say that all the faults are with muslims then that too is wrong!
at November 23, 2004 5:33 PM
Naseem, did you read Kemaste's post?
Posted by: Mike at November 23, 2004 5:38 PM
"A deadly sand storm" ! Nah nazi-eem, I was thinking more of a light summer breeze in the city, when you feel a speck of something brush against your face but then it's gone and it's forgotten. Sorry to hear about the heartache though - try bicarbonate of soda, that sometimes works. As for those friendly islamic websites (in arabic naturally) , are they the ones that show the throat slitting, head chopping, the calls to exterminate the Christians and Jews, the demands that the West convert to islam ? In fact isn't "friendly islamic website" an oxy-moron ? Like "islamic tolerance" ?
No , all the faults aren't with the muslims BUT islam is the one that demands we become converts or dhimmis, islam is the one that calls us "infidels", islamists are the ones who ALWAYS demand special treatment and then try to destroy our freedoms and because of that I hate islam and I hate it's apologists.
You can't progress because you're happy in islam - the way a Nazi would be happy with Hitler. A "religion" that threatens to kill people who leave it isn't a religion - it's a CULT. Good luck with all that - I really hope your hindu & buddhists ancestors will somehow show you the light.
Posted by: Son Of Albion at November 23, 2004 6:05 PM
Naseem
((So, now you tell me... do you have to reform?))
More pomposity and arrogance.
Answer me this question. Why is it that Hindus and Sikhs and Chinese Buddhists and African Christians can all live in the west, face racism and prejudice, and not fall into backward ghettoes?
What is it about Islam that makes it HATE the entire non Muslim world, to spit on Kaffir's, to despise their culture and societies?
Think about it Naseem.
The disease is within Islam. The brainwashing, the putative hatred in the Koran, the imperialistic stupidity of the culture of Islam is the reason for the ghetto living and backwardness of Muslims in the West.
Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jews all say the same thing about Muslims.
Face the truth Naseem. Be honest. It will liberate you.
at November 23, 2004 6:14 PM
Naseem
You cannot be taken seriously when you whine about Western Imperialism. Because Islam is the vehicle for Arabic Imperialism. And if there is one thing history has taught us it is that Islam seeks to dominate the world, and slaughtered millions in its imperialistic forays around the world, destroying whole civilisations and religions. As a Pakistani your land was on the receiving end of Islamic imperial armies, and as a bootlicker and a slave of the Arab, you display all the cringing abjectness of a slave.
In other words, stop whining about imperialism. A skunk shouldnt tell other animals that they stink.
Posted by: Kaffir Boy at November 23, 2004 6:21 PM
Shiva is right.
There must be many millions of muslims who are born into this religion through no fault of their own, who would absolutely HATE Islam.
These people would be an effective 5th column to destroy Islam from within.
Posted by: Voltaire at November 23, 2004 6:32 PM
Trust and respect are not handed out, they must be earned. Before 9-11 quite honestly I knew very little about islam or muslims, I saw them but did not perceive them as a threat, I had no idea that deep within mosques and muslim households they (no not all) were planning and conspiring to make the US an islamic country...now that the cat is out of the bag so to speak the story is different. 9-11 opened many many many eyes, but it did not stop there, since then we have witnessed beheadings, kidnappings, muslims cheering and parading through the streets of the US happy about the deaths of 3000 innocent people, etc etc, these acts do not endear muslims to the general American population, nor do the half-hearted condemnations of the acts of terror carried out in the name of islam.
The United States has fought many wars to keep and preserve their freedoms....when Americans wanted to be free from British rule, they fought for it, even when some states wanted an end to slavery there was a war within the states to accomplish that, in short Americans will fight to preserve the freedoms that they have and hold dear, shaira will NEVER become law in the US, women will not allow themselves to be treated as though they were a farm animal...religion aside, sharia is contrary to every basic human right that Americans hold dear and they will, repeat WILL fight for it if pushed into a corner. Once again there will be a war on US soil to protect our freedoms.
