| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
In an article yesterday, the journalist and Islamic apologist Stephen Schwartz defined "Islamophobia" this way:
Notwithstanding the arguments of some Westerners, Islamophobia exists; it is not a myth. Islamophobia consists of:• attacking the entire religion of Islam as a problem for the world;• condemning all of Islam and its history as extremist;
• denying the active existence, in the contemporary world, of a moderate Muslim majority;
• insisting that Muslims accede to the demands of non-Muslims (based on ignorance and arrogance) for various theological changes, in their religion;
• treating all conflicts involving Muslims (including, for example, that in Bosnia-Hercegovina a decade ago), as the fault of Muslims themselves;
• inciting war against Islam as a whole.
While there may be by this definition some Islamophobes in the world, the definition actually obscures more than it reveals. Does the labeling as “Islamophobic” the practice of “attacking the entire religion of Islam as a problem for the world” mean that it is Islamophobic to focus attention on the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet as motivations for terrorist activity? If so, then jihad terrorists worldwide are themselves “Islamophobic,” for as we have seen, they routinely point to jihad passages from the Qur’an and Hadith to justify their actions. Nor is a frank discussion of the doctrine of Islamic jihad equivalent to saying that the “entire religion of Islam” is a “problem for the world: no one is saying that tayammum (ablution with sand instead of water) or dhikr (a dervish religious devotion) or other elements of Islam pose a problem for the world.
Defining as “Islamophobic” the condemnation of “all of Islam and its history as extremist” is similarly problematic — and not just because of the sloppy imprecision of the word “extremist.” Jihad and dhimmitude are and always have been part of Islam. Yet no religious commandment of any religion has ever been uniformly observed by its adherents, and no law has ever been universally enforced. Jews and Christians in Islamic lands were able at various times and places to live with a great deal of freedom; however, this does not contradict the fact that the laws of the dhimma always remained on the books, able to be enforced anew by any Muslim ruler with the will to do so.
Likewise, it may be “Islamophobic” to deny “the active existence, in the contemporary world, of a moderate Muslim majority,” but this also is beside the point. The existence of a moderate Muslim majority is not a question of “Islamophobia” or lack thereof, but of fact. But it is a fact that is very hard to ascertain with certainty -- not least because of the problem of definition: it’s useless to affirm that there is a “moderate Muslim majority” without clearing up the meaning of the word “moderate.” What makes a moderate Muslim? One who does not and never will engage in terrorist acts? That would make moderates an overwhelming majority of Muslims worldwide. Or is a moderate one who sincerely disapproves of those terrorist acts? That would reduce the number of moderates. Or is a moderate Muslim one who actively speaks out and works against the jihadists? That would lower the number yet again. Or finally, is a moderate Muslim one who actively engages the jihadists in a theological battle, trying to convince Muslims on Islamic grounds that jihad terrorism is wrong? That would leave us with a tiny handful.
Notwithstanding that fact, however, it would be silly for anyone to treat “all conflicts involving Muslims…as the fault of Muslims themselves,” or to incite “war against Islam as a whole.” To go to war with Islam as a whole — grizzled sheepherders in Kazakhstan and giggly secretaries in Jakarta as well as bin Laden and Zarqawi — would be absurd and unnecessary. But what does Schwartz really mean by saying that those who would advocate “war against Islam as a whole” are “Islamophobic”? Would that include among the Islamophobes those who recognize that Islamic jihad has been declared against us and advocate resistance to that jihad?
All this indicates that “Islamophobia” is virtually useless as an analytical tool. To adopt it would be to allow oneself to submit to the most virulent form of theological equivalence, and to affirm, against all the evidence, that every religious tradition is equally capable of inspiring violence. It would be to deny the very sensible observation of the eminent atheist (and, late in life, theist, but not Christian) philosopher Antony Flew (thanks to Daniel): “Jesus is an enormously attractive charismatic figure, which the Prophet of Islam most emphatically is not.” To recognize this is not base theological one-upmanship, but a step toward the recovery of realism in the analysis of Islamic jihad, and of a sense that in Western civilization there is something worth defending.
Even worse than all this, however, is the way the charge of “Islamophobia” is used to silence opponents of the jihad ideology -- as has been illustrated abundantly at Jihad Watch and Dhimmi Watch.
Posted by Robert at April 29, 2005 2:05 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Okay, so now that I have the ground rules for avoiding charges of "islamophobia," I will:
1) attack some of the religion of islam as a problem not for the world but for women in particular and non-muslims in general;
2) condemn some of islam and some of its history as extremist;
3) acknowledge the active existence, in the contemporary world, of a moderate muslim minority;
4) insist that muslims accede to the demands of non-muslims when they are living in non-muslim majority countries;
5) treat all conflicts involving muslims as the fault of the blind idiots who let the muslims into their lands; and
6) incite expulsion of muslims from non-muslim lands.
Posted by: 3812Michelle![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 29, 2005 2:27 PM
Schwartz plays ideological musical chairs every few years. What's next?
I would pay to put him on a lie detector, if only to ask this question: do you believe that the Angel Gabriel visited Muhammed and began reciting the words of a deity named "Allah?" Of course he doesn't believe that crap because he is well aware that Muhammed (Pig Crap Be Upon Him) concocted Islam at the age of 40 because: he was humiliated by his sex-toy status inherent to his marriage to a rich woman of 55 years; he had learned Biblical stories while employed on camel runs; he knew that he could create conditions where he could have all the sex, food and material booty that he desired, at the expense of the wretched lives of his nominal "slaves of Allah" army of jihadi scum. Schwartz believes that he can sell more anti Wahabi books, if he claims Muslim credentials and wears silly Middle East get up. He is about as piously Muslim as my dog.
Posted by: smokem at April 29, 2005 2:30 PM
Islamaphobe, homophobe, immigrantphobe and all the other phobes are an invention of the PC left. Pay no heed to their nonsense. Do what’s right, if it’s a spade, call it a spade.
The liberals and leftists that come up with these terms are weak and fearful people who are very afraid of being seen as intolerant. Their whole pathetic lives revolve around the PC notion of tolerance which is a façade.
These weaklings are a tiny minority that seem bigger only because they control the cultural institutions. If we dismantle the institutions and take back journalism and entertainment there would be no more left. They would lose their mouthpieces.
at April 29, 2005 2:37 PM
I don't know - disease may be another likely explanation. Hallucinations do occur with epilepsy, and can be quite substantial, including all the senses and the projection of imaginary auras:
http://www.epilepsyfoundation.org/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=21&threadid=29502&enterthread=y
Geoff
Posted by: Geoff at April 29, 2005 2:40 PM
Islamaphobe - who me?
I'm not an Islamaphobe, I'm an Allahphobe and anyone who calls me an Islamaphobe is either having an AllahGasm or is AllahGasmic.
at April 29, 2005 2:59 PM
Here's my definition:
An Islamaphobe is a reasonable person who has a rational opposition to an irrational belief system which has been used historicaly and can continually be used to impose an archaic value system in opposition to and destructive of one's own personal beliefs and values.
That makes me a proud Islamaphobe!
Posted by: crusader rabbit at April 29, 2005 3:10 PM
Oh, Schwartz is such a snake! He's being intellectually dishonest with us like he's been in the past.
"attacking the entire religion of Islam as a problem for the world"
translation: Identifying Jihad incursions around the world as a problem is Islamophobic.
"condemning all of Islam and its history as extremist"
translation: Labelling the Quran (the Medinan suras in particular which take precedence over the Meccan suras) as an extremist text is Islamophobic. Pointing out the history of Muslim imperialism and cultural genocide is Islamophobic.
"denying the active existence, in the contemporary world, of a moderate Muslim majority"
translation: QUESTIONING the existence of a moderate Muslim majority is Islamophobic. We do not have statistics that prove x % of Muslims are moderate or extremist and neither does Schwartz, but we have to assume that the majority are moderate lest we be called Islamophobes.
"insisting that Muslims accede to the demands of non-Muslims (based on ignorance and arrogance) for various theological changes, in their religion"
translation: Demanding that Muslims change their texts that are derogatory towards infidels and promote violence towards them is Islamophobic. Demanding Muslims drop their supersessionalistic claims to Jewish and Christian prophets and revisionist history is Islamophobic.
"treating all conflicts involving Muslims (including, for example, that in Bosnia-Hercegovina a decade ago), as the fault of Muslims themselves"
translation: Pointing out that the common theme of imposing a Muslim state in non-Muslim land is usually the thrust of a Muslim-infidel conflict is Islamophobic. If the Muslims get bare the brunt of that conflict, it's even more Islamophobic.
"inciting war against Islam as a whole"
translation: Defending oneself against Jihad, Sharia, and Dawa is Islamophobic. That constitutes "war" against Islam.
I'm sorry Mr. Schwartz, but we are not stupid and we can see right through your double-speak. You can call us all the nasty names you want, we will still refuse to accept Islam as a "religion of peace".
at April 29, 2005 3:14 PM
Islamaphobe: One who thinks Mulims should act like civilized human beings.
