"We've never hated America".

We have only hated infidels.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 28, 2006 9:19 AM

We've never hated America

No, we like it so much we want it for the Dar al-Islam.

Posted by: Interested at June 28, 2006 9:30 AM

It's the old "We love the American people, it's just those dog-gone government policies that we actually hate" speech.
Heard it all before and still don't believe it.

Posted by: JanuaryMan at June 28, 2006 9:31 AM

When was the last time our "extremists" -- for example, the aforementioned politicians spouting "inflammatory statements" -- rioted over a cartoon, planted roadside bombs, or beheaded someone?

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at June 28, 2006 9:39 AM

So I guess the term "Great Satan" is just an affectionate nickname?

I just love a little taqyyia in the morning.

(Not to mention all the actual polls say the Arab world can't stand us. But facts are such inconvenient things).

Posted by: treehugger at June 28, 2006 9:43 AM

"The Arab world is the friend of America. The question of hating America is not there. We've never hated America,"

Just like "Mars Attacks!"

"Don't run!....We come in peace!"

How these people can spout in the face of all the evidence. But hey remember! the members of the audience "the US Arab Economic forum" have already bought in or been bought off. Their livelihood relies on living the lie.

Posted by: Turbinehead at June 28, 2006 9:54 AM

Such lies have a unique name: whoppers.

Posted by: Shy Guy at June 28, 2006 10:16 AM

"The Arab world is the friend of America. The question of hating America is not there. We've never hated America"

The good news is that America's impatience with Islamic savagery is becoming more visible, despite all the attempts of the Political Correctness crowd to muzzle it.

Posted by: Steven L. at June 28, 2006 10:18 AM

"We fear it in the Middle East. Many of us read what they say and we are angry about this nationalist agenda that is gaining some ground."

LOL. It makes you angry?

Hey, Arab League -- guess what? I LIVE IN TEXAS. And I'm going to chase you across the border within the next 10 years.

Get really mad, because I'm way more pissed off than you'll ever be.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 28, 2006 10:19 AM

Oh, btw, using the term "Arab" isn't going to change anything. If you intentionally make it difficult to know the difference between a Muslim Arab and a Christian Arab, my advice to the Christians and agnostics and atheists among the Arab community is simply this: DO NOT GET INVOLVED WITH ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE PROPAGANDA TOOLS OF THE MUSLIMS. Start your own separate Christian Arab League, etc. In fact, I highly recommend that that becomes a trend. The Arab people are not my enemy. The Muslims are.

I have worked for and with Arabs and been the recepient of kindness and even charity from them in the past. I just want to make it clear that this taqiyya does not fool me.

Muslims that start attacking American nationalism should start packing their bags. You want to tell us when to talk, when to walk, when to eat, when to drink, when to breathe next? Just try me.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 28, 2006 10:27 AM

Re: "The Arab world is the friend of America. The question of hating America is not there. We've never hated America,"

These creeps lie as easily as we breath air. The following link shows them celebrating Sept. 11.

http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=4030

Posted by: johnb at June 28, 2006 10:36 AM

"You have to stand firm against all negative forces with agendas," Arab League secretary general Amr Moussa told the US Arab Economic Forum in Houston, Texas.
Damn!! He took the words right out of my mouth.

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at June 28, 2006 10:47 AM

"The United States must check the internal voices of nationalism that are promoting a 'clash of civilizations' with Islam, the head of the Arab League said."
-- from the article above