As for reform....when I moved from the US to Canada I...yes me...I had to reform to their laws, customs and way of life...I moved here, they did not drag me here, it is my responsibility to assimilate myself into their society, not their responsibility to assimilate themselves to me just to make me more comfortable...same goes for muslims that move anywhere on the planet...THEY MUST ADAPT AND ASSIMILATE..if they cannot or wont then they should not move and place a burden on established societies.
Posted by: USAgirl at November 23, 2004 6:45 PM
(And let me tell you, I'm not crazy -- everybody else is, but not me)
Posted by: Kemaste at November 23, 2004 04:02 PM
Welcome to my world!!
to calm the nerves??
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give the Strength,Wisdom,Sight and Courage to stay the course to Victory [FREEDOM] to Destory ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Amen
at November 23, 2004 7:02 PM
Naseem, here are some suggestions of how muslims can get on with non-muslims and avoid the conflict worsening in American and European society, as well as earn trust and respect. One aspect is intellectual and the other is social. You and your fellows should get rid of the literalist muslim teachers, kick them out or the mosques and the schools and send them back to their homelands. Get together with fellow moderate muslims and organise vociferous campaigns against against islamicists and literalists acting in your community. Encourage your fellows to read the Qur'an translated into a language they actually understand (ie. not 7-8th century arabic), as well the hadith and sira; study the history of the spread of islam (ie. good, scholarly historical studies) and the fate of the peoples and faiths vanquished in its wake; study American and European social history.
On the social side, you can encourage your friends and relatives to socialise with non-muslims, make deep friendships with non-muslims; avoid living in neighbourhoods dominated by muslims; engage in sports outdoor activites and intellectual pursuits with non-muslims. Take an active part in non-muslim community life; get active in local non-religious issues. As a woman you will understand how central women are to any societal change of this nature, so encourage your female friends to defer marriage and strike out and make an independent life for themselves economically, socially and culturally. And finally make babies! Yes, encourage your female Muslim friends and relatives to search outside their ethnic and religous backgrounds for parteners. Above all avoid arranged marriages with men from your parental or native homeland. The children of these marriages may be raised as muslims, or at least taught the tenets of the religion, and when they reach adulthood the will be in a position to judge whether the Muslim faith is for them. I genuinely think if concerned moderate Muslims like yourself carry these things through (as have people of the Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, and various Christian faiths, etc.) we will achieve a refrormed Islam and a gentle and loving inclusive society. At the back of my mind I think that I read that you live in Pakistan. Still, you could impart these ideas to your friends and relatives living in Europe and North America.
Posted by: fieldvole at November 23, 2004 7:02 PM
There is only two groups of muslims,the ones who choose to be muslim.and the ones who do not have any choice.
Fear is the islamists best friend
Posted by: shiva at November 23, 2004 03:41 PM
hate to tell you this but you are WRONG! WRONG! if they are in the west and choose to stay in islam this is their choice...
Now if they live in Arab lands this of course is right on ,but not in the West it is their choice...
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom,Sight and Courage to Destory ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Worlds Eyes to their Threat Amen
PS
Now the mong says he is the real victim after shooting 8 peopele and killing 6 and they were UNARMED and you ask if he is a mulsum?? come on people!!
at November 23, 2004 7:16 PM
So, all have to be careful and not have a role reversal.
If we don't get along, muslims will have Islamic schools, shops, supermarkets, clothes shops exclusively selling Jilbabs, Hijabs etc. Over a number of years you will get communities living within communities having an almost sharia type living.
"Is this vision what you really want boy"? Who will be responsible for this...I'll tell you...it's your programming of hate...we'll be putting out hand of friendship to you and you'll spit in it....forcing muslims to live in small exclusive muslim enclaves...ironically already there in parts of the UK which postees like Mr. Rikki and Albion complain about.
So, now you tell me... do you have to reform?
Posted by: Naseem at November 23, 2004 04:25 PM
once again you don't understand Americans??
YOU ARE A STUPID WOMAN...