Yeah, Cross... all those wretched leftists helping Islam. Like Dubya, Condi, James Baker, Grover Norquist, and Bush Sr. You've got a point there.
Posted by: kj at April 29, 2005 3:15 PM
I'm disappointed Buddhists and Hindus haven’t complained about Buddhaphobia and Hinduphobia. I guess everyone really understands those two religions.
Posted by: 1630r at April 29, 2005 3:16 PM
Hey Cross... did you see your fearless leader traipsing along hand-in-hand with the leader of Saudi Arabia?... I think Dubya would look damn good in a nice, pink dress. LOL.
Posted by: kj at April 29, 2005 3:18 PM
Does the labeling as “Islamophobic” the practice of “attacking the entire religion of Islam as a problem for the world” mean that it is Islamophobic to focus attention on the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet as motivations for terrorist activity?
That in and of itself is not Islamophobic. What is Islamophobic is deliberate attempts at using one-sided and out-of-context quotes from the Quran, Sunnah and Seerah to demonize Islam.
If so, then jihad terrorists worldwide are themselves “Islamophobic,” for as we have seen, they routinely point to jihad passages from the Qur’an and Hadith to justify their actions.
Nonsense. Read for example, what Usama bin Laden says. He repeatedly cites Western aggression as his motivation and NOT the Quran or Hadith.
Jihad and dhimmitude are and always have been part of Islam.
True. Defending oneself and ensuring that both non-Muslims and Muslims within an Islamic state pay taxes to support the defense of the State have always been a part of Islamic Sacred Law.
What makes a moderate Muslim?
Those Muslims who obey Islamic Sacred Law are moderate Muslims. Those who go outside the bounds are extremists. Very simple.
More later...
Posted by: Shukri at April 29, 2005 3:19 PM
FP not TCS will print this how sensitive are the filters of FP this post edited wont go through
Your arguing over the amount of shit in turd soup.
Anything that promotes Islam in any form or suggests it can be moderated is an affront to Islam and reason. no scriptural basis can be found for it.The mere suggestion calls for death under sharia .
Islam’s only hope is to point fingers and call names counting on white guilt causing capitulation to the extortionist demands of civilization's enemies.
Im sure Swartz has got to be getting its money from RAND and hopes to promote some Trojan horse Islam. He is a proven liar and equivocator who will not face the fundamental problem that are spawnd directly from the Quran.
He should be arrested for sedition not on the payroll of the government or quasi government NGOs
at April 29, 2005 3:19 PM
I am not an Islamaphobe; I am a Miso-Islamist, a hater of Islam.
Posted by: Mentat at April 29, 2005 3:22 PM
Miso-Islamist - AKA "enemy of God".
Posted by: Mentat at April 29, 2005 3:23 PM
That was awesome Robert...I always look at terms like Islamophobe or Allahisms as left handed humor. Some very important and profound ideas are expressed in jest. Billr knows all about that, that's probably why he collected them on his blog site. Schwartz is trying to make something out of nothing...great trick if you can do it...
at April 29, 2005 3:24 PM
From the mass murders of megaterror
To the foaming speeches of Khomenei clones.
To the martyr seeking selfexploding maniacs
To the crowds in the the street full of support
And crying "death to israel, death to America"
To the Khalifah Revolutionaries "islam will rule the world" kinds.
How should one not be islamophobic ?
Posted by: TBH_1 at April 29, 2005 3:28 PM
At an "islamophobia" talk, I asked our muslim brotherhood leader why wouldn't I have a bad case of islamophobia? Muslims want to take over my country (and will use violence to do it), run it according to sharia laws, take away my rights and freedoms,suppress other religions, etc. etc. etc. Anyone who doesn't have a healthy fear of islam is doomed. He stammered and said islam was misunderstood, it was a beautiful religion, blah blah, blah.
This has been posted before but seems appropriate here.
To Stephen the sufi who finds himself drowning in the strong current of the ocean of jihad
does your pir keep your whirling, turning,
bowing, chanting, repeating the name allah
til fana obliterates your rational mind
and you find reason flees and frees you
from all those rules and regulations
imposed on all those baser men
imprisoned in the box of islam?
It is your fate to keep dancing
as fast as you can on the back of the beast,
so it won't turn and scream APOSTATE!
And sever the heads of the american sufis
with its swords of hate, for that seed
is always there, that seed of hate
ready to explode and bring pain again.
Show me the sufi love of your allah,
show me his love and compassion
for All beings and All creatures,
great and small. Through the ages
One and All.
Tell me, meccan, about your perfect prophet.
In your sacred books, I read that he
was a murderer, a thief, a pedophile,
a lusty power-monger tribal chief.
You've said this was only custom of the time,
while others of your medinan brothers say no,
this is the way to go, for all times.
Is his life what you seek to imitate?
the great pattern to which you aspire?
It is nihilism, the kiss of death,
not only to the ego, but to life itself.
"High" states don't substitute for morality.
Believe me, I know.
So you must keep turning and whirling
in a dual dance with the shadow sheiks
of the sufis who draw that line in the sand
and stand in its name, islam.
at April 29, 2005 3:29 PM
Defending nonsense, Shurki-style:
"What is Islamophobic is deliberate attempts at using one-sided and out-of-context quotes from the Quran, Sunnah and Seerah to demonize Islam."
Um, which quotes would these be? And if they're being "taken out of context" by muslims, how is that the fault of everyone else?
"Nonsense. Read for example, what Usama bin Laden says. He repeatedly cites Western aggression as his motivation and NOT the Quran or Hadith."
Nonsense. Read what Osama bin Laden and other islamofascists say. They invoke God in all their crimes.
"Defending oneself and ensuring that both non-Muslims and Muslims within an Islamic state pay taxes to support the defense of the State have always been a part of Islamic Sacred Law."
Sorry, dhimmitude has nothing to do with muslims paying any taxes at all; that is zakat, which has historically often been voluntary, and not required. In these cases, and in much of jihad history, non-muslims were economic and demographic slaves to muslim aggression. Additionally, where levied, zakat was at approximately one half the rate of jizya, the "dhimmi" (non-muslim) tax. And finally, "defense" has historically been interpreted with such lability by muslim officials so as to make the term completely illegitimate.
"Those Muslims who obey Islamic Sacred Law are moderate Muslims. Those who go outside the bounds are extremists. Very simple."
Hmm, so hard to say whether islam is simple or complex - so many muslims worldwide seem to "misunderstand" it so. Unfortunately, your definition of "moderate" (strict adherence to sharia, the Quran and the hadits, which include the call for oppression of minorities and women, the limitation of expression of religion for such minorities, among other crimes) corresponds to "extremist" in the majority of the rest of the world.
More later...
Geoff
Posted by: Geoff at April 29, 2005 3:33 PM
J.W.rs;
Anti Jihad leaflets/Posters available to download.
Click the link and it's the first one I'm on about. (Total of 3)
You can print it off and post it in public areas, I encourage as many of you as possible to do so!
Regards;
Kc.
at April 29, 2005 3:43 PM
So kj, you like to see men in nice pink dresses do you? Or, since you view all real Americans as monkeys, does that mean you like to see monkeys in nice pink dresses too?
Logically I could conclude that you are into homoeroticism and beastiality? LOL
at April 29, 2005 3:49 PM
To soon to be massacred Maronite Christians in Lebanon:
"Father, don't worry. We don't want to harm you. If we are destroying you, it is for strategic reasons."
~Yasser Arafat
Whew, that's a relief....
at April 29, 2005 3:50 PM
I shouldn’t have been so kjphobic. Now watch Giaour jump into the fray to save the day for kj. LOL
Posted by: Cross at April 29, 2005 4:09 PM
An Islamophobe is someone who defends the rights of all non-Muslims, and of Muslim women.
Posted by: Doctor Phibes at April 29, 2005 4:30 PM
Oy. Schwartz just had to go over to the dark side. His apologetics have been steadily growing more shrill and emotional.
I'm thinking it will only be a matter of two years or so before he picks up a Kalashnikov and heads for one of the multitudinous jihad fronts currently open. Maybe he'll even appear on an ummah message board in his own shahid will video.
Posted by: patrickafir at April 29, 2005 4:39 PM
"Those Muslims who obey Islamic Sacred Law are moderate Muslims. Those who go outside the bounds are extremists. Very simple."
I think you have it reversed...
Moose
Posted by: Moose at April 29, 2005 4:46 PM
What I find so odious about the term "Islamophobia" is that it is an allegation of "thought-crime" instead of a warning not to hold a bigoted view against certain human beings.
A strong dislike of homosexuals is generally what the term "homophobia" means. A person could have no problem whatsoever with homosexual human beings, but be against the "radical gay" agenda promulgated by some homosexuals. So in the case of the word "homophobia," it appears that a person can be both (1) courteous and polite to fellow people who happen to be gay, but (2) stand against the politics of certain gay people.
The term "Islamophobia", by contrast, is labeling any person critical of a *set of beliefs* as a de facto bigot. This is complete sophistry. A person can easily treat muslims with respect, but be entirely critical of their beliefs. To call him an "Islamophobe" is nothing more than denying that person the right to critically evaluate a belief system while acknowledging that the holders of that belief system have the same rights as any other in a western society.
