Will we ever see Muslims conciously decide that American Islam must be conformed to the political role of religion in America? While I have from time to time suggested that it is a theoretical possibility (one never knows what a great man or men might accomplish; think of antibiotics or space travel) I don't know if it will ever happen.

Posted by: AnneCrockett at March 23, 2006 8:23 AM

''I did not act out of hatred for Americans, but out of love for Allah instead,'' Mohammed Taheri-azar, 22, wrote in a letter to Amber Rupinta dated March 10 posted on WTVD's Web site....

Thank God he didn't do it out of anger, I forgive him now. Let him out of jail, I'll have him over for coffee and give him the keys to my SUV so he can practice his religion. OMG, what came over me, must drink coffee before posting.

Robert, keep at um, people are sloooowly waking. I am a real fan of all the JW/DW gang even when you use words I have to look up.

Posted by: Ronin at March 23, 2006 8:23 AM

More Orwellian double-speak from the religion of peace. Killing for love....ah such a nice thought. Why don't we all do it?

Posted by: Turbinehead at March 23, 2006 8:32 AM

He called the [Koran] ''a scientific and mathematical miracle, so there can be no doubt that it is from a supernatural source.''

This guy had just graduated from an American university. I do not think that a worse indictment of American education is possible.

Posted by: Paolo at March 23, 2006 8:41 AM

There is another strategy that is favored by some. It is to pretend that the canonical texts of Islam do not say what they say, or that, because there are some Believers who do not believe it all, and of course there are such, that we should pin our hopes on the laxness of some Believers, and hope they will, wherever they are, whether in the Iraqi government, or now living in London or Bradford, Marseille or Paris, Hoboken or Falls Church, will of course manage to run things, manage to control the mosques, the madrasas or Islamic schools (where regular subjects may also be tuahgt), the Muslim organizations. . banning the Qur'an, and not pretending that Islam has nothing to do with it.

They do not tell us how, whether in handing out visas, or in permitting naturalization to go forward, officials of the government are to be able to distinguish the "moderate" (i.e., the lax Muslim, the inattentive Muslim, the not really fully believing Muslim, or even, at the limit, the "Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only" Muslim), who not only has no desire, and never will, to engage in violence against Infidels, but rejects entirely all the attitudes and atmospherics, of hostility to Infidels, that the Qur'an and Hadith and Sira (i.e., exemplary life, for Muslims, of Muhammad, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil) so clearly inculcate. Nor do they tell us how, even if they manage to find some tell-tale indicators of "moderation," so that we can be sure, or fairly sure, or kind of sure, that having detect the "moderate" Believer from the "immoderate" and full-bodied one, that that Believer will stay, no matter what conditions in the larger world, or in his personal life, might lead him to renew his interest in, and willingness to follow the tenets of, Islam itself.

If, every time someone accused of plotting terrorist acts, or who has actually carried out such acts, is investigated, and if his Muslim family and Muslim neighbors claim to high heaven that they had no idea, that it astonishes them, that they cannot possibly have realized anything was amiss because he "gave no signs of anything" then how should we, the Infidel victims of all this, past, present, and future, trust those of our leaders in the Western world who claim that they know how to detect the supposed handful of "immoderate" Muslims from that vast peaceful horde who are as appalled as we are that their "noble religion" has been (hijacked, perverted, misused, misunderstood -- choose one) by some others.

The farce continues. And la lutte continue.

Posted by: Hugh at March 23, 2006 8:42 AM

Paolo, I came across a few old school textbooks and compared them to today's PC books. It makes me sick at the loss of our history. I vote with my feet now, I don't watch PC movies, or watch PC news channels nor do I read PC books (don't worry Robert I read yours). Cut off the money and even the "elite PC" string pullers will start to feel pressure.

Posted by: Ronin at March 23, 2006 8:48 AM

"...a scientific and mathematical miracle..." Yeah, right, the Quran says that the sun sets in a muddy pool, the earth is flat, God made the universe in 7, no, 8, no, 6 days, the sun and the moon revolve around the earth, and numerous other errors. After trying to reconcile all the lies and myths in the Quran, no wonder this poor devil went nuts! That is why he can call attempted murder "an act of love". I see a long incarceration in a mental institution with massive infusions of thorazine in his future, and I'm no prophet!

Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at March 23, 2006 8:54 AM

Hugh, is right we need a way to test muslims for moderation of homicidal tendencies. Keeping in mind a “moderate” muslim is potentially one verse from a total conversion to full blown homicidal, infidel stalking killer. I designed the following test and answer key, feel free to send it to our fearless border protectors.

Question: Are you a muslim?

Correct Answers: NO!

Incorrect Answers: Yes (followed by any diatribe), sort of, maybe, I am non-practicing. I was raised muslim but now I am not sure.

This completes the testing process, thank you for your cooperation and have a nice day.

Ok, I have done my civic duty for today, off to work I go.