YOU SEE AMERICA IS NOT EUROPE AND WE LOVE OUR CHILDREN UNLIKE THE MULSUM MONSTERS WHO SEND THEM TO BLOW UP OTHERS??
as far as them making getos well that makes it a little easier??
YOU ARE THE FOOL THE SWING IS GOING BACK NOT FORWARD??
Remember our President and Military take an oath to DEFEND AGAINST FORGIEN AND DOMISTIC ENEMYS??
This is why you have amde a huge mistake??
this chess board is bigger than your eyes can see but we are wearing our glasses??
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH,WISDOM,SIGHT AND COURAGE TO STAY THE COURSE TO VICTORY[FREEDOM] TO DESTORY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM AMEN
at November 23, 2004 7:29 PM
Naseem pleading for us all to disarm... ...now that Professor Khan -- doubtless with the assistance of the Pakistani government and military -- has provided God-knows-what with the means of producing nuclear weapons and the Islamic Republic of Iran's BS about enriching uranium for peaceful purposes. That's rich.
Kaffir Boy pegged her and others like Naseem fair and square:
"You cannot be taken seriously when you whine about Western Imperialism. Because Islam is the vehicle for Arabic Imperialism. And if there is one thing history has taught us it is that Islam seeks to dominate the world, and slaughtered millions in its imperialistic forays around the world, destroying whole civilisations and religions."
Posted by: waterdragon52 at November 23, 2004 8:05 PM
Can anybody tell me ONE thing that islam has done to benefit Americans (or any other Western country)?
JUST ONE
Posted by: cross at November 23, 2004 8:17 PM
Kemaste:
I believe Daniel Pipes was also not sure how to peg Nawash, but came down on the side of him being OK. That opinion may, however, predate this little pronouncement.
It's possible that Nawash simply thinks that to have permitted Arafat to be buried in Jerusalem that would have been seen as a gesture of good will without thought to the broader implications.
at November 23, 2004 8:27 PM
No Naseem... we infidels, kaffirs, whatever!, are not going to reform to islamic ways. We will resist. If you live in U.S.of A. or Canada you MUST live the laws of our land. If you don't like it here, then get out!
Posted by: Ummagumma at November 23, 2004 8:31 PM
My dear Naseem, you sound like an intelligent, educated person, albeit steeped in Islamic confusion, a common malady among the brainwashed.
Before 9-11, most Americans, myself included, thought very little about muslims. The difference between me and most other Americans is that I studied Islamic history and Islamic cultures in college, so I had a head start on many of my fellow citizens. I have known for years what a vile and inimical religion Islam is. There are very few muslims in my little corner of the world (thank God), but I am well acquainted with muslim breeding habits, so this could change over night. I won't deny that despite my knowledge of Islam, I was complacent before 9-11. I seldom encountered muslims, so I didn't think much about them.
It is absolutely appalling that you would accuse the United States of imperialism, considering the fact that every Islamic country on earth was conquered by invading Arab armies, millions of their citizens slaughtered by Islamic savages, their cultures and religions eradicated, and they have been festering in perpetual stagnation, poverty, and ignorance ever since. You are a member of this illustrious clique.
Is it my fault that ignorant muslims breed themselves into poverty, illiteracy, and misery? No, that's Islam's fault. Should I be ashamed that I live in the greatest nation on earth, a nation that has consistently welcomed people of every ethnicity, nationality, religion and color? A nation that was diverse long before the multiculturalists decided to take it one step further and sabotage a natural phenomenon with their asinine social engineering projects? Do you think Europe invented diversity? Thirty years ago, Europe was 90% white and Christian. Thirty years ago, America was the most diverse and unique nation in the world, and it still is.
We don't have any apologies to make, any concessions to grant, or any appeasements to offer muslim immigrants. If they can't come here and blend in with the mix, they can get the hell out. Muslims aren't "special" to me; they are intolerant, arrogant, bellicose malcontents who are never satisfied, no matter where they are.