If persons critical of Islam can be called "Islamophobes," then why aren't Zarqawi and his ilk called "enlightenment-phobes," "democracy-phobes," "univeral rights of man-phobes," etc?
Posted by: Darius LaMonica at April 29, 2005 5:37 PM
A phobia is an irrational fear; that fear should be related to some sort recurrent stimuli and a psychological condition that can be characterized in measurable terms. All of Schwartz' criteria are behavioral or cognitive to start with; in addition the criteria are replete with vague notions: 'extremist', 'problem' etc.
How in the world are we supposed to be able to coherently identify some intelligible, recurring irrational fear in people with criteria like this?
What a sham.
Posted by: JTF at April 29, 2005 6:09 PM
Stephen Schwartz, the protector of the weak. God will surely be pleased with him.
Posted by: ia786 at April 29, 2005 7:12 PM
Yesterday, I kept hearing that Islam is the world's fastest growing religion. I did a little research and found statistical data that refutes that claim. Here's some interesting excerpt from this website: http://www.bible.ca/...
Introduction:
"The Islamic religion has a long history of myth making. The claim they are the fastest growing religion in the world is pure myth. We have collected the latest statistics from David A. Barrett’s huge two volume, "World Christian Encyclopedia", the 2001 AD edition. In case you haven’t heard of this work, it is the world standard for religious statistics.
"Muslim's claim that their growth rate is 235 percent and 47 percent for Christianity. This statistic came from the Readers Digest Almanac and Yearbook 1983, and represents 235 percent increase over 50 years. Muslims always leave off the 50 year fact to make it appear they are going 235% every year. A simple review of the readers Digest study shows that the growth rate of Islam vs. Christianity is directly linked to the birth rate in Third World countries where Islam dominates and not actual conversions to each religion. Christianity has always been larger than Islam. These statistics from Readers Digest are over 20 years old. Further, we do not consider readers digest to be an authority on such matters. Why will Muslims not quote real authoritative statistics from certified research groups who show Islam is not the fastest growing religion in 3/4’s of the worlds countries.""Before we examine the true facts from informed statisticians, we want to make it clear that we are not claiming Christianity is the fastest growing religion on earth. Such a claim is a needless as it is irresponsible. Having said this, in terms of sheer numbers, there are more Christians being added to planet earth, than any other religion on earth, including Islam. (see Table 1-2 for proof.)"
Relative Size and Growth of Islam to Christianity: [highlights]
1. From Table 1-1, there are 1.9 Billion Christians making up 31% of the world population, whereas there are only 1.2 Billion Muslims making up only 20% of the population.
3. From Table 1-1 you can see that the world growth rate of Muslims is 2.13, and for Christians it is 1.36. A closer look reveals, however that the birth rate of Muslims world wide, is literally double that of Christians. This is due to the fact that Muslims are largest in the developing world where dirt floors, thatched roofs and large families are common. When you the actual conversion rate, where men chose their religion, rather then are born into it, you can see that Christians are converting, on a percentage basis, almost twice as many as Muslims (1.7:1). This means that individual Christians are out converting Muslims almost two to one! What this means, is that as third world Muslim countries become more civilized, their birth rate will drop off to match the rest of the civilized world, but Christians will still continue to out convert them at a rate of 1.7:1.
4. From Table 1-1 you can see that while Muslims claim they are the fastest growing religion in the world (2.13), the statistics say that Baha'is are growing at a faster rate (2.28) and faster still are Zoroastrians (2.65).
5. From Table 1-1 regarding world distribution, you can see that Islam is only in 204 of the worlds 238 countries. Christianity, on the other hand is in all 238 countries of the world. Christianity has a 100% penetration rate world wide!
Posted by: Freedom1
at April 29, 2005 7:30 PM
(cont.)
From Table 1-4 the continent "Europe" we observe that while Muslims are growing faster than Christians, Buddhists claim the prize for the fastest growing religion at a rate of 1.39. Muslims make up only 5% of the population in Europe and most of the Muslim growth in Europe is from immigration. Although 77% of Europeans are Christians, Buddhists, not Muslims, are the fastest growing religion in the continent of Europe.
From Table 1-4 the continent "Latin America" that we observe that while Muslims (1.99) are growing faster than Christians (1.63), they make up only 1/3 of 1% (.3%) of the population, whereas Christians are 92 % of the population. The down trend in Christianity conversion is mainly defects from Catholics to non-religious. It must be troubling for Muslims to know that although they are growing faster than Christians, Baha’is are growing much faster than Muslims at a rate of 2.87! In the Latin American continent, Christians make up 93% of the population. Although tiny Islam is fastest growing faster than Christianity, it is the Baha’is, who take the prize for fastest growing the Latin America.
From Table 1-4 the continent "North America" we observe that while Muslims are growing faster than Christians, they make up only 4% of the population, whereas 84% are Christians. Most of the Muslim growth in North America is from immigration. Canada alone immigrates more Muslims apart from the USA, to account for almost all the growth in all of North America every year! It sure must be a hollow boast for Muslims to claim they are the fastest growing religion in North America, when it is because of the kindness and generosity of Christians who let them immigrate, often fleeing the persecution between hostile Muslim sects. There are still 50% more Jews in North America than Muslims in 2004. Muslims lie when they tell you they are the fastest growing (1.56) religion in North America. From Table 1-4, we can see that they are no better than 5th place in growth behind: Atheists (3.51), Hindus (3.13), Sikhs (2.81), Buddhists (2.75), Baha’is (2.25). We tire of the lies and myth making of Islamic spin doctors.
Conclusion:
There are more new Christians added to the world population than any other religion on earth every day. This data makes the entire discussion about "rates of growth" irrelevant. The fact is today, that Christianity is the fastest growing religion on this most critical basis. This may change, but today, in 2004 AD, Christians take the prize for being the fastest growing religion.
On none of the 6 continents are Muslims the fastest growing religion.
That Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world is pure myth at best and at worst a deliberate deception of solid statistical facts.
*****
Another Source: "A Christian Boom" Daniel Pipes http://www.danielpip...
I just thought it was interesting to know the facts.
at April 29, 2005 7:32 PM
Freedom1 check the site you got the info from, HA HA, what did you think they were going to say old chap.
The people of Europe have abandoned Christianity, More Muslims go to Mosque than Christians go to Church in the whole of the UK.
There are 2 million Muslims here and about 60+ Million Christians, think about that!!
at April 29, 2005 8:08 PM
How do you politicize 'gayness'? That's right, you can't. Fear of homosexuals is completely irrational, since a homo can't turn you or anyone else into a homo who isn't one already. It's a biological thing and the person has no control over it whatsoever. Now, Islam...
Posted by: Leveller at April 29, 2005 8:12 PM
The CIA World’s Facts Book
“The total number of Muslims in 1996 was 1.4 billion which was 26% of the world population. According to UN statistics Islam’s annual growth in 1994-1995 was 6.40% compared to only 1.46% of Christianity. The total number of Muslims in the world in 1998 was 1.6 billion (1, 678, 442,000).”
By: James A. Bill (professor of government and director of the Reves Center for International Studies at the College of William and Mary in Virginia)
‘..By the turn of the century, for the first time in history, the number of Muslims (those who practice Islam) will have surpassed the number of Christians in the world.
Islam is a monotheistic religion, civilization and way of life now practiced by 1.5 billion people. Easily the world’s fastest growing religion, Islam is not confined to the Middle East. It is a truly universal force. More Muslims live in America today than all the Presbyterians and Episcopalians put together. There are more than 1,200 mosques in the United States and 1000 mosques in England, where the Muslim community has established its own national parliament. There are more Muslims in Indonesia than in Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Saudi Arabia put together. More live in Malaysia than in Jordan, Lebanon and Kuwait combined. Nearly 20 million Muslims live in China. ‘
at April 29, 2005 8:18 PM
ia786-
So, in other words, you have no evidence-no proof- to refute the data.
Check where the data came from:
"We have collected the latest statistics from David A. Barrett’s huge two volume, "World Christian Encyclopedia", the 2001 AD edition. In case you haven’t heard of this work, it is the world standard for religious statistics."
at April 29, 2005 8:19 PM
Fastest-growing religion
"The second-largest religion in the world after Christianity, Islam is also the fastest-growing religion. In the United States, for example, nearly 80 percent of the more than 1,200 mosques have been built in the past 12 years.
Some scholars see an emerging Muslim renaissance as Islam takes root in many traditionally Christian communities."
Posted by: ia786 at April 29, 2005 8:21 PM
Did you know Churches in Europe have to recruit Church leaders from Africa???
The BBC stated this, what do you think this suggests. Europe has abandoned Christianity.
Posted by: ia786 at April 29, 2005 8:22 PM
I do not "fear" (phobe) Islam.
I have contempt for its Koranic dogmatic attempt to force all who will not bow to its cultic claims into servitude or death.
And I am troubled by this militant and imperialistic urge of many Muslims.
What is THAT in Greek?