Posted by: Ronin at March 23, 2006 9:00 AM

"I do not think that a worse indictment of American education is possible."
-- from a posting above

Yes there is.

1) The alacrity with which Princeton University hired Cornel West as a university professor, and the delight expressed by the Provost and others in the Princeton administration at this great catch..

2) The elevation of Maria Rosa Menocal, author of a book that purports to study the wonders of the "convivencia" in Islamic Spain (a book in which she fails even to list, much less give a hint of having read, the most important works on that subject, including Evariste Levi-Provencal's study, and lesser ones such as that of Dufourcq. The book itself is sentimental nonsense, not only in form but content. Nonetheless, the latest issue of the Yale Review tells us proudly that four professors have been appointed to Sterling Professorships. Three were in science. The only one from outside science was Maria Rosa Menocal.

3) The delight expressed by Stephen Greenblatt at the appointment of Homi Bhabha to a professorship at Harvard a few years ago. Bhabha, who is a professor of English, cannot express himself clearly in written English. Not because he comes from abroad. No, his prose has won prizes because of its impenetrable jargon, its postcolonial projects of phallic hegemeony, or things like that.

Here are tiny examples from Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. Then there is the MEALAC Program at Columbia, a university to which someone just donated $200 million. There is the entire disgraceful operation of lean, mean, jogging John Esposito, head and master of all he surveys at the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown.

There are the professors who teach two courses and cannot be bothered to grade the papers of ten students and get them their grades until two months after the term has closed, and then without a single mark on those papers, nor a single indication of what they did right, what they did wrong.

There are the grant-getters. There are the smooth talkers. There are the blurb-and-reference-letter-writers. You scratch my back...

This recent graduate (he had graduated in December), at a loss for what to do with his life, had no Mrs. Robinson to entertain him, or no one to whisper the word "Plastics" in his ear. In short, he was so very like millions of recent non-Muslim graduates who get their diplomas,and then must fend for themselves, and are not helped, and have no clear idea of how or where or what to do (that this happens, year after year, is a different comment on the scandalous and ridiculous faith put by some in the magic way in which the mysterious workings of the marketplace will make everything work and everyone happy). In this case, Taheri-Azar, being a Muslim, found his solace in the Qur'an. But that is not necessarily a comment on on the level of education (outside science) offered students in American higher education (which is bad, and getting worse), but of a different, though grim problem: the Muslim who, suffering personal setbacks, comes to blame, the Infidels. For if you are not a Muslim, and you lose your job, your girlfriend, all your money, your status, you are at your wit's end, you are descending into depression, you have a thousand things to blame. You can blame everyone and everything. You can blame your uncomprehending parents, your unhelpful siblings, the injstice of Amerika or The System, the indiffernt stars, your cruel fate, your high cholesterol level, your low serotonin level. You can even, if you choose, blame yourself.

But if you are a Muslim, you do not blame your parents, your sibilings, your children, the stars, fate, your cholesterol or serotonin level. You do not even blame Amerika specifically. No, you blame, because you have a mental construct that naturally leads you to blame, Infidels all over. And those Infidels deserve what they have coming to them -- and this time, just possibly, from you, as you gun that SUV - vroom, vroom -- and aim it straight into a crowd of mooing Infidels, as they stand there just waiting to be cut down.

Posted by: Hugh at March 23, 2006 9:03 AM

The argument may be that; did he read it in English, or Arabic?-- Yes! that would be the first question posed by the usual masters of deception, and of course if he says he read it in Englsh than he would have miss read it because the translation would be false, then if he read it in Arabic he also misunderstood the tenets of the Quran as well ----HUH?

I wonder how many times he read it before he fully understood, and reached the fanaticism that eventually prevailed in his mind.

I still remain fasinated that this guy was a psyche major and still allowed himself to perform an irrational and deadly act against fellow students.

I sure would like to see COURT TV petition this courtroom for live broadcasts so we can hear Taheri-azar clearly explain how he came to his conclusions to commit to a jihad.

Anybody have a website for that program? -- Nancy Grace --go get em!!!

Posted by: Mackie at March 23, 2006 9:21 AM

And of course we Know that how that Academie think / teach on campus cannot possibly affect how these kids think, eh nariz, kj?

Speaking of which: does anyone have any info on the professor of ME studies at NCU?

Posted by: Gary at March 23, 2006 9:24 AM

Robert: Great commentary. For our governments not to address this central issue is suicidal not to mention self defeating.

The West must win, but wont with inadequate leadership.

If these politicians dont get it, bring in ones that do.

Posted by: dgene at March 23, 2006 9:28 AM

I've heard the "mathematical miracle" of the Quran mentioned before, but no one ever seems to bother to articulate what it is... or is precisely because it's a "miracle," and it's just "there," and beyond the probing of the human mind? That's not mathematical. A bit of numerology, maybe. Big difference.

As far as I can tell, the only "miracles" lie firmly in the province of sarcasm, not mathematics.