This is MY country; my ancestors fought in the Revolutionary War, and I'll just be damned if a herd of pugnacious, megalomaniac muslims is going to invade America and tell ME that I must change to accomodate THEM. That's not the way it works, sorry.
at November 23, 2004 9:24 PM
Nazeem, where would all your great oil be without Western technoloy and advanced geological knowledge? Without that, your precious Middle East would be nothing but Stone Age sheepherders. You owe us big time for what we showed you to do with that oil, how to find it, how to suck it out of the ground, and how to transport it in supertankers. Muslims were capable of doing NONE of these things before the Westerners showed up.
And if Islam succeeds in destroying the West, the whole world goes back to being Stone Age sheepherders. Because you don't understand -- all the "goodies" the Muslim world gets from the West, the mobile phones, the high-tech gadgets, the Mercedes Benz cars, the supertankers -- it all comes from our system of FREEDOM. Only FREE people invent things, only FREE people make technological and scientific advances, only FREE people build wealthy, peaceful and law-abiding societies.
Take away our FREEDOM, and you take away all the "goodies' you came here for in the first place. You will simply get back, here in the West, what you fled your homelands to escape -- poverty, overcrowding, backwardness, violence, barbarity, misery. I guarantee it.
Posted by: Suzan at November 23, 2004 9:49 PM
Catherine,
It may be easier for people to leave Islam in the west than in Islamic countries, but they still live in fear of their lives, and have change their names, and live in secure undisclosed locations.
Look at Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
Even apostates in the west are scared.
It would be a good thing if there was an Apostates Anonymous, where apostates from Islam could go and be given a new life.
Something equivalent to the Witness Protection program.
Posted by: Voltaire at November 23, 2004 9:52 PM
And if you don't believe me, Naseem, just start reading the news from Holland. REALLY read it, everyday.
One of the richest, most peaceful, least crime-ridden societies ever founded. Turned into a violent, crime-ridden shithole that's only going to get more violent as time goes by. . .only going to get more poverty-stricken and overcroweded, as Holland depends heavily on world trade and tourism for its economy -- and who the hell wants to vacation in Beirut, or trade with people who slaughter artists in the street -- all thanks, Naseem, to YOUR PEOPLE. YOUR PEOPLE, and NO ONE ELSE.
Take a look at Holland, before and after.
Before Islam: Wealthy, tolerant, little poverty, little crime.
After Islam:??????
at November 23, 2004 9:53 PM
Islamic Riddle
We all know that the Star in the Jewish religion is the Star of David.
And we know that the Cross in Christianity is there because Jesus was crucified on the cross.
But do you know where the Crescent or the Moon comes from in Islam?
a) The Turkish flag
b) Pre-Islamic Allah was a Moon God
c) The Arabs were deeply impressed with the shape of the Moon
If you chose b) then you are correct.
Prophet Mohammed worshiped a God named Allah before Islam was founded. Pre-Islamic Allah had three daughters - all mentioned in the Koran and were known as the Trinity Dessert Goddesses, Al-lat(u), Menat and Al-Uzza. [1 God + 3 Gods = 4 Gods.]
All of these Goddesses would have been important to Mohammed’s family or the Quraish. Allatu was Allah’s main daughter; a Mother Goddess, known simply as ‘The Goddess’. Allatu was so popular that she was borrowed by the Greeks and became Leto – Mother of Apollo. Al-Uzza was represented as the morning star - Venus.
But more significantly Menat had a cult which was between Mecca and Medina and was worshiped in the form of a ‘Black Stone’ or the Kaaba at Mecca; the very same black stone that every devote Muslim is required to encircle during his (her) pilgrimage or Hajj to Mecca at Ramadan.
This explains how it could be that Mohammed’s own father was named Allah or Abdullah - which translates into a servant of Allah – even before Islam was created. Mohammed was born into a family known as the Quraish {Webster's Third Dictionary}, who for more than 200 years were the caretakers of the ‘Black Stone’ or Kaaba at Mecca. Before Islam, Mohammed’s religion was known as Kaaba with Allah as God.