The nearest I can find is "KEDO" -worry, anxiety, trouble.
So: Islamo-kedic?
Troubled by Islam?
Definitely!
Mr. Schwartz, feel free to call me Islamokedic.
Posted by: BigSleep at April 29, 2005 8:27 PM
I'm still waiting for evidence.
So far, all you've managed to do is to contradict yourself:
From your first post:
‘..By the turn of the century, for the first time in history, the number of Muslims (those who practice Islam) will have surpassed the number of Christians in the world.
From your next post:
"The SECOND-largest religion in the world after Christianity, Islam is also the fastest-growing religion.
Your posts contradict themselves. Also, the 21st century is here and there are almost 2 Billion Christians in the world vs only about 1.2 billion Muslims in the world.
Posted by: Freedom1 at April 29, 2005 8:33 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050429/ap_on_re_af/togo
looks like they don't need cultural centres in Africa...
Posted by: Terminator at April 29, 2005 8:38 PM
If your figures were correct Ia (which they almost certainly aren't) what it would mean is that the UK was abandoning religion, not Christianity per se.
Similarly, with almost 20% of muslims becoming apostate within ONE generation of arrival, it seems secular life isn't too good for islam either.
And, as you like to say, there is absolutely nothing you can do about that.
Cheerio!
Geoff
Posted by: Geoff at April 29, 2005 8:41 PM
'it seems secular life isn't too good for islam either'
Well secular life has been catastrophic for Europe. I am British, I have been raised here and I have seen the hatred the Brits have of their 'own religion’, horrid blasphemies are committed openly. No one cares, I as a Muslim find this worrying.
The truth is that Islam has gained a strong foothold in the West. My father told me once that if all immigrants and their children were to leave the West, Islam would not leave. Islam is in the West and it always will be. Islam has a strong base in the West now.
at April 29, 2005 8:48 PM
Muslims worship the moon:
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0042/0042_01.asp
Posted by: Mentat at April 29, 2005 8:54 PM
Mentat-
"Muslims worship the moon:"
Awesome, Mentat, awesome!
Posted by: Freedom1 at April 29, 2005 9:01 PM
Shuggi:
"Those Muslims who obey Islamic Sacred Law are moderate Muslims. Those who go outside the bounds are extremists. Very simple."
Does that mean when they're all bums up in the mosque listening to a fiery sermon they are moderate, and when they come out of the mosque they start killing people?
1a786: Pressure begets counter-pressure. We will stop the mosque-building and the immigration to our countries. We will forbid proselytizing and we will stop welfare payments to muslims. We will also make sure the Islamic religious Schools are closed and hijab and blibab and all other bab's are banned, not only in the Schools, but also in public. Finally, we will get right down and dirty and round 'em up like catttle and deport them to where they belong. I bet I will see that happen in the next 10 to 15 years...
at April 29, 2005 9:04 PM
Why did Muhammad/Allah change the qibla from Jerusalem to Mecca?
Why did Muhammad/Allah decide at what point that alcohol was okay and then decide that it was not?
Why did Allah/Muhammad decide Muhammad/Allah should get a fifth of all the booty that was stolen from innocent people in their caravan raids?
Why did Allah/Muhammad decide it was all right for Muhammad/Allah to have more than 4 wives?
Why did Allah/Muhmmad intervene in Muhammad/Allah's love affair with Mary the Coptic maid? Sura 66:15
Why did Allah/Muhammad intervene to allow Muhammad to marry his adopted son's wife, Zaynab? Sura 33.2-33.7
Why, if Islam is such a peaceful religion, did Muhammad/Allah order the execution of al-Nader, Ocba, Asma bint Marwan and Abu Afak? (Jesus, the Buddha and Confucious are not on record as having ordered the execution of anyone)
Posted by: Mentat at April 29, 2005 9:11 PM
“The truth is that Islam has gained a strong foothold in the West”-posted by ia
The real truth as to why Islam has creeped into the West is because, and I’m talking about Europe mainly, has been for economic reasons, the importation of migrant workers. Islam is not in the West by anything the followers of Islam have done. It is in the West right now solely by the Western leaders needing workers. Islam just came along for the ride.
The reason it has spread somewhat is because few locals gave it a second thought. People would say “muslims? Oh you mean at those religious freaks with the weird clothes”. And, the muslims were and are saying that Islam is only a peaceful religion. Whatever tenuous foothold Islam may have, has been carved out through lies and deception. Not exactly a firm foundation. Now that people see that it is only the followers of Islam who cut off peoples heads and bomb children they are having second thoughts about keeping it around. Remember, those who give can take away.
at April 29, 2005 9:12 PM
Cat Stevens, now there's a Muslim.
http://www.theasiannews.co.uk/heritage/index/11695.html
at April 29, 2005 9:20 PM
'Muslims worship the moon'
'How silly of me. Oh No, so we were tricked all along, damn, 1400 years and we thought we were praying to God. Well back to the drawing board' Sarcastic ^_^
HA HA HA HA ^_^
'We will stop the mosque-building and the immigration to our countries. We will forbid proselytizing and we will stop welfare payments to muslims. We will also make sure the Islamic religious Schools are closed and hijab and blibab and all other bab's are banned, not only in the Schools, but also in public. Finally, we will get right down and dirty and round 'em up like catttle and deport them to where they belong. I bet I will see that happen in the next 10 to 15 years'
Go for it old chap, I wish you luck ^_^
Posted by: ia786 at April 29, 2005 9:26 PM
I will carry on spreading the message of Islam in the UK. The fact that many Brits have left Christianity makes it a lot easy for them to accept the message of Islam.
Posted by: ia786 at April 29, 2005 9:40 PM
Go for it old chap, make sure you stop by the taverns and pubs, I'm sure the blue collar workers would just luv you. HAHAHA I'll watch for the latest video of you getting "happy slapped" as well. HAHAHA
Posted by: Cross at April 29, 2005 9:46 PM
'We will stop the mosque-building and the immigration to our countries. We will forbid proselytizing and we will stop welfare payments to muslims'
You use the word WE, who's we???let me tell you something. You are irrelevant and insignificant, you can't decide anything and you know it. You can't do anything to Islam and you know it.
Stop dreaming old chap.
at April 29, 2005 9:48 PM
Islamophobia is a GOOD thing. It's a healthy sense of self-preservation in a society. Societies that don't have Islamophobia are taken over by Muslims. Look at the Netherlands---30% of Dutch want to emigrate, that's how bad it got there. NOW they're Islamophobic, but that might be too late.
So any society that hosts Muslims and is accused by them that it is Islamophobic should feel GOOD about itself---this society has very good prospects of surviving the jihad and demographic warfare waged against it by the Muslims.
You will know that the West got rid of its last remnants of dhimmitude when it deports every single Muslim man, woman, and child.
Posted by: angry_kafir at April 29, 2005 9:53 PM
"You use the word WE, who's we???let me tell you something. You are irrelevant and insignificant, you can't decide anything and you know it. You can't do anything to Islam and you know it."
--From a posting above.
That statement, and the assurance behind it, deserve to be pondered.
Posted by: Hugh at April 29, 2005 9:58 PM
from angry_kafir:
"Islamophobia is a GOOD thing. It's a healthy sense of self-preservation in a society. Societies that don't have Islamophobia are taken over by Muslims. Look at the Netherlands---30% of Dutch want to emigrate, that's how bad it got there. NOW they're Islamophobic, but that might be too late."
Looks like the Islam-recruiting-campaign isn't going so well in the Netherlands. Not only do the Dutch refuse to convert to Islam but, the Dutch ARE FLEEING THEIR OWN COUNTRY in record numbers just to get away from Islamists! Not a good sign for Islam.
Posted by: Freedom1 at April 29, 2005 10:06 PM
'...the West got rid of its last remnants of dhimmitude when it deports every single Muslim..'
I think you should replace the word 'when' with IF. ^_^
Posted by: ia786 at April 29, 2005 10:10 PM
"'We will stop the mosque-building and the immigration to our countries. We will forbid proselytizing and we will stop welfare payments to muslims'
You use the word WE, who's we???let me tell you something. You are irrelevant and insignificant, you can't decide anything and you know it. You can't do anything to Islam and you know it.
Stop dreaming old chap."
ia768, will you please explain why someone who does not like islam is considered an islamophoob? And we, who is we, we is us, the people who are fed up with being bullied, being bled (financially as well as literally) and simply more the anoyed, by respectively with muslims.
And, sweet dreams, but the moment the last muslim leaves our country/countries (your fantasy, not mine) islam will be gone also. Nothing to inherret, nothing worth to keep.
Posted by: Ernst at April 29, 2005 10:15 PM
Freedom1-
Dutch out-migration is a little above average lately, but there has always been constant number leaving this tiny, VERY crowded country. Economic opportunites elsewhere are the usual draw.
I doubt they will put up with the Muslim invasion in the long run.
They like their homeland.
More than most Europeans, because they literally drew a lot of The Netherlands right up out of the sea.
Keep an eye on this plucky bunch.
They outlasted Hitler.
They'll outlast Mohammad.