Posted by: Shinoliite at March 23, 2006 9:32 AM

''I read the Quran 15 times. I did not act out of hatred for Americans, but out of love for Allah instead,'' Mohammed Taheri-azar, 22, wrote in a letter to Amber Rupinta dated March 10 posted on WTVD's Web site....
-----------

The secret is now revealed that Muslims kill infedels due to their love of Allah.

The peaceful followers of Islam speak again.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 23, 2006 11:58 AM

The RoP® - such a nice religion.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 23, 2006 12:00 PM

My paperback version of the Qur'an (Yousef Ali translation) is hailed as a "Literary Masterpiece!"

Of course, we all know how the masterpiece reads. Might as well be reading the same three or four sentences over and over. Endless repetition, one of the primary tools in the art of brainwashing.

I cringe at the thought of banning books. Yet, is the Qur'an a book, or is it a very bad drug? It doesn't fall into my own definition of a book. Books are readable. The Qur'an isn't. Books are translatable. Islamic purists claim the Qur'an must be read in Arabic, only.

Books generally don't make homicidal lunatics out of weak-minded people, but the Qur'an does. Like a drug. Like a highly toxic substance.

People could argue the same of the Bible, too, and they would be right. Viewing the contents of the Bible, in just the wrong way, has produced many a weak-minded, homicidal lunatic.

I know I'm rambling, and I ask the forgiveness of all and sundry for it. Would I like to see every copy of the Qur'an taken out of bookstores, libraries, and confiscated from individuals? Yes, to be honest with myself, I would. I doubt it would do much good, though. It could easily be obtained from internet bookstores. Worse, banning the damnable thing would only make it more attractive, human nature being the perverse thing it is.

P.S. to Ronin: I'm glad I'm not the only one who has to read the postings on JW with a dictionary in my lap! :-)

Posted by: Abscedere at March 23, 2006 12:26 PM

If you have read any of my books or have been reading this site for awhile, you know where in the Qur'an he could have gotten this idea.

MORE KORANS MORE HADITHS MORE SIRATS MORE MOSLEMS MORE ISLAM MO MO

What God said:

And kill them wherever you find and catch them. Drive them out from where they have turned you out; for Al-Fitnah (i.e., polytheism, disbelief, oppression) is worse than slaughter.
--- God in Koran 2:191

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at March 23, 2006 1:54 PM

I wasted much time on an islamic site debating the scientific miracles of the koran. One must understand the islamist twists the meaning of the word miracle the same way they twist other words, such as peace and martyr.

A true miracle is the occurance of an event that can not be or ever retroactively explained by any scientific process, analysis or theory now or hereafter known. To the islamist, a miracle is nothing more than an identification of random coincidences or the vaguely written words of a verse, either of which are then forced to fit a known fact. The claim is then made at the time the verse was written, it was a miracle, thereby applying the word miracle in an exact opposite sense to its meaning.

Our friend Mohideen used a the same argument on another thread a few days ago. Quoting some verse that that says something to the effect if allah says it shall be then it shall be brought into existence proves the miracle that that the koran taught the big bang theory before any scientiist postulated it.

Irrespective that such verse is only a paraphrasing of the opening of Genesis (and God said let there be ... and there was ...), Mohideen nonetheless asserted that this is a miracle of the koran because such verse could only come from the creator of the universe who caused the big bang. Note how this same process is used to verify the writings of Nostradamus.

Of course whenever I pointed out this reasoning to the islamist du jour, the conversation always turned to me being "ignorant," and devolving thereafter to spending eternity in the flames of hell.

Posted by: Lisa at March 23, 2006 2:03 PM

For those of you not wishing to spend money to buy the book, "The Calcutta Koran Petition" that Robert Spenser mentions in this column, a web version is available online here:
http://voi.org/books/tcqp/

It was Chandmal Chopra of Calcutta who filed a Writ Petition in the Calcutta High Court on 29 March 1985 stating that publication of the Quran attracts Sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code because it “incites violence, disturbs public tranquility, promotes, on ground of religion, feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between different religious communities, and insults other religions or religious beliefs of other communities in India”. This writ was, as expected, thrown out by the Dhimmi Indian courts but not before causing some panic within the Indian government. The book is quite an interesting read

Posted by: Razdan at March 23, 2006 2:41 PM

Ooops, sorry about the typo in your name, Robert!

Posted by: Razdan at March 23, 2006 2:42 PM

Have any of you rabid anti-Muslims ever actually met or talked to a Muslim? Or seen one of their homes or gotten to know them? (I'm already waiting for the remark that you'd be afraid to get blown up if you went to their house, so try again).
Or are you so willing to believe what bin Laden tells you--that Islam and the West are at war? Don't make his job easier for him by accepting his argument that Muslims and the West can't co-exist. They can, and do, every day. Your use of extreme cases (convert sentenced to death in Afghaistan) gives you a distorted view of Islam and its adherents, though that case and the others in my mind are obviously deplorable. But please stop doing bin Laden's work for him; God knows it is hard enough to overcome prejudice between non-Muslims and Muslims without sites like this. A real Jihad Watch site could be very useful for non-Muslims and Muslims alike; despite what many of you may think, many Muslims are trying to root out violent jihadis within the religion. But this site seems dedicated to merely exacerbating your fears about Muslims and perhaps taking care of the mental indoctrination for the coming Muslim concentration camps, a la WWII.
Why not try learning about Muslims like a rational person, rather than just bouncing your fears and anxieties around in this website like a pinball?