Worshiping Moon and Sun Gods and Goddesses were common in ancient times, from the Queen of Sheba in Ethiopia to the Ancient Greeks. Historical facts seem to show that Islam has its foundation in this Mythology, with any Biblical connection being added later – perhaps to give the religion legitimacy in the face of the other powerful regional ‘One God’ religions. (Most things Islamic were developed under the Syrians, who took over Islam after killing Mohammed’s cousin.)
at November 23, 2004 9:59 PM
Give Naseem a break. I think she honestly wants to de-escalate the violence of word and deed that is rising between the West and the Islamic countries.
Pass it on wrote: Pre-Islamic Allah had three daughters - all mentioned in the Koran and were known as the Trinity Dessert Goddesses, Al-lat(u), Menat and Al-Uzza. [1 God + 3 Gods = 4 Gods.]
Dessert goddesses? I am rather fond of baklava, but I sure don't worship it, or even personalize it.
Pequot--I'm glad your ancestors survived. But, do you honestly think the world would be better off with the third largest continent inhabited by at best, a few millions living at a stone-age level of development? And, I for one, am not about to get chopped up and shipped back to a dozen places in Europe, Asia, and Africa. As far as the heathen being given to Messiah as His inheritance, some of mine worshipped gods which were simply stones and sticks shaped by the hands of men. I bless God that, in my case, Messiah triumphed over my idolatrous heart. Heck, even some of my ethnic kin who should've known better sacrificed their first children to the gods of soil, rain, and fertility.
Posted by: Kepha1 at November 24, 2004 12:04 AM
In other words,Naseem is telling us:America must reform,or else....
The moderate muslims if there are any,are irrelevant,for any of them ,at any given time,for any number of reasons and anywhere in the world,can turn radical,and most of the radical ones have started out as moderates and then have graduated to mujahadeens.
The more religious a moderate muslim becomes,the more chances for him to turn radical,which means that the virus of radicalism lives within the religion of islam itself.
at November 24, 2004 12:33 AM
Definition of a moderate Muslim: A Muslim who is out of ammunition.
Posted by: BattleofthePyramids at November 24, 2004 1:16 AM
The United States does not need to reform to favor Islam.
Islam needs reforming though or must face possible extinction.
Posted by: abad at November 24, 2004 1:44 AM
Since Islam is anything but moderate, I don't believe you can be a moderate Muslim. To be moderate you'd have to drop Islam all together, i.e., be an ex-Muslim. You can't be moderate and believe Jews are pigs and dogs and people to slaughter. You can't be moderate and believe that you're superior and non-Muslims have to: convert, die, or live like a 3rd class drub paying Mafia-style protection tax in a humiliated manner. You can't be moderate and believe you have the right to beat your wife, murder your wayward daughter, blame rape victims and think women have less intelligence than a man. What the hell's moderate about that?
A true moderate is one on the way out of Islam but perhaps is afraid or just waiting for the right time or situation. The rest are like Islam's PR Dept. While the so-called "extremists" do Islam's dirty work, and follow Islam to the letter, the so-called "moderates" make excuses and deny it's Islam's fault or responsibility. Kinda like cigarette companies and their talking heads who denied for years that cigarettes were harmful or addictive and blamed the dying victims for all their health problems.
Posted by: feralee at November 24, 2004 1:46 AM
thanks, hugh, for your excellent analysis and taxonomy of "moderate" islam. while it seems that the human condition and philosophical and political trajectories of mankind could never accommodate your ultimate solution of isolating all muslims from non-muslims; your perceptions are very encompassing and enlightening
to kemaste and catherine: i am reminded of one of my favorite maxims
"i'm a schizophrenic, and so am i"
Posted by: ted at November 24, 2004 2:28 AM
thanks, hugh, for your excellent analysis and taxonomy of "moderate" islam. while it seems that the human condition and philosophical and political trajectories of mankind could never accommodate your ultimate solution of isolating all muslims from non-muslims; your perceptions are very encompassing and enlightening
to kemaste and catherine: i am reminded of one of my favorite maxims
"i'm a schizophrenic, and so am i"
Posted by: ted at November 24, 2004 2:29 AM
Hello all,
Thank you all for your comments, they were highly illuminating in many different ways.