Running scared is the sinister Amr Moussa, for whom the jig seems to be up. For we no longer live in the days when those blue-papered copies of the FBIS (Foreign Broadcast Information Service), so poorly distributed, so hard to find, contained the transcripts of radio and television in the Arab countries. Now we have the Internet, and we have all kinds of translation services, busily giving us what is written in Al-Ahram or a hundred other official or semi-official government papers. We know when anti-American or antisemitic travesties are broadcast, in a ballyhooed and popular series, on television. We can see what Egypt's population is fed, and what it screams from its heart, whenever aloud. Why, it was Frank Gardner, once and future friend of the Arabs, and a BBC correspondent, who reported on the absolute delight of Cairene crowds on the afternoon of September 11 when they heard the good news. Does Amr Moussa not know that? Does he not know that others were reporting from Hamra Street in Beirut (see the Wall Street Journal), others still captured on film the wild delight in Gaza and the "West Bank" (not all the photographers had their film confiscated by the local Arabsa), and in Riyadh, as even Saudis reported, there was much mafeking, honking of horns, Arab equivalents of high-fives, and invitations to suddenly-thrown-together feasts. In this country, too, a nurse overheard the hilarity in the room of an Arab patient at the Mass. General (and she was then hushed up); stories from all over, from Arab communities that could not conceal their glee, until the next day they suddenly realized that they had to assume long faces and express their "outrage" and "grief" (some of those Muslim leaders joining in those interfatih candelight vigils and so on later were found to have long been expressing quite different sentiments, and continued to do so, for Muslim audiences, when they thought no Infidels were listening, no Infidels were looking, no Infidels were recording.

Amr Moussa is quite wrong. There is no "clash of civliizations." There is Islam against all Infidels. It is Islam against America, and Israel (the Lesser Jihad), but it is also Islam against the Infidels of Western Europe, with their silly laws, and silly customs, and silly understandings, including that ridiculous "
freedom of speech" those Danes and others insist on practicing. Despite the most incredible attempt at brainwashing by all the governments and elites, especially in the media, to prevent the peoples of Western Europe -- of Italy and France, of Spain and Belgium, of Denmark and Sweden and Norway, of Germany and Holland, to prevent Infidels from discovering too much about what is written in the Qur'an, and what the Sunnah tells the True Believer to believe, and what that figure of Muhammad, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil, means for the wellbeing of Infidels, it cannot be done. It's just not possible to have those texts on-line, everywhere available, and prevent the more intelligent and aware Infidels from looking at those texts, and then from studying the history of Islamic conquest, and subjugation of non-Muslims.

Does Amr Moussa think we haven't all been watching like hawks the assault on the Copts? Does he realize that the days of the Court Copts, silently enduring their mistreatment, are over -- at least over for those Copts who have arrived in the West? Does he realize that we are capable of making the link between the attacks on inoffensive Buddhist monks and teachers and farmers in southern Thailand by Muslims, and the all the other examples of Muslim murderousness against Infidels -- in Nigeria, Sudan, Philippines, in Pakistan and Bangladesh, in Afghanistan and in Iraq (where as the attitudes prompted by Islam return with a vengeance, Christians flee), in the Muslim demands, whipped up by Muslim leaders within Denmkark, who had accepted the fantastic generosity of the Danish state, for the Danes to cease to practice freedom of speech and to punish any of their own citizens who insisted on so doing, in Holland, the most self-consciously "tolerant" state in the entire world, that has made a fetish of that "tolerance," and where, without any kind of prompting, and despite every effort made to pretend the problem is not Muslims and not Islam, more than 60% of those famously tolerant Dutch now regard Muslims with alarm -- alarm born of the behavior and attitudes and beliefs of those same Muslims.

No, Amr Moussa doesn't realize that the more he prates about this kind of thing, the more he inflames the Infidels. They have been slow learners. They are still taking their time. But it is not anyone whipping them up. It is they themselves, as they read the daily paper, however sanitized it may be, however confusingly or misleadingly it may present the latest Muslim outrage here, there or everywhere, and that even those who might a few years ago have fallen for those "interfaith" sesssions, those Mosque Outreach evenings, those predictably deceptive meetings of special Muslim pleading, and manipulation of useful idiots among the Infidels at those "Muslim-Christian" and "Muslim-Jewish Dialogues" that are exercises always in taqiyya-and-tu-quoque, after the exposure of even the smoothest of sinister operatives, Tariq Ramadan, not only by French Infidel journalists -- Fourest, Favrot), but by debaters on television (Sarkozy, Finkielkraut) who showed him up for all the French to see, and they did see, but also from the truthful Muslims themselves.