Posted by: brandono at March 23, 2006 3:10 PM

Brandono opines: Have any of you rabid anti-Muslims ever actually met or talked to a Muslim? Or seen one of their homes or gotten to know them?

Well, ahem.. to answer your question, I have met and interacted with many muslims. In fact, I used to live in a place that was a muslim majority region (I'm talking about Kashmir). It was the very peaceful, Sufiistic muslims of Kashmir who, with the help of their jehadi brothers drove my family and other members of my community (Kashmiri Pandits, i.e. Hindus) drove us out of our homes. If you desre to learn more about us have a look at:

http://www.kashmir-information.com/

Posted by: Razdan at March 23, 2006 3:38 PM

brandono,

I suggest that you actually do some research on Islam, including reading more at this site, before you make presumptuous, bigotted comments like those. Rahman's case is extreme, yes, but it not uncommon at all. Executing apostates is official policy in several Islamic countries.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/2004/04/001590print.html
Even where apostates are not executed, there are stiff penalties (e.g., jail sentences) as well as ostracism from the community.

In addition, I suggest you look at what the polls say regarding Muslims' opinions on sharia, suicide bombing, etc. (Take a look at the PEW results, also take a look at the polls in Britain showing that at least 40% of Muslims living there want sharia law, and 58% wanted the Danish cartoonists to be punished as criminals). In several western nations, political Islamist groups have attempted to introduce sharia in personal and family law. That they have been unsuccessful so far does not mean that they'll stop trying. No one source of information is perfect, but your comment about meeting and talking to Muslims doesn't help much. Most of us, I suspect, have met and talked to Muslims. Not all of what we hear is pleasant. If you want to find out what Muslims think, ask them about their opinions on the Jews; ask them about Salman Rushdie, the Mohammad cartoons, etc.; and ask them about this apostacy case in Afghanistan.

Finally, I suggest that you read the Koran, with tafsir, and read the Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim Ahadith (or Hadith), as well as the Sira. Keep in mind that Muslims must believe and obey the Koran. Some do, some don't, some follow only the parts they like. But the Koran itself says it is to be believed and followed.

Posted by: Archimedes at March 23, 2006 3:58 PM

Razdan:

I have extensively studied the Kashmir conflict, and I am sorry for your family--the expulsion of the Pandits was very wrong. Does that mean you don't think any Muslims can be decent people?
Every organized group involved in the Kashmir struggle has dirty hands, from the Islamist groups and Pakistan, to the nationalist Kashmiri forces, to the Indian security forces and their death squads.
Doesn't this again show that this website's singling out of Muslims as particularly violent is misguided? I don't condone anyone's violence--Muslims or otherwise. And for every instance of violence by a Muslim, we can find an analogous instance in other religions (i.e., the BJP and Hindutva in India, the destruction of the Ayodhya mosque, and the subsequent riots that killed 800 Hindus and 2,000 Muslims). To me it seems that every major religion is going through a period of increased fundamentalism, with resultant violence.

Posted by: spoiler at March 23, 2006 3:59 PM

Archimedes,

I think what brandono was driving at is that we should not accept what we are told by polls, etc., but get to know actual Muslims in order to demystify them--that they are people and that the extreme stories bandied about in the press are not representative, and that we do a disservice to them and ourselves if we fall for the trap of bin Laden and others into thinking that we are somehow incompatible.
Re: Rahman's case, the clerics pushing for execution have it wrong: "There is no compulsion in religion", Quran, 2:256.

Posted by: spoiler at March 23, 2006 4:12 PM

spoiler,

You claim, "And for every instance of violence by a Muslim, we can find an analogous instance in other religions (i.e., the BJP and Hindutva in India, the destruction of the Ayodhya mosque, and the subsequent riots that killed 800 Hindus and 2,000 Muslims)."

You used the word "every." Are we talking today? Today, the execution of apostates is, as far as I'm aware, for the most part being carried out by Muslims. Not all Muslims carry it out, but nearly all of it is being carried out by Muslims. (I would, of course, welcome any information about the exceptions; I am aware that other religions have executed apostates in the past, but not today). Also, the killing of critics is largely an activity carried out by Muslims. This doesn't mean that all Muslims carry it out, but that most of what's carried out is by Muslims. Both of these forms of intolerance have a huge effect, in the form of a tacit threat, on both Muslim and non-Muslim populations who are not directly affected by the violence but are indirectly influenced, as measured by timidity in public criticism, fear among ex-Muslims, etc.