Posted by: BigSleep at April 29, 2005 10:23 PM
'ia768, will you please explain why someone who does not like islam is considered an islamophoob?'
Because your fear of Muslims/Islam is irrational. I have been on this webiste and FFI, many know vet little about Islam. I have exposed this many times. Your fear of Islam is irrational.
North Korea has an army an army of a Million, they have nukes. They have fired missiles over Japan, they are a threat to the US. They have flooded the US with counterfeit super-dollars. They have declared War on the US, yet to you they are no threat.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/3819345.stm
China has more than a million in its army, they are a growing economic powerhouse, they see the US as a potential enemy and are taking steps now. They are a major threat to the US. Their military expenditure is increasing every year. Are they not a threat?
If Islamic countries are such a big threat then why did Russia, France, China and Germany reject the War. Why did the US snub them when it came to reconstruction contracts?, can't you see the bigger picture?
Why does Russia support Iran, Why does China support Iran. Why has Putin sold weapons to Syria? You tell me Shiva. Are the Governments of these countries stupid, If Islam is such a threat why do they support Iran. Do the people here know something the that these Governments don’t know. I can tell you one thing, no Politician fat cat loses sleep over this 'Islamic threat'
You are not looking at the bigger picture here, why does Europe want to compete with the US, Tony Blair has rejected this. The French and Germans don't want the US to be so strong. Why is this, why would they want this if Islam was such a threat??
Your fear of Islam is irrational, Muslim countries are poor and backward, they couldn't fight any Western country.
According to our Prophesies, WW3 will come out of nowhere, no one will be expecting it, the big powers will fight each other. Pressure is building up in the World.
'And, sweet dreams, but the moment the last muslim leaves our country/countries (your fantasy, not mine) islam will be gone also. Nothing to inherret, nothing worth to keep.'
What about Americans that have converted, they are American, they are not Arabs. I am British too, I am a Muslim who's going to deport me from my own country??
Posted by: ia786 at April 29, 2005 10:27 PM
Documentation on the Dutch flight AWAY FROM ISLAM and the Islamists in their own country:
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/355
"Europeans fleeing 'Eurabia'"
Scroll down and see this, as well:
"Feb. 27, 2005 update: "More Dutch Plan to Emigrate as Muslim Influx Tips Scales" reads the blunt New York Times headline over a story by Marlise Simons. It recounts how the murder of Theo van Gogh led to an emigration specialist being "inundated" with messages. "There was a big panic, a flood of people saying they wanted to leave the country."
Posted by: Freedom1 at April 29, 2005 10:28 PM
'ia768, will you please explain why someone who does not like islam is considered an islamophoob?'
Because your fear of Muslims/Islam is irrational. I have been on this website and FFI, many know vet little about Islam. I have exposed this many times. Your fear of Islam is irrational. I can discuss with you in private if you wish.
North Korea has an army an army of a Million, they have nukes. They have fired missiles over Japan, they are a threat to the US. They have flooded the US with counterfeit super-dollars. They have declared War on the US, yet to you they are no threat.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/3819345.stm
China has more than a million in its army, they are a growing economic powerhouse, they see the US as a potential enemy and are taking steps now. They are a major threat to the US. Their military expenditure is increasing every year. Are they not a threat?
If Islamic countries are such a big threat then why did Russia, France, China and Germany reject the War. Why did the US snub them when it came to reconstruction contracts?, can't you see the bigger picture?
Why does Russia support Iran, Why does China support Iran. Why has Putin sold weapons to Syria? You tell me Shiva. Are the Governments of these countries stupid, If Islam is such a threat why do they support Iran. Do the people here know something the that these Governments don’t know. I can tell you one thing, no Politician fat cat loses sleep over this 'Islamic threat'
You are not looking at the bigger picture here, why does Europe want to compete with the US, Tony Blair has rejected this. The French and Germans don't want the US to be so strong. Why is this, why would they want this if Islam was such a threat??
Your fear of Islam is irrational, Muslim countries are poor and backward, they couldn't fight any Western country.
According to our Prophesies, WW3 will come out of nowhere, no one will be expecting it, the big powers will fight each other. Pressure is building up in the World.
'And, sweet dreams, but the moment the last muslim leaves our country/countries (your fantasy, not mine) islam will be gone also. Nothing to inherret, nothing worth to keep.'
What about Americans that have converted, they are American, they are not Arabs. I am British too, I am a Muslim who's going to deport me from my own country??
Posted by: ia786 at April 29, 2005 10:28 PM
Yes, a lot of Dutch -welcome immigrants all over the world (we tend not to impose our way of life on others, do not behave like rabbits nor do we expect others to pay our way, and the latter not because we are going Dutch all the time)- are leaving the country in ever growing numbers. I do not like this development, but since I like it even less to foot the bill for agressive non-contributors (that is not contributing in a positive way) I had a house built in another continent already, just keeping the backdoor open. For the time being I hold on here, and try to stop unwanted developments. And yes, when all Dutch would do likewise, who is going to pay all the wellfare?
And ia768, when the Dutch are gone with it their benevolent country is gone, nobody left to keep the sea out or wellfare checks in the mailbox.
at April 29, 2005 10:30 PM
Cat Stevens:
I have a haunting suspicion that guy is a peadophile. Not long ago I saw him on TV, herding a group of ME-girls (8/9/10-year- olds in full bilbab, and he himself with beard and Kaftan) into some Madrassah. It won't be long before he is exposed...
One burning question I have for the trolls on this site, please answer me: What's in it for Muslim women? We know their lives are f*#@ed as long as they can't get out of the cult. But when they go to Muslim heaven, what happens? Are they there to watch their husbands screw 72 virgins and 24 boys day in, day out? I mean Shuggi, 1a687, how is that gonna go?
I am writing a song at the moment: "Muslim women, what's in it for you..?' Any poet's out there who can help me with the lyrics?
Posted by: Terminator at April 29, 2005 10:41 PM
"Because your fear of Muslims/Islam is irrational. I have been on this website and FFI, many know vet little about Islam. I have exposed this many times. Your fear of Islam is irrational. I can discuss with you in private if you wish"
You do nothing but repeating that there is not a rational base to the dislike of islam. Okay, proof me wrong and give me one rational reason to like it. Rational reasons for not liking it? Turn on the tv, watch how life in islamic countries is, really, you know those reasons yourself or are you one of the very few people that do not have the possibility to watch tv? I know a lot about islam, more then most people who are muslim (otherwise they would condemn acts of violence on behalf of islam, nobody, and least of all Quran-scientists and imams seems to know they should do that in the only way valuable: by fatwa, no fatwa means no condemnation but just BS and doubletalk), so do not bother me or yourself with telling me that I do not know what I'm talking about, or if I do, I do it out of context. The only context that matters is reality, and in reality, Islam is the most backward, (won)menhating, supremist cult the world has ever seen. If you do not see that, you are clearly unaware of the facts, and -if you are known about those facts- incapable to see them in their context.
Why start about China, Korea and Russia? Does any subject you name make Islam any better then it is? No, so please refrain from diffusing the subject (which is not Korea, not China and not Russia)and start explaining what is (apart from its birthrate) so progressive and likeable in Islam.
Posted by: Ernst at April 29, 2005 10:49 PM
Ia, could you refrain please from duplicating posts from other websites? It smacks of intellectual dishonesty. Thankyou.
Speaking of intellectual dishonesty, how is that you rate North Korea "of no threat"? Perhaps you're unaware of 20th century Korean history? It would seem so. I regret I can't point out any books for you at the moment; the history of American-North Korean relations has been ABUNDANTLY documented, and is far from amicable. This sort of thing is usually dealt with in early schooling.
I was also amused by this comment: 'How silly of me. Oh No, so we were tricked all along, damn, 1400 years and we thought we were praying to God. Well back to the drawing board'
But, of course, this is hyperbole and appeal to common authority. By what evidence do you say you've been worshipping this god? There's no evidence of him, anywhere. Merely opining that you've been worshipping the proper god all along because you've been worshipping the proper god all along is not really an argument.
Regrets, but of course various islamic countries seem to have quite enough hatred and resources to attack the US, and the West. Iran, for example, is considering trying to develop an EMP weapon for use explicitly against the US. Saudi Arabia - in case you hadn't heard - recently commissioned 19 islamic terrorists to fly planes into the sides of the World Trade Centre. To say nothing of the islamofascist intentions on Spain.
Why is the islamic world having such a hard time dealing with its own problems, or treating minorities and women fairly, or in letting go of the past? In the current climate and given islam's history, it is all too apparent that 'islamophobia' is more than justified.
Geoff
Posted by: Geoff at April 29, 2005 11:22 PM
To IA and Shukri (normally I would give the greeting of peace as a Muslim to another Muslim, however in this case I do not believe it is warranted, and you probably won't consider me Muslim anyway in light of your definitions):
Shukri in particular, I find your remarks laughable and typical.
"That in and of itself is not Islamophobic. What is Islamophobic is deliberate attempts at using one-sided and out-of-context quotes from the Quran, Sunnah and Seerah to demonize Islam."