The best was the journalist, now bodyguarded in Italy, a commentator on the RAI (state-owned television) and for the leading newspaper, the Corriere della Sera, Magdi Allam. He, like Tariq Ramadan and like Amr Moussa, has his roots in Egypt. He, like Tariq Ramadan and Amr Moussa, was raised as a Muslim. And he, Magdi Allam, completely unlike Tariq Ramadan and Amr Moussa, is in the business not of deceiving Infidels in order to protect and promote Islam and to deprive Infidels of their senses -- "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" -- which is what Amr Moussa, in the nonsense and lies peddled in the speech described above, was trying to do -- but of trying to tell the truth.

Posted by: Hugh at June 28, 2006 10:57 AM

"The United States must check the internal voices of nationalism...." Much easier said than done in a free society. We should all be encouraged that the b@stards are frightened. I'm reminded that in the waning days of WWII, Heinrich Himmler, in a discussion with a neutral (Swedish?) diplomat, stated that in his opinion it was time for the "Jews and National Socialists to bury the hatchet."

Posted by: MP at June 28, 2006 11:14 AM

So very true. Someone buy Hugh a beer. (Or a cabernet or whatever he prefers.)

Posted by: Foehammer at June 28, 2006 11:15 AM

Some are waking up.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/columnists/jgurwitz/stories/MYSA062506.gurwitzcolumn.b5d0659a.html

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 28, 2006 11:37 AM

"The Arab world is the friend of America. The question of hating America is not there. We've never hated America."

And I have a certain bridge in NYC to sell to you. What a whopper.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 28, 2006 12:19 PM

A poster above mentions Frank Gardner -- here's a followup article written about him by a Guardian correspondent aptly named James Meek. In The man who would not die" He says "Frank Gardner tells his extraordinary tale of survival". Extraordinay indeed. After nearly being assasinated by his beloved Arabs, he remains a staunch fan of Arab culture and Islam. This man is the BBC correspondent who carried a Koran around knowing full well that one day he'd have to pretend to be a Muslim in order not to be murdered. Later in the article we learn that Mr. Gardner had "just gone back to his old job at the BBC - effectively, the Corporation's "war on terror" correspondent" when he and his cameraman were attacked in Saudi Arabia. If this putrid Arabist was the vehicle for the BBC's perspective on the WOT, Saudi Arabia, and Arab Islam -- no wonder their coverage was so blatantly biased against telling the truth about Islam and Arab racism and barbarity. This man is a fawning terror groupie -- a lewd Arabist -- and a craven apologist for barbarism and hatred. It's hard to square his absolute knowledge that with the Arabs he's dealing with the new vandals and barbarians of the world, and his unquestioned devotion to their methods and their causes. Read the article and learn about this verminous scum:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/saudi/story/0,,1462909,00.html

Posted by: jsla at June 28, 2006 12:20 PM

Hugh

Thanks for exposing the fraud thats Amir Moussa. I recall an al-Bawaba report a couple of years ago in the run-up to the Iraq war, that had the Kuwaiti speaker calling him a dog, and he threatening to resign. Didn't he? I'm surprised that he is still around. However, since he isn't opposed by the Administration for the right reasons - being an apologist for Islam (recall his furious reaction to Berlusconi's commments on Muslims as barbarians in the wake of 9/11), can we count on him being treated as a pariah, a la Assad or Hanafiah, since he supported Saddam against the US in the prelude to Operation Iraqi Freedom? Why is he being allowed into the US in the first place?

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 28, 2006 1:00 PM

Hugh,

Thank-you for your commetary. Slowly, but with certain realizations, non-Muslims the world over are at last begining to wake up to the dangers of the Muslim threat.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 28, 2006 1:05 PM

"Slowly, but with certain realizations, non-Muslims the world over are at last begining to wake up to the dangers of the Muslim threat."

Yeah, like that 5-track shaving razor satirized on Saturday Nite Live that keeps shaving the hair follices of the beard closer and closer and closer... never quite getting there.