"To me it seems that every major religion is going through a period of increased fundamentalism, with resultant violence."

"it seems"? Why not check the statistics. Last time I checked, almost all of the terrorism carried out in the world today is by a group claiming to act in the name of Islam. Of the major conflicts in the world, most involve an Islamic group on one or both sides of the conflict.

Posted by: Archimedes at March 23, 2006 4:19 PM

brandono,

Yes, I have had Muslims in my home and have known them personally. I can same the same for Christians, Jews, Hindus, Bhuddist, Atheist, Agnostics, even a Rastafarian (best religious rites ever!) or two; same for white, black, brown, yellow, and even rainbows from the GLTG community; Asians from East, South-east and South, N. and S. Europeans, N. and S. Americans including Native Americans, Africans, but as far as I know not a single extra-terrestrial, but I am anxiously awaiting the possibility of an invite.

And here is what I firmly believe in:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Presumably, that is what brought all these groups, or their ancestors to the U.S., that and the economic freedom that comes from personal freedom. At least that is what brought my grandparents here early last century, and what brings immigrants and ex-pats from all over that I have personally known.

There is a wonderful web page, Ten Misconceptions About Islam, hosted by the Muslim Student Association at the University of California. There is nothing on this site or this page, in particular, that advocates violent Jihad, or the slaughter of infidels (except in the text of the Koran and Hadith that they provide).

However, after reading about popular misconceptions about Islam, and what the MSA wants us to know as being the true Islam, as it should be here in the U.S., I believe I have the absolute right to be concerned and question whether Islam can exist as just another religion in a pluralistic free society as envisioned by the Founding Fathers of this country. Let's see what the MSA writes to counter misconceptions about Islam:

In this article, we will try to clear up many of the misconceptions that are prevalent about Islam. Before jumping into the list of misconceptions directly, it is important to give a little interesting background about the source of Islam.

We avoid the word religion because in many non-Islamic societies, there is a separation of "religion and state." This separation is not recognized at all in Islam: the Creator is very much concerned with all that we do, including the political, social, economic, and other aspects of our society. Hence, Islam is a complete way of life.

The opening two paragraphs of the MSA thesis already puts Islam in contraposition to the opening of the Declaration of Independence and also to the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which forms the basis for our seperation of Church and State.

Is it a misconception that Islam is incompatible with democracy? Let's again see what the MSA has to say about liberal, pluralistic, securalist democracy.

Islam is a complete way of life. Given this, it is not surprising that the Creator is concerned with the method which we choose to govern ourselves.

[I]t is clear that the state's obligation of obedience to the Creator is as important as the obedience of the individual. Hence, the Islamic state must derive its law from the Qur'an and Sunnah. This principle excludes certain choices from the Islamic state's options for political and economic systems, such as a pure democracy...For example, a pure democracy places the people above the Qur'an and Sunnah, and this is disobedience to the Creator. However, the best alternative to a pure democracy is a democracy that implements and enforces the Shari'ah (Islamic Law).

Now, back to the Declaration of Independence. The highlighted portion says according to inalienable rights grantied to men by the creator, that to secure these rights governments derive their posers from the consent of the governed. Again, we see Islam as brought to us by the MSA as being the polar opposite of this proposition. Also, the self evident truth of equality of men does not hold true in the Shari'ah, which states that Islam is to dominate and force the non-Muslim into willful submission (Koran 9:29).

Is Islam peace? Even the MSA says this is the number one misconception.

It might seem strange to think of this as a misconception, but in fact it is. The root word of Islam is "al-silm" which means "submission" or "surrender." It is understood to mean "submission to Allah." In spite of whatever noble intention has caused many a Muslim to claim that Islam is derived primarily from peace, this is not true.

There you have it, from Muslims themselves, educated Muslims at one of the finest universities in the U.S.

Posted by: Lisa at March 23, 2006 4:28 PM

Errata: Universtiy of California referenced in the fourth paragraph should read University of Southern California, nonetheless itself a highly respected institution.

Posted by: Lisa at March 23, 2006 4:31 PM

Archimedes,

I read the link on apostasy you posted above to brandono. Do you have further info on the killing of critics or apostates? I am wondering how much of this actually occurs; that is, is it representative of Islam or Muslims? Let me be clear: I in no way defend these practices. They should be stopped and all should have freedom of religion or no religion. My argument is simply that to tar all Muslims with the brush of a very few psychopaths is unfair, illogical and ultimately counterproductive.
The BJP in India, which thank God has lost power in India, is just one example of the worldwide increase in fundamentalism (http://www.bjp.org/philo.htm). President Bush is another example--he has claimed God wanted him to be President, http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=1994.
And I wonder how much the Iraq war was motivated by these ideas; it certainly wasn't by the WMD and I'm skeptical whether it was my safety or yours--it hasn't done much for that except make it worse.
There are certainly plenty of so-called Islamist terrorist groups in the world (12 of 28 listed groups in the State Dept's 2001 list claim some sort of Islamic link, http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/rpt/fto/2001/5258.htm)--I'm not disputing that. Just that these groups have nothing to do with a reasonable understanding of Islam, and that for us to call them "Islamic" is to give them a victory in the propaganda war and prevents us from understanding regular Muslims better, which would benefit all of us and help thwart the attempts at radicalization of young Muslim men that these groups make.
In terms of "amounts" of terrorism, I would look closely at both the right and left wing groups in Columbia, as well as the Maoist guerrillas in Nepal to see the groups that are having the biggest impacts in terms of deaths and political instability, though certainly not in terrifying people in the west.