Out of context... How can the Prophet's (SAWS) sexual relationship with a nine year old girl, as enshrined in good ahadith. Are you not disturbed that our Prophet copulated with a nine year old? Do you believe that everything that the Prophet did was halal?
As a lawyer, using principle, methods of literary construction and the plain meaning rule most of the ayat, surah and ahadith that mandate violence against non-believers are straightforward an clear, in other words unambigous. If they can be viewed as ambigous, then we look at the wealth of extrinsic evidence available in sirah and fiqh to assist in clarifying the intention of these sources.
Non-Muslims are correct to point out these verses, because Muslims never do. If anything, we as Muslims are the ones who use ayat and hadith out of context in explaining that Islam is a "religion of peace". And again the verses are inumerable, just have a look at some of CAIR's campaigns and releases who employ this tactic.
"Jihad and dhimmitude are and always have been part of Islam.
True. Defending oneself and ensuring that both non-Muslims and Muslims within an Islamic state pay taxes to support the defense of the State have always been a part of Islamic Sacred Law."
At least you are speaking the truth here. Dhimmitude is more than taxation. What about the doctrine of dhimma which mentions the humiliation of non-Muslims, or the Prophet's practice of forcing non-Muslims to the edges when approached by a non-Muslim. Are these just concepts.
As a citizen of Great Britain what is your opinion of the Human Rights Act 1998?
"What makes a moderate Muslim?
Those Muslims who obey Islamic Sacred Law are moderate Muslims. Those who go outside the bounds are extremists. Very simple."
True moderate Muslims realise that shariah has no applicability whatsoever in the West. True moderate Muslims would examine the history of application of shariah and realise that there has never been a just application, and the result of its application has always resulted in great harm to non-Muslim and women. Moderate Muslims challenge traditional orthodoxy. Someday this may mean, that moderates may have to divorce themselves from Islam. It is ideas like yours that are forcing moderates to the margin. Following the so-called sacred law has led Islam to what it is today... a cesspool of hate and incitement.
Islamophobia, if it exists is justified in many ways.
Yours sincerely
IA and Shukri... Inta wella haggah
Thomas Haidon
at April 29, 2005 11:27 PM
Incredible!!!
I need to share this one with you people...
Today as i finished some shopping at a department store and i was about to pay and leave,i noticed the name tag of the hijab-clad lady at the counter:"Takyia"...
I told her this was an interesting name and asked her if it meant anything.
Her answer was:"Yes,actually it means `the righteous one`"...
Can you believe that??!!!
at April 29, 2005 11:31 PM
Pressure begets counter-pressure. We will stop the mosque-building and the immigration to our countries. We will forbid proselytizing and we will stop welfare payments to muslims. We will also make sure the Islamic religious Schools are closed and hijab and blibab and all other bab's are banned, not only in the Schools, but also in public. Finally, we will get right down and dirty and round 'em up like catttle and deport them to where they belong. I bet I will see that happen in the next 10 to 15 years...
Posted by: Terminator at April 29, 2005 09:04 PM
Well said Terminator, and I especially enjoyed the part about "banning the babs", LOL! We are gagging on the rotten fruit produced by thirty years of muslim immigration and Europe is choking on it. We still have plenty of time to avoid Europe's mistakes. The Islamic threat to the safety, sovereignty, and stability of our republic is unique, with no historical precedents to offer insight or counsel. We have never been confronted with insurgent immigrants who practice a militant, intolerant, totalitarian, predatory religion, and whose stated goal is to overthrow our government and impose an Islamic theocracy. Your suggestions are quite practical and are really our only choice. We either remove the cancer or it will spread and kill us all. Their one and only claim to productivity is an obscene birth rate, not that there is any need or use for more muslims. Evolution forgot the Islamic world and these creatures don't adapt well to alien environments.
Muslims are certainly the most arrogant of all people but they obviously do not understand the American psyche. Let them bask in their egomaniacal delusions of self-importance,power, and influence, and plot their jihadist strategy in their mosques. I regret that this preventable and unnecessary problem exists, but the solution will be far more inconvenient for muslims than us.
Posted by: Susanp at April 29, 2005 11:32 PM
Thank you, Thomas
Posted by: Carolyn2 at April 29, 2005 11:32 PM
Those who commit murder and genocide in the Name of Christianity are going against the teachings of Jesus Christ and christianity.
Those who commit murder and genocide in the name of Islam are following the teachings of the prophet Moh.
at April 29, 2005 11:35 PM
islamophobia: A religion I can live with.
Posted by: Havoc at April 30, 2005 12:54 AM
Terminator-
What kind of song do you need lyrics for? Meaning what style - metal? punk? blues? hard rock? country? (Rap wouldn't work.)
Give me a clue about musical mood (minor or major) and the meter (line/syllable length to match words to the rhythm) and I'll give it a go.
Here's a sample of something, just rhymed together, along the line of what you mentioned, to get the stone rolling (no musical idea at all for it, just a raw rhythm):
"The Meccan Rock"
"Ladies of Mecca, shake off your veil.
Women of silence, shatter your jail.
When you are worth just
Half of a man,
Tell me, sweet nothings,
Tell if you can:
What do you get
From playing the fool?
What's in it for you
Being so cool?
Children know better
than to pretend
That they love something
'Playing' their friend.
(refrain)
Roses are lovely
-cut off their heads.
Women are perfect
-mute in their beds.
Honor is shining
-sharp as a knife.
Tell me again
-is it worth your life?
So, Ladies of Mecca, kick off your chains.
Women in shadows, tattooed with pains,
If you would taste a moment of light
Rock through the Kaaba, all day and night!"
(With a play on "Rock the Casbah", of course, in the last line.)
This is just an ad lib, and if you have a better direction or idea for what you want to lyricize, post the notes.
at April 30, 2005 1:29 AM
ia786 "I will carry on spreading the message of Islam in the UK. The fact that many Brits have left Christianity makes it a lot easy for them to accept the message of Islam."
There are very few conversions to Islam in the UK. I live in the heart of Londonstan and I don't see it happening. What is happening is that a lot of stupid PC types are feigning interest in Islam to prove/declare their moral superiority. In fact, the churches are filling up again after years on Christian decline.
Religions ride on the back of economic success. Christianity is expaning rapidly in countries that may dominate the world economically and culturally in the coming decades (China). Islam got lucky will the oil boom and the Islamic revival will dry up when Saudis flush with petrodollars squander their remaining forture. The mosques built with Saudi money will be discos in 2050.
Posted by: 1630r at April 30, 2005 2:31 AM
Thanks for the effort, big sleep. I'll save it and see if I can use it.
Just to give you an idea about what I do:
http://www.terrorists-suck.org/fight/winds_of_jihad.html
1a786:
'What about Americans that have converted, they are American, they are not Arabs. I am British too, I am a Muslim who's going to deport me from my own country??'
Rest assured it can be done. Its been done before. 'El Andaluz', East Timor,the Greek Isles, Sicily: Just like the Muslim invaders have driven others out, we have the means and the will to get rid of you. Don't take my word for it. We are still the majority, we are still in charge and WE WILL TAKE CHARGE!
at April 30, 2005 2:35 AM
Check out this sadistic left-coast Indy attack against Aaron of Internet Haganah:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17568/index.php
Aaron works selflessly to close down terrorist websites. Leftists don't see it that way.
Posted by: smokem at April 30, 2005 4:14 AM
What would Schwartz think of this convert to Christianity from Islam?
http://thevictoriaadvocate.com/Religion/story/2750377p-3183320c.html
Posted by: smokem at April 30, 2005 4:19 AM
786 - The way you arrogantly sneer at Christianity in your host country is typically Islamic behaviour. You demand respect for your own, but respect nobody else’s. Indeed, Muslims are masters of ripping the flesh off the hands that feed them. Ask yourself how you can comfortably and safely condemn Christianity in any Christian country, and yet I can't do the same for Islam in one of your countries - in a nutshell: Islamic society is barbaric, violent and intolerant, and Christian society is not. Muslims flock to the west because Islamic society is dysfunctional and repressive, and when they get to the West they tell us how perfect Islamic society is!!! Perhaps the majority of Christians in the UK don’t go to church, but the basis and bedrock of the society you live in (mock and exploit) is Christian.
China, by the way, in all its history has never sent an army outside of its part of the world, same for Russia - the Muslims, however, delighted in their global rampage, which continues today in other forms.
"Islam is the fastest growing religion" - yes, Muslims have twice as many Children as Christians - oh congratulations! Tiny Bangladesh has a bigger population than Russia (the world's largest country), medium sized Pakistan and Indonesia are in the top ten most populated countries in the world - congratulations! What an achievement! If you think this is something to be proud of, then you must be a moron. What is the ecological and social future for these small countries with such population growth rates? Look at Iran, the population doubled in 25 years – MUSLIM MADNESS!!!!!!!!!