I for one will not tolerate too much longer these infuriatingly incremental baby steps we in the collectively passive West are taking. Stop blaming the elites and the news media. Hundreds of millions of ordinary Westerners are doing nothing from what I can see. What will I do? I'd rather sit and fume in fruitless exasperation than believe in a comforting untruth.

Posted by: Television at June 28, 2006 1:13 PM

The Muslims are expanding their definition of victimhood. Just as they are suffering from "Islamophobia," in the cruel, corrupt West, they must now labor under the threat of American nationalism. The poor,poor things....does their pain never end??

Posted by: maryrose at June 28, 2006 1:19 PM

"When was the last time our "extremists" -- for example, the aforementioned politicians spouting "inflammatory statements" -- rioted over a cartoon, planted roadside bombs, or beheaded someone?"

Isn't it the enemy who sets the rules? Maybe it's time to fight fire with fire.

Posted by: IceDragon at June 28, 2006 2:00 PM

One more thing, Moussa. Your fellow snakes are not a civilization, therefore your characterization of this conflict as a clash of 'civilizations' is flattery of your side beyond belief.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 28, 2006 2:17 PM

Well of course the Muslims would be our friends, if only we would let them. The problem is the nationalism and xenophobia of the ordinary American people who do not even recognise their own ignorance of Islam.

Do you know that there are large portions of this benighted land where one never hears the call to prayer? Where burkas and abayas draw open-mouthed stares from the unsophisticated natives? Where crosses and other infidel symbols and idols are openly displayed in public? Where infidels walk the streets and ride in public transportation without chastisement for their unbelief or the extraction of the jizya in humiliation and submission?

Our highest officials, our ruling elites, and our news and entertainment media repeatedly tell us that Islam is a religion of peace, but many stupid and uneducated people refuse to accept the truth.

The solution to these problems is quickly to admit 20 to 30 million Muslims to the United States and to implore them to accept citizenship. This will come about when the new, bipartisan immigration bill becomes law.

Don't worry, be happy!

Islam is a religion of peace!

Viva El Presidente Jorge bin Jorge al-Bush!

Allahu akbar!

Posted by: Norseman at June 28, 2006 2:18 PM

In effect he is saying no to nationalism in the U.S.A., and the world of the "west" for that matter.

Nope, it is all about islam, and for islam. Let freedom rehin ,and bow.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at June 28, 2006 2:24 PM

Norseman - El Presidente Jorge bin Jorge al-Bush is the new calipha. I realized it the other day. He's building a new world order as calipha and has began in Iraq and Afghanistan. Next will by Syria and his dhimmi client state Israel will help with this one.

Nation by nation, El Presidente Jorge bin Jorge al-Bush is putting together something great for Islam. He's always doing good da'wa as well, saying things like 'Noble tradition, noble Qur'an, Islam is a noble religion, Islam seeks peace, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are 'staunch allies' Also, he is generous to a fault, never expecting our Good Friends, the Kuwaitis to repay the 20% tribute they owe us. ( thanks be to Allah )

Jorge bin Jorge al-Bushi is the new calipha! allahu ahkbar !

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at June 28, 2006 2:34 PM

Oh they love us dont you know!

http://www.honestreporting.com/relentless/new_version/content-pages/view-trailer_sep.asp

http://www.honestreporting.com/obsession/trailer.htm

Posted by: tgusa at June 28, 2006 2:35 PM

The deliberate use by Amr Moussa of the word "nationalism" deserves study. All kinds of things are implied by this choice of word:

The idea that only American hyper-patriots could conceivably be wary of, or hostile to, Islam.

The fact that the E.U., which does its best to diminish national sentiments, old-fashioned pride in one's own history, literature, and culture, which weakens the ability of the members of the E.U. to withstand Dawa and demographic conquest.

The fact that Islam is trans-national, deplores the nationalism that divides the umma al-islamiyya, the Umma or Commuinty of Believers, the only community that really counts.