Many people like me (or my children) I think will never be in a position to leave Islam.
I found it interesting that the modern muslim get the blame for history of their ancestors...lock, stock and barrel.
It almost brought me to tears to read some of the venom, spite and sheer hate that was there.
Others were quite enlightening like the post from "fieldvole".
Generally, I conclude that you all feel that it is not possible to be a reformist and be a muslims!
I certainly agree that muslims must make more effort to integrate, personally I think it is foolish to think all Kafirs are bad...that's just nonsense. Equally I hope you don't think that all muslims are bad...
I know that while in Pakistan I see very few Kafirs and the atmosphere is different...but it's not that bad.....not like how you make it out to be.
My hope is that given time...and some goood examples you don't see the very worst in muslims...& vice versa that I think is the best one can hope for.
If this doesn't happen, then what is the future?
Posted by: Naseem at November 24, 2004 5:21 AM
Naseem~ unfortunately the world has always seemed to work that way. Not awake enough to be sure ... Aha! 'The Sins of the Fathers.' That's the phrase. It gets far too much use and it always has done.
I wish to believe you are a moderate. But until koranic phrases such as (paraphrased) 'Jews are like apes and pigs' are denounced as equally as any Biblical phrases that were used to give sanction to slavery...
Like I say, not awake yet to word this correctly.
btw- Europeans took over the slave trade from muslims. And in the countries where it Still occurs... who runs it?
at November 24, 2004 5:57 AM
Taqiyya and kitman are always in effect.
I never believe anything that comes from islam, its apologists nor its defenders.
Posted by: CGW at November 24, 2004 8:10 AM
"I found it interesting that the modern muslim get the blame for history of their ancestors...lock, stock and barrel."
Why would you find this surprising Naseem? You seem to think that there has been a change from the past to the present; however, the past and the present haven't changed for your people. The modern Muslim still acts like the Muslim of the past. If you want to see the evidence, look at the murders taking place in Sudan. Look at the riots in Nigeria about a year or so back. Look at the Iraqi "insurgents" who beheaded those poor people and dragged the charred bodies of non-Muslims through the streets of Falujah. What you are failing to see is that things haven't changed all that much in the Muslim world. Oh, they have from your perspective because you live in a majority Muslim state. But if you were living in the borderlands, you would see a living history of what has been happening for the past 1400 years - not much has really changed after all. It is all well and good to say, "Our ancestors did that. How can you blame us?" Well, I don't blame you for what your ancestors did, but I do hold you accountable for what your society is doing today, Not YESTERDAY - TODAY. Clean up that mess. Reign in the murdering Jihadis and then we can have something to talk about.
"I know that while in Pakistan I see very few Kafirs and the atmosphere is different...but it's not that bad.....not like how you make it out to be."
And this is exactly the point I brought out above. You live in an hermetically sealed environment. You simply DO NOT understand what it is for those who do not ascribe to your religious views. How many of those "Kafirs" are you friends with?? Does it even enter into your brain that these are people with thoughts and feelings that are as acute as yours and that they might not want to "embrace" your ways of seeing things and living? Do you even look at these people as being just as equal to you in humanity and respect? Or, are they just "Kafirs" to you? Are they nothing more that "Dawah opportunities?" What is it they call Christians in your countries?? "Street Sweepers?" And they are called that why?? Oh, yeah. Because your country (your Muslim country) won't allow anyone that isn't Muslim to have a job where these people can have any sort of authority over Muslims. Imagine you were born in such a family. Imagine you were subjected to a life of menial work because you had the audacity to want to maintain your religious and cultural identity. How horrible! That person doesn't want to give up their identity and entire belief system because they are considered to be a lesser person simply because they can't see the glory that is Islam and convert to it. They choose not to convert to a religion that abuses those who aren't its adherents. What a terrible crime! Do you not realize that those who don't convert to your religion might choose not to because they see something about your religion that you DO NOT see? They see a side of Islam that is disgusting and offensive to their own feelings of morality and right and wrong. If you really want to discover why it is that there are people here who object to Islam, then you need to leave your hermetically sealed bubble. Go outdoors and find a Kafir. Talk to them about what their life is like in your country. Ask them about how they view Muslims and Islam. I guarantee that once they get beyond the fear that you will report them to the authorities, they will tell you things that will open your eyes and help you view your "Moderate" religion in another light.