Tell me, what would happen if I were to openly sneer at Islam in any Muslim country? I would be beaten up, deported, murdered or imprisoned. I spent some time in Muslim Bangladesh - I KNOW. In my 18 months in South Asia I also saw how education, law and order and general prosperity go to the wall wherever Muslims dominate. Don't take my word for it - check the literacy and infant mortality statistics of Indian Christian states like Goa, Nagaland, Meghalaya and to a lesser extent Kerela, and compare these areas to Muslim strongholds like Bihar, Gujarat or even the nation of Bangladesh.
Yes most of us Westerners may heap scorn upon Islam, but at least we are true to our beliefs: 99.999% of us would NEVER emigrate to any Muslim nation, not even for better money. You Muslims have immeasurable scorn for the West and yet, given the choice and opportunity, I guess 50% of all Muslims in Islamic countries would emigrate to the West tomorrow, alas tens of millions already have – conclusion: you are all ungrateful hypocrites and the cost to British social cohesion and national security has been great. So what is your response? That we “owe you” because of the erstwhile British Empire? Well, by this measure you Muslims owe a hell of a lot to the Hindus, whose sorry arses you exploited, massacred and kicked around for so many centuries. And what of America – this “great Satan”? It’s their oil money that keeps the Saudis rich. Be thankful they are so short sighted and greedy that they can’t be bothered to invest in alternative energy. They are more frightened of their precious economy shrinking by 10% than they are of funding Muslim expansionism.
How can you ask us why we fear Islam? What planet have you been living on for the last 10 years? Are you delusional? What about 9/11? What about terror threats and riots in England?? What about 10,000 other good reasons – for proof of these 10,000 other good reasons you need do no more than check the archives of this site.
at April 30, 2005 6:04 AM
1630r posted "There are very few conversions to Islam in the UK. I live in the heart of Londonstan and I don't see it happening. What is happening is that a lot of stupid PC types are feigning interest in Islam to prove/declare their moral superiority. In fact, the churches are filling up again after years on Christian decline."
which I must say accords with my own experience, although I no longer live in London. I have come across more converts from Islam than to Islam. The converts to Christianity have not had an easy time, so I will say no more about them. But from talking to them I know that their conversion was a result of their search for God which Islam did not answer.
The 2 (and only 2, I have met more trans-sexuals than I have converts to Islam) converts to Islam did so through loneliness, and love of a particular Moslem.
at April 30, 2005 7:21 AM
Well, while I'm not a Muslimphobe, I guess I am another Islamophobe. The reason the peecee crowd is screaming about Islamophobes is because they're a bunch of Christophobes to begin with.
Timbo wrote:
**China, by the way, in all its history has never sent an army outside of its part of the world, same for Russia - the Muslims, however, delighted in their global rampage, which continues today in other forms.**
OT, but important. Actually, get an historical atlas sometime and you'll see that back in the time of Moses, China as a cultural unit didn't extend beyond the Chang Jiang. The island from which I write didn't get a Han Chinese majority until the 17th century. Guangzhou, where I formerly lived, was not Chinese until about 200 BC; and wasn't majority Han Chinese until about the time Islam began.
Russia also started as a bunch of small states running from the northern Ukraine over to the Volga and then a bit inland from the Karelian Isthmus. It took a bit of military action for it to get all the way down to Azerbaijan (former Iranian territory) and then to the Pacific. BTW, the Amur region of Russia was taken from the Manzhou Empire (1644-1911); and it was that dynasty that united Manchuria to China, opening the former to spill the excess population of the North China Plain up beyond the Willow Pallisade (once the limit of extensive Han Chinese settlement in the Chinese Northeast/Manchuria. BTW, the Manzhou (nearly extinct) and Chinese languages are about as closely related as English and Arabic.
The ability to expand is the mark of (a) a vigorous civilization (b) a more decadent civilization next door or (c) a combination of a and b.
1630r: what evidence is there that British People are going back to church? Sure it isn't proof that West Indians, Anglo-Indians, southern Nigerians, and former Pakistani Muslims (for ia786) have babies? I'd be surprised and pleased to see if my supposition is wrong.
Freedom1: I'm well aware of a "Christian surge" in the global south, as well as a turning from Islam in various places.
Has anyone bothered to ask Stephen Scwartz what he thinks of the brothes Mehmet and Emir Caner? What are the odds that Schwartz will go ballistic? BTW, respect his work as I may, it's amusing to see an Evangelical theologian named after Ole Mo himself.
Posted by: Kepha at April 30, 2005 8:17 AM
Dear Thomas Haidon:
Why are you a Muslim again?
Did you see my posts to you earlier?
Dear Thomas Haidon:
Would it be fair to say that you are spiritually troubled?
As a youth, I went through tremendous moral and spiritual agony; although I was raised as a Christian and have added some Christian values to my own personal belief system (It is so liberating being your own God!), I do not believe in anything supernatural and so could not be confirmed in the Christian faith. My family was initially quite troubled but being Christians who have actually read the New Testament, they accepted me for who I was even if they didn't agree with my beliefs. You know - hate the sin; love the sinner?
In any case, the only reason I mention my experience is that, having gone through this intellectual firestorm, I might be able to show you some doors that you can open that, even if they do not resolve your uncertainty, they might allow you to live with it and accept it. Like Sisyphus, you may grow to love your rock.
So, without further ado:
Do you know what existentialism is? A good introduction is Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy, by William Barrett (Doubleday Anchor, 1962).
Have you read the ancients? You must read Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. Marcus was a stoic and his views are very interesting.
Have you read Kierkegaard and Nietzsche? I found them helpful.
I presume that you have studied all (and I do mean ALL) the major religions already. If you haven't, you should.
Then to round you out, you should visit some modern skeptics.
I heartily recommend the following site devoted to skepticism (very bracing intellectually!):
http://www.skeptic.com/
As well, you should read Sigmund Freud's, The Future of an Illusion.
Then, the literature: E.L. Doctorow's City of God, Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov (Notes from Underground)and the Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus. I found the Myth of Sisyphus particularly helpful.
A little intellectual history might also be of use. I recommend European Intellectual History since 1789 by Roland N. Stromberg (Prentice Hall). Try and get the most recent addition as he has a great little section on what post-modernism and moral relativism have done to the study of history and the like. (i.e. there is no objective truth, so you can just make up whatever you like to suit the particular axe that you have to grind or the particular ideological objectives that you have in mind - looking for the "truth" is not the aim of history anymore)
And finally, you must read John Stuart Mill's On Liberty. That I think is key to understanding the Western sensibility towards religion. Here is a free copy:
To quickly learn about a lot of other faiths, go to belief.net. Also, take the quiz at belief.net called belief-o-matic, you will find it interesting. It is a quiz designed to determine what belief system you hold. You can find it here:
http://belief.net/story/76/story_7665_1.html
Or you can just ignore my pedantry all together; that's what my children do and it works for them. LOL. Cheers. Bye. Good luck with it.
Dear Thomas Haidon:
I forgot to mention that I think that the inclination to be religious, have religious experiences (feelings of transcendancy, oneness with the universe, talking to God, etc.)are part of our genetic programming. That is why religion is such a universal part of being human, now and throughout history. Religions come and go but they have been a constant feature of every human culture; stone age man, even neanderthal man, gives every evidence of having some religious belief system.
All will soon be revealed in any case as scientists are working slowly toward explaining human consciousness in terms of neurochemical activity. As vitalism was debunked as an explanation for the creation of life with the discovery of DNA, so will the discovery of the neurochemical bases for human consciousness explain religious feelings and inclinations.
It was not for nothing that Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of DNA, spent the last part of his life trying to decipher the riddle of human consciousness as it is the last great problem left in biology.
Here is an interesting introductory article on the subject:
Is God in our Genes?
http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,1101041025-725072,00.html
Posted by: Mentat at April 30, 2005 8:29 AM
Kepha
You ask what proof there is that British people are going back to church. I can only offer the growing numbers attending in my own parish, the popularity of the Alpha course, the steady increase each year in the numbers of adult confirmations, and the positive response to every interdenominational "churches united in Anytown" outreach project of the last 5 years.
at April 30, 2005 8:40 AM
Granny Weatherwax: Well, God bless the UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland! May your parish mark the beginning of a longlived trend.
Posted by: Kepha at April 30, 2005 9:14 AM
ia786,
I want you to think for a moment why you have become so arrogant to believe that Islam is growing and going to become something in the future...
That arrogance is built on fear and killing. Maybe you don't agree with it, maybe you do but you sure do enjoy the benefits.
Your arrogance will be your downfall.
Moose
Posted by: Moose at April 30, 2005 9:37 AM
Kepha
With the help of the Lord we will. Greetings to your neighbourhood also.
at April 30, 2005 9:58 AM
Now that all the experts have defined Islamophobe, now define Allahgasm...
As far as an incease in Muslims in the US, I dont see it. More mosques does not necessarilly mean more muslims. Many of the muslims already here open their own mosques...Cat Stevens...and even if Islam is growing, who is it growing among? Certainly not people loving freedom and independance. Certainly not strong willed people who can think for themselves. Certainly not among people who command a high level of literacy, (can read, write, and comprehend). Certainly not among people who demand a high level of truth and insist on a low level of bullshit. So it's the weak minded, insecure, mostly illiterate, parts of the populations that are attracted to Islam. Islam grows the same way communism grew. Offer people who have nothing, "something", and they will follow you.