Posted by: spoiler at March 23, 2006 4:50 PM

Spoiler, now that name fits you well. You sound like a typical apologist for islam, only a small number are bad, don’t blame them all, all religions have bad people, yada, yada, yada. I know, I know some of your best friends are muslim, so what? I have had coffee and conversations with muslims from America, Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia, Iraq, Kuwait and a half a dozen more countries. Are they all bad? Nope, not even close. What did they have in common? All are one more verse from becoming a full convert from peaceful, well mannered guy next door, to a full fledged wife abusing, infidel hating, homicidal maniac. You see all it takes to turn them to the dark side is to simply follow the koran (yes I have read it). I was fooled by muslims myself once. I wish I knew what in that evil book caused people from such a wide variety of cultures, communities, sects, tribal units and clans to go homicidal. Race doesn’t seem to be an issue muslims from all races have turned into major trouble makers and killers. Economic and social standing doesn’t seem to be an issue. Both rich and poor seem to act up equally, so that can’t be it. I don’t think it can be explained by education. There must be some connection I am not seeing (or is it you). That damn book, that must be it, you know the one? The one that says, they can kill me, enslave me or convert me. Personally, I don’t think they have a snowballs chance in hell of completing any of those choices. They could just befriend me, oops I forgot, that is against the rules. Hmm, maybe we can just live together in peace and harmony, darn that is against the rules too. Seems, I am out of options, not being a muslim myself I can’t threaten, or use force against them. What I can do, is watch them and try and get others to wake up to the threat. I would not ask anyone to stand in a burning house without attempting to warn or save them. Why would I let anyone take up for a misguided killer cult like islam? Hmm, again it doesn’t seem like I would. I know some people will take your side and to them I just ask you to take a globe, look at all the countries in the world today that are muslim controlled, or have large populations of them. Now compare it to the ones that have an ongoing insurgency or an all out war. Ok, you had your fun now pick any two other religious groups and do the same. Hmm, seem these muslims are major trouble makers after all. I am not really islamaphobic just informed. Good day to you sir. (Again my apologies to Willy Wonka)

Posted by: Ronin at March 23, 2006 5:51 PM

Brandano & Spoiler, you guys must be out of your mind to try to equate the number of terrorist attacks done in the name of Islam with those of other religions. Brandano, did you even bother to read the BJP philosophy on the web site you cited? Take the time to read it carefully and tell me if you really think you can equate the BJP philosophy, which believes that the Hindu value system is essentially secular, is as morally repugnant as the Islamic one which divides the World into Dar-ul-Harb and Dar-ul-Islam and asks its adherents to never stop till they have converted everyone to Islam? And you equate the destruction of one defunct mosque, built on what was originally a temple destroyed by the Mughal ruler Babar (who killed hundreds of thousands of Hindus during his time), as equivalent to the cold-blooded murder of thousands of Kashmiri Pandits? I'm sorry, but it is you guys who show zero objectivity and not the folks here on JW/DW.

Posted by: Razdan at March 23, 2006 6:10 PM

Raleigh,NC alert

Organizing a group of RTP,North Carolina citizens that will educate the NC public about the ideology of radical Islam.

Posted by: savetheus at March 23, 2006 6:22 PM

Shortly after 9/11 I went to a local book store to buy a Koran and found an edition called
"The Essential Koran." This version has been abridged, leaving out what more people need to know about the Islamic doctrine. Is it possible that President Bush and others in his cabinet have not read an unabridged version? I think it would be a good idea to post the best edition (one that includes the teachings of Mohammad) and tell who the editor is and what the publisher's name is.