Posted by: paula at November 24, 2004 9:06 AM
Catherine
Come to Indonesia,take a trip to the villages around Ambon and Poso,where people are being forcefully circumcised by Laskar Jihad while the police turn a blindeye.Go to Java and look how many families are homeless,thrown out of their villages because the kepala desa [village chief] or local iman thought they where not good enough muslim.
Here is a little thing to prove I am not so wrong,Indonesia has just had elections,and the Islamic parties went backwards Catherine
It is okay to Copy-paste-and rant,you have the best army in the world to protect you,you are safe fighting the jihad from behind your monitor.You talk big about guns.When you live in a house made of brick and bamboo,no telephone,not enough money to pay off the police,the only weapon you have is a sickle,then the rule of survival is SCHHH!!
May-be if you stopped clip-paste-clip-paste the same old thing day in day out and read a little more about the horrors of islam,then maybe you will understand that I am correct. Catherine
Let me be very clear,for any thing to exist it must have an opposite.The same like black/white-day/night-wrong/right
So for islam to exist,there must be two elements/groups.Islam means to submit,so here we have the two groups:-
Group 1] muslims who enforce submission[oppressors]
Group 2] muslims who submit[oppressed] Proof Since 1965 there have been over 1,000,000 people killled in Indonesia,mostly by the blade.The killing has not stopped in Poso and Ambon,North bali,Java.These places are not totally islamic yet so it is mostly christians be killed.Sumantra is the scary one,here muslim is killing muslim,so as to bring in sharia. So cut tuff gun rant,beause when you have 30-40 raving fanatical muslims burning down your house in the middle of the night,your gun in hand does not amount too much.When they do come,they are not that stupid to come when you are awake.
FEAR IS THE ISLAMISTS BEST FRIEND
Now this fear can also exist on the micro level in the USA,why are there so many comparisions with islam and the mafia.Look how the mob terrorised poor honest folks.I do not believe the islamists are going to change their tactics just because they come to the USA..
_WHERE EVER THERE IS ISLAM FEAR IS SURE TO FOLLOW
Cathrine,there are at least 100,000 6 year old muslim kids who can recite the complete Quoran.
They do this by reading the same thing day in day out.The way you keep throwing these evil verses at us,and your lack of knowledge of how fear is used within islam,I am beginning to suspect you are a cleric who cannot find his way home.
Prove me wrong and give your dog a bone
To finish with,,my soul mate is a muslim but hates islam
at November 24, 2004 9:13 AM
Yea remember a gun in hand is better than 2 cops on the phone? The American Way?
Not every has luxury of a gun
at November 24, 2004 10:45 AM
Catherine,
Look carefully at What Mr. Shiva has written. Read it again and again. Also look at my notes on how muslims enclaves will come about in America because both muslims and Kafirs refuse to integrate. You could be looking at America in 40-50 years.....drop your hate, learn to spell and read some other books too.
Paula,
Thank you for your lecture, it was more like a dressing down. Actually, I have met a lot of Kafirs, I used to live in the UK. I don't live in a seald bubble.
I am coming round to thinking that there are no friendly people in the US (for muslims).
You talk about the Saddam and Bin Laden giving you a hard time.....but you put them there!
I certainly hope the West learns not to tinker round the edges....it's dangerous.
I hope the muslims world learns to get better leaders.
at November 24, 2004 11:20 AM
Naseen
Bang!!!!!!!!
you should read very carefully what you have just
written
Hows your foot!!!!!!!