Mohammad used that technique and the muslim powers that be, still use it...the only problem is, that the "something", is in itself "nothing", so the convert gets robbed again...
at April 30, 2005 10:12 AM
Well, Kepha, for me the places you mention were "their part of the world", but as you seem to know more about the subject than me I will not dwell upon it.
Posted by: Timbo at April 30, 2005 10:26 AM
Thomas Haidon:
Please read my response to your post on the JW April 26 "Federal jury convicts . . . " thread.
CGW
Posted by: CGW at April 30, 2005 10:42 AM
Thomas:
That being said, I DO appreciate your comments on this thread.
BTW, ia786 is in Britain, Shukri is in California USA, and he has already posted many times defending the rape of Aisha, theorizing that she had had her first period and was therefore technically an "adult".
Posted by: CGW at April 30, 2005 10:45 AM
ia786
Shalom. How are you mate? I wonder if you managed to catch this post I wrote addressed to you on another thread? I am putting it here, just in case you didnt, for yours and everyone elses enjoyment ;-)
+++++
The Fastest Growing Cliche In The World
---------------------------------------
*The reason why Islam is 'the fastest growing religion in the UK', if true in any ramschackle way, is because of the high birth rates of Pakistanis. This is due to the arranged marriage system and the fact that women are used as breeding cattle.
*The high birth rate is matched by the fact that Muslims are the fastest growing religion in prisons in the UK. They now account for the biggest single ethnic or religious group incaracerated in the UK in proportionate terms.
This means that Muslims are the fastest growing religion of criminals in Britain (drug pushers, thieves, murderers, pimps, sex offenders, terrorists)
*Muslim women also have the fastest growing suicide rate in the UK too, Muslim women are three times as likely as the national average to kill themselves.
*Muslims also have the fastest growing rate of honour killings in the UK too, in which, opposite to other eastern immigrant groups in which this phenomena is decreasing as they improve their economic status and education, the rate of slaughter of daughters and sisters for daring to want a boyfriend or education is rapidly increasing.
*Muslims also have the fastest growing rate of diseases in the UK associated with consanguinity, that is, genetic in-breeding caused by first-cousin marriage.
*Muslims also have the fastest growing rate of drug abuse out of all religions in Britain too; in some areas of the country, for example Tower Hamlets and Bradford, Muslims make up the largest groups of heroin addicts in the country.
*Muslims are also the fastest growing group of terrorists in the UK too, for example, the Gloucester man Sajid Badat being the latest in a long line of British Muslims who have been involved in terrorism and plots to kill as many innocent infidels as possible in the name of Islam.
*Islam also has one of the highest rates of apostasy of any religion in the UK too, as a recent article by Anthony Browne in The Times shows, that despite death threats and persecution, Muslims are leaving their religion in droves, although it is not reported by the media that much, for fear of enraging more Muslims, and worsening their inferiority complex, and making them turn to criminality, of which they are already the fastest growing religion of criminals, or terrorists, of which they are the fastest growing religion.
*They are also the fastest growing religion of illiterates, as study after study shows that Muslims have the highest rate of educational idiocy and exam failure in the UK, in contrast to Hindus, Jews, Sikhs and Chinese, who out perform native white people, and contribute to the health and happiness of the UK.
Yes indeed, Islam is the fastest growing religion in many areas of the UK.
at April 30, 2005 10:55 AM
ia786, though your comments frustrate me, I find them refreshingly honest. It's really no surprise at all that a Muslim would find Christianity and Western ways insignificant, given that we have basically laid down in front of Islam. Like all primitive mindsets, Muslims respect power. When they see how little regard we ourselves have for Christianity and other Western cultural values, there is little reason for Muslims to be respectful of them. This, among many others, is a prime reason the multiculturalist project has failed western societies that have embraced it.
As for the Christian revival, it is a very real phenomenon. Even famously a-religious Australia has seen a resurgent interest. Ten years ago, even five years ago, I would not have considered it a remote possibility. The reason I see for it is this: Much to the annoyance of liberals, the very real human need for a sense of identity relies strongly on history and tradition, a role perfect for Christianity. Against the backdrop of this need, we have been, for a few decades now, enduring the aimlessness of multiculturalism. Increasingly, more and more of us have been repulsed by the endless self-loathing multiculturalists require from us to make their project work; respecting and celebrating every other culture but our own has begun to feel decidedly empty. Finally, the tipping point for many has likely been the sheer arrogance with which Islam has been asserting itself in our societies, aided, as it is, by the feeble western apologetic that insults our intelligence.
Posted by: spect8or at April 30, 2005 10:59 AM
"Those Muslims who obey Islamic Sacred Law are moderate Muslims. Those who go outside the bounds are extremists. Very simple"
Shukri? Doesn't it matter to you that you are not as good as the devout Muslims who fo out to fight for the cause of their allah {which is to have the whole world bowing to him.
You don't have to take my word for it - but - being a Muslim - you DO have to take allah's word for it:
004.095 Not equal are those believers who sit at home and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit at home. But those who strive and fight hath He distinguished above those who sit at home by a special reward.
002.216 Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing [war] which is good for you and that ye love a thing [peace] which is bad for you?
009.039 Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place.
Unless you go forth to fight Shukri - 'in the cause of allah' - allah has promised to punish you.
If Islamophobia is a fear of Islam - then the way I see it - is that you are the one suffering from Islamophobia.
You are afraid of the truth about it.
You are commanded Shukri - to behead the 'unbelievers'
009.123 O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you.
047.004 Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks. [Behead them!]
Shukri? ...that includes ALL who believe in the Son of God:
009.030 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; in this they but imitate what ''' the unbelievers ''' of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
If your own allah keeps calling you a liar - why would you keep defending him?
Hypocrisy is anything whatever may deceive the cleverest and most penetrating man, but the least wide-awake of children recognizes it, and is revolted by it, however ingeniously it may be disguised.
Verily I [Jesus] say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
at April 30, 2005 11:12 AM
I guess you could say I was Naziphobic. Was that bad?
Posted by: JasonP at April 30, 2005 11:26 AM
Jason, interesting. Let's see how that works:
attacking the entire ideology of Nationalist Socialism as a problem for the world;
• condemning all of Nationalist Socialism and its history as extremist;
• denying the active existence, in the contemporary world, of a moderate Nationalist Socialist majority;
• insisting that Nationalist Socialists accede to the demands of non-Nationalist Socialists (based on ignorance and arrogance) for various ideological changes, in their political ideology;
• treating all conflicts involving Nationalist Socialists (including that in Europe five decades ago) as the fault of Nationalist Socialists themselves
• inciting war against Nationalist Socialism as a whole.
Yep, I'd say I'm a Naziphobe too.
And what about the definition adopted in the document ‘Islamophobia: A Challenge For Us All’?
1. Nationalist Socialism is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.
2. Nationalist Socialism is seen as separate and 'other'. It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.
3. Nationalist Socialism is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive and sexist.
4. Nationalist Socialism is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism and engaged in a 'clash of civilisations'.
5. Nationalist Socialism is seen as a political ideology and is used for political or military advantage.
6. Criticisms made of the West by Nationalist Socialism are rejected out of hand.
7. Hostility towards Nationalist Socialism is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Nationalist Socialists and exclusion of Nationalist Socialists from mainstream society.
8. Anti-Nationalist Socialist hostility is seen as natural or normal.
Yep, seems I'm a Naziphobe by that definition too.
at April 30, 2005 11:54 AM
Hi Geoff, I have made a new thread. Talk to you soon.
ia786
Posted by: ia786 at April 30, 2005 12:28 PM
Beth you are welcome to the discussion as well. I want to talk to those that think Osama and Zarqawi are the best Muslims in the World.
It is the Geoff and ia786 thread at Faith Freedom International, in the Islam defended section.
See you there.
Bye.
Posted by: ia786 at April 30, 2005 12:30 PM
I post on Front Page Forum and have been hit with enough thunder bolts from Schwartz to last a lifetime. He is a brilliant man and a talented writer . He cares about his faith and America in any basic reading.
He correctly feels he has been attacked at times
for points unrelated to his article. Sometimes this is true but sometimes he beans the wrong people.I have been beaned about half a dozen times.
My question is that if we feel the Zinn model of indict a society by its history is bigoted Schwartz is correct. We can sit up and make a case against any society except Iceland.
Yet if you feel that the history of Western Civ is
open to scrutiny then so is Islamic Civ. Every ill of Western Civ has an equal or greater paralell in Islamic Civ. Colonialism, Slavery,Ethnocide ,Genocide and Jim Crow all occured under Islam. Yet I have no problem adressing these issues in Western Civ. However if these subjects are adressed in Islamic civ we are called bigots by the left.
Just one Question
Most of his anger comes from the discussion of Dhimmi laws. He claims they are being misreprented by myself. I see them as Jim Crow and 3/5 redux. How is this issue resolved ?
Posted by: Beakerkin at April 30, 2005 1:44 PM
Muslims are increasingly looked on with contempt and
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)