Posted by: Monteverdi at March 23, 2006 8:32 PM

Razdan:
I would dispute your generous treatment of the BJP philosophy as well as your characterization of the destroyed mosque. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babri_Mosque#December_6.2C_1992:_the_destruction_of_the_Babri_Masjid
Regarding the BJP philosophy as secularism, even their own website belies this: "It is because our sense of mission has weakened with the administration of the soporific called secularism that we have ceased to be true to ourselves and our culture." http://www.bjp.org/philo.htm My issue here is not with the "Hindu value system," as you say, but with how the BJP uses it for its own nationalist purposes.
You also talk about the "Islamic" view, but there is nothing so unitary as that among regular Muslims--the Shi'a and Sunni divisions are just the largest of a wide diversity of belief. Please stop using the al-Qaida propaganda as your understanding of Islam--it's highly inaccurate.
No doubt there are plenty of "Islamist" groups responsible for thousands of killings that their members claim are justified by Islam; the members of those groups should be imprisoned or killed. Since we all agree that these groups must be stopped, I am always perplexed as to why people are always so willing to believe their justifications and versions of Islam are accurate. Given that they are murderers, why do we not make the connection that they are also liars?
And I'm not equating the destruction of the Babri mosque to the murder of thousands of Pandits; rather, I'm equating the BJP-inspired murder of 2,000 Muslims to the murder of the Pandits to the murder of 800 Hindus in the riots. Murder = Murder = Murder.

Posted by: spoiler at March 23, 2006 8:37 PM

Spoiler,

I initially responded to Brandono's comment:

"Have any of you rabid anti-Muslims ever actually met or talked to a Muslim?"

I think a hard response was appropriate in that case, though I generally try not to get involved in mud-slinging. The vast majority of the posters at the site, as far as I can tell, are not anti-Muslim. A lot of confusion arises, and people think we are being anti-Muslim. I can't speak for everyone, and I don't defend anyone who makes reckless or crude remarks. I believe any fair criticisms of Islam and the goals of Islamists will ultimately benefit not only non-Muslims, but also Muslims. How can these criticisms of Islam be anti-Muslim if, ultimately, these criticisms result in improved human rights (safety, security, freedom from persecution, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, equal rights for women, etc.) for everyone, including Muslims?

You said:
"My argument is simply that to tar all Muslims with the brush of a very few psychopaths is unfair, illogical and ultimately counterproductive."

I agree. And I don't tar them all one with one brush. The enforcement of the apostacy law, though widespread, is not universally upheld officially. I don’t have figures at the moment (I should, but I don’t; still, the Warraq article that I cited noted several countries in which the law is implemented). Indeed, even when they move to modern western democracies, Muslims still have to be careful if they decide to leave the faith; many do so quietly. The few apostates who come out publicly are threatened, e.g., Warraq himself, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ali Sina, Abul Kasem, Wafa Sultan, etc.). Also see, for general testimonials, http://www.apostatesofislam.com/index.htm

The Hanifi school (one of the main schools of Sunni Islam) does not give the death penalty for simple apostacy.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/010698.php#c193136

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/010698.php#c192987

See Afghan constitution provided by this poster here
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/010698.php#c192939

Posted by: Archimedes at March 23, 2006 10:27 PM

"It is because our sense of mission has weakened with the administration of the soporific called secularism that we have ceased to be true to ourselves and our culture."

So spoiler, let me get this, you are saying that the above statement in the BJP platform (which is simply stating the truth about the state of 'secular' India, which currently follows a policy of abject appeasement towards Islamic demands) is equivalent in its venom to the numerous statements in the Islamic Koran & Hadiths asking for the killing and destruction of non-muslims?

While the worst one can accuse the BJP is of inspiring the people to tear down the disputed Babri Masjid mosque (which, by the way was a non-functioning mosque), to lay blame on the BJP for the ensuing riots, started by muslims, is simply incorrect and disingenous.

Posted by: Razdan at March 23, 2006 10:33 PM

No doubt there are plenty of "Islamist" groups responsible for thousands of killings that their members claim are justified by Islam; the members of those groups should be imprisoned or killed. Since we all agree that these groups must be stopped, I am always perplexed as to why people are always so willing to believe their justifications and versions of Islam are accurate. Given that they are murderers, why do we not make the connection that they are also liars?

Posted by: spoiler at March 23, 2006 08:37 PM

Spoiler your statement comes from a position that to me suggests you are unfamiliar with the writings and doctrines of the Koran. It is a facile argument to say that interpretations are inaccurate or misunderstood. All languages can be converted and transformed into other languages with the basic premise remaining intact. The Koran can be deconstructed just like any other legal, social, religious or political system and its ramifications laid bear so that its impact upon individuals can be seen and quantified in such a way as to measure their impact on personal freedoms and psychological development.

The structure of the Koran is such that it demands of its subject’s adherence to a set of laws that because of their divine origin cannot be reinterpreted and modified to adapt to changing times and environments. The laws within the Koran are explicit in how Muslims must interact with non-Muslims. Moral equivalence arguments hold very little weight when trying to deflect attention from the violence and oppression that is inherent in Islam today. The statistics are clear that Islam is at the root of much of the disturbances that plague modern society.

Your statement that we should make the connection that they are liars is simply out of touch with what is actually written in the Koran. A normal interpretation of Islamic texts shows that these people are not liars and are merely following the laws laid down to them by Allah. It is the Muslims who say that the Koran does not justify killing of infidels who are lying.