You should know better than to insult other peoples gods
The silver tray is waiting the hogs head
your night of the long knives is not so far of
at November 24, 2004 2:56 PM
Yea remember a gun in hand is better than 2 cops on the phone? The American Way?
Not every-one has luxury of a gun
at November 24, 2004 3:11 PM
Catherine can correct me if I am wrong but I think she means that having a gun in hand gives you protection this minute, whereas the police, no matter how fast they are may take a few minutes to arrive and protect you--minutes that could cost you or your family your lives. I guess I have it made....I have a gun AND a cop in the house.
Posted by: USAgirl at November 24, 2004 4:31 PM
"Thank you for your lecture, it was more like a dressing down."
Naseem, you fail to understand what I am saying here. I am not interested in lecturing you; nor do I get anything out of "dressing down" a person. I am simply trying to make a point.
Perhaps I am being rather blunt with you and the words are coming out strongly, but I fail to understand how you, or other Moderate Muslims are going to fix some of the problems in your own back yard if you don't deal with some pretty difficult realities. A very wise man I know of has a favorite saying, "You cannot change what you don't acknowledge." No matter how difficult it is to accept, you have to look at it straight in the face and accept it is a problem first before you can come up with ways to fix it. Otherwise, from what I can see, you are simply mouthing empty words or platitudes that you are trying to reform anything.
Yes, I realize you lived in Britain for a number of years. To this I say, "So what?" I am not asking you to befriend a non-Muslim in Britain and ask them about things. They don't know what life is like for a Kafir in a Muslim country. They are still living without the imposition of Sharia on their backs. I am asking you to be brave and ask a non-Muslim in Pakistan. Pakistan IS a Muslim country. Only a "Kafir" from Pakistan can give you that sort of information - that is why I asked you to go to that sort of person. They know the reality in a way you cannot even conceive of it.
The truth is we ALL are people who live in our own groups - I don't care if that is in Nairobe or in Brazil. All of us have our own unconsciousness based upon our group ways and group think. If you want to know how you are viewed by others you have to move outside your group and see things from the other person's perspective. It is a little more complex than this but it is a basic necessity if you want to understand why someone outside of your group sees you as they do. As an example, imagine you are witnessing a group of intellectuals at a dinner party. They spend the whole evening talking about the latest finds in their prospective fields. Hours and hours of talking, debating, pulling ideas apart and chewing on every little detail. At the end of the night they go home deeply satisfied - they had a wonderful night, it was exhilerating. Now, imagine there was a young farm boy at that same party. He witnessed the whole thing from beginning to end. You approach him and ask him, "How was the party." And he says, "It was dreadful." "What do you mean?" you ask. "Oh, they went on and on about things but no one talked about anything important or personal. It was all Ivory tower stuff."
This is what I mean about going out and finding a Kafir in your country. You, living amongst your own with little personal contact (I mean a friendship here where you can be honest with one another - not a distant acquaintance sort of friendship) have NO IDEA of how someone who is not Muslim experiences being in your country. You live in your own world, far removed from that person's reality. I am not trying to lecture you as much as I am trying to have you see that there are other realities about you, of which you have no idea. It seems to me that if you really want to make reform in Islam, and not to talk about it as if you really mean it, you are going to need to look at things from the other person's perspective. Otherwise, you will get NOWHERE.
Posted by: paula at November 25, 2004 7:12 AM
Paula:
As long as Naseem refers to non-Muslims as "Kaffirs", she's beyond reach. The very term has the same pejorative taint to it as "goyim" etc., have in Yiddish. ("Kaffir Boy" uses it as a nom de plum to show contempt.)
Posted by: waterdragon52 at November 25, 2004 1:15 PM
Yes, waterdragon, you are right; but truth be told, I expected some sort of response by her... and am a bit dismayed by the ringing sound of silence.
I fully expected a debate of some sort and now am finding the silence deafening.
Wow! Must have touched a nerve, eh?
Posted by: paula at November 28, 2004 10:06 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)