You need to be aware of the concept of abrogation within the holy texts. Those that espouse peace and understanding occur earlier in the life of Mohammed and are superceded by those which occur later in Mohammed’s life where the concept of proselytizing by the sword became common.

The doctrine of Islam is an ideological engine of war that uses a totalitarian political system to maintain numbers and force subjection of those that stray into its path. You have the right to defend who ever you wish but at least first learn the intricacies of the system you are trying to defend.

Posted by: km at March 24, 2006 1:56 AM

spoiler,

km is right.

You say "I am always perplexed as to why people are always so willing to believe their justifications and versions of Islam are accurate."

You are completely ignoring the issue of doctrinal support. This is critical.

If you read the Islamic texts, you would realize where their ideas come from. I recommend that you read Robert Spencer's book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam.

Re Bush's Christianity. My opinion as an atheist is that Bush's policy is not affected by his conception of Christianity except insofar as that happens to overlap with his views on freedom and democracy. Bush's comments on Christianity are the sort of comments that a politician would have to make in a Christian population such as America. I don't put a lot of stock in it. The New Testament doesn't talk about military operations. Also keep in mind that the on-going violence and killing in Iraq, which is ruining the lives of Iraqis, is due to the activities of jihadists, i.e., most Muslim being killed there are being killed by jihadists.

Hamas, the democratically-elected government of the Palestinians, has in its charter a vow to destroy the Jews. This is a quotation from the Sunni-accepted Hadith. (Shia apparently accept the same concept).

"Just that these groups have nothing to do with a reasonable understanding of Islam,"

Again, you must read the Islamic texts.

"and that for us to call them "Islamic" is to give them a victory in the propaganda war"

It helps us identify the enemy. The enemy of our civilization wants sharia law imposed. Some are pushing for it politically, socially, and demographically, while the short-sighted/impatient ones are using terrorism and causing a distraction. All Islamists are acting based on the Islamic texts. Those who do not strive with their wealth and their lives are hypocrites who must be killed. Multiple Ahadith and Koranic verses call for the killing of hypocrites.

"and prevents us from understanding regular Muslims better,"

Not at all. We simply distinguish between moderate Muslims and Islamists. The concept of moderate Muslim is problematic, but there are genuine moderate progressive Muslims and a few of them even post here from time to time. Of course, we also have posters who want apostates executed and think there is no problem with Mohammad's marriage to a six-year-old girl.

"which would benefit all of us and help thwart the attempts at radicalization of young Muslim men that these groups make."

I don't agree. We need to simply put the criticism where it belongs and we should not be afraid to do so. We need to educate non-Muslims (most of whom do not grasp the nature and extent of the threat) while putting pressure on the Islamists as well as constructive, positive pressure on the moderate progressive Muslims. We won't improve things by pretending everything is okay when it isn't.

I actually do not believe that Islamic terrorism is the biggest threat posed by Islam. The biggest threat to the west (Europe in particular) comes from political Islamists, the radicalization of Muslim youth, and the demographic jihad.

Nevertheless, I'm not sure I agree with the numbers that you cite and I can not access the site that you linked. Here is what I did find.

1. According to this report, the U.S. State Department has listed 37 terrorist groups, 19 (51%) of which are clearly Islamic. I counted 3 nationalist Palestinian groups as non-Islamic because they have Marxist ideological influences. The remainder are non-Islamic. Two of these non-Islamic groups may no longer be active (the IRA and ETA) rehttp://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2003/31711.htm
In addition, the list does not include the Chechen terrorists (the list was apparently composed before the Beslan massacre). And of course the list does not include larger instances of tyrannical warfare (e.g., Sudan) which are explicitly Islamic and/or Muslim-Arab supremacist.

2.
Excerpts From Huntington’s Thesis
http://www.hvk.org/articles/1003/48.html
“In the 1990s violence occurred between Muslims and non-Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Chechnya, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kashmir, India, the Philippines, Indonesia, the Middle East, Sudan and Nigeria. Mujahedin fighters from the Afghanistan war were central participants in many of these conflicts as well as in Muslim terrorist organizations in countries throughout the world. In the mid-1990s, roughly half the ethnic conflicts in the world involved Muslims fighting each other or non-Muslims. In one inventory by The Economist, Muslims were responsible for 11 and possibly 12 of 16 major acts of international terrorism between 1983 and 2000. Five of the seven states listed by the U.S. State Department as supporting terrorism are Muslim, as are a majority of foreign organizations listed as engaged in terrorism. In counter-actions between 1980 and 1995, the U.S. armed forces engaged in 17 military operations against Muslims. According to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, 32 armed conflicts were underway in 2000; more than two thirds involved Muslims. Yet Muslims are only about one fifth of the world’s population.”

3. This site has a number of interesting brief articles on Islamic terrorism.
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/arab05.html#arab0805
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/arabs.html#arab0504
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/arabs.html#arab0504b
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/arabs.html#arab1204b

Posted by: Archimedes at March 24, 2006 6:39 AM