All this and more can be located in the use of that word "nationalism."

The Arabs and Muslims are very careful with how they put things. They never miss a trick. That is why it is so painful to listen to one of those debates between Arabs ("Palestians") and Israelis, in which every word is loaded on the Arab side (beginning with the words "occupied" and "occupaton") while the Israelis blithely ignore, or sometimes even naively accept, the lexicon of the enemy, and in doing so, unwittingly lose the debate in the minds of unwary listeners.

Posted by: Hugh at June 28, 2006 2:39 PM

Jorge bin Jorge al-Bush al-Crawfordi is the new calipa! Inshallah.... and allah ta'la knows best.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at June 28, 2006 2:42 PM

Denial is not just a linear cesspool in Egypt

Posted by: Dumbo at June 28, 2006 2:48 PM

Next they'll be telling us they never hated the Jews, just Israel.

Posted by: Texas Kaffir at June 28, 2006 2:51 PM

Tx Kaff,
they say that all Jews are really Muslims anyways.

Posted by: Dumbo at June 28, 2006 3:05 PM

It wouldn't make any difference if these people did NOT hate America (and I actually think most of them don't, really). Because---

Islam, the ultimate authority in the Middle East and elsewhere, orders Muslims to "slay the infidels everywhere" and that "paradise is under the shade of the swords" as well as innumerable other spectacles of malignance.

Muslims are therefore forced by their ideology to destroy America and its people regardless of their feelings towards them. And this is what they are going to dedicate themselves to doing (America goes first because it is presently the most important non-Islamic land while the others are set to bite the dust by their descending order of global influence).

Posted by: pythagoras at June 28, 2006 3:06 PM

The absolute arrogance of them. Goebels would be proud. They have the Big Lie down pat.

Posted by: Thomas Paine at June 28, 2006 3:14 PM

Who cares whether they say they love us or hate us? The simple fact is their petrodollars pay for da'wa that kills Americans.

They hate our nationalism because it threatens them, eh? Dang, that makes me feel good!

Posted by: GreatShaitan at June 28, 2006 3:20 PM

So I guess they feel the same way OJ felt about Nicole, they want to kill us because they love us too much.

Posted by: pissedoffcanadian at June 28, 2006 3:49 PM

How exactly are "we to check nationalists who clash with Islam?" As they do in Saudi Arabia or Iran? Those who clash with Islam are unbelievers, not worthy, "hated for their disbelief". Who wants to keep around those that promote this ideology? We can sense the smell the taqiyya wafting out of his mouth.

Posted by: Eleanor at June 28, 2006 4:04 PM

Yes, "nationalism" - this spokesman knows how to push the buttons of the ignorant and complacent.

Here is why national loyalty is important:

Membership is defined in different ways at different times and places. For many societies, religion is an important part of it, so that the infidel is cast out or marginalized, as in traditional Islamic society. Although religion has been an important part of European identity, it was gradually, under the influence of the Enlightenment, pushed into the background by nationality, and subsequently by the rise of the nation state. And it is thanks to the nation state that we enjoy the freedoms and secular jurisdictions that are so attractive to immigrants – and especially to those immigrants who define their pre-political membership in religious, rather than national, terms. For national loyalty is a form of neighbourliness: it is loyalty to a shared home and to the people who have built it. It makes no specific demands of a religious or ideological nature, and is content with a common obedience to a secular rule of law, and a common sense of belonging to the land, its customs and its habits of peaceful coexistence. Communities founded on a national rather than a religious conception of membership are inherently open to newcomers, in the way that religious communities are not. An immigrant to a religious community must be prepared to convert; an immigrant to a national community need only obey the law.

This is excerpted from an excellent speech by Roger Scruton that is available in full at the Brussels Journal here:

Speech by Roger Scruton, Antwerp, 23 June 2006

Posted by: Yojimbo at June 28, 2006 4:22 PM

Those nationalists are "making mischief in the land." They must be silenced, so Islam can spread unimpeded. Muslims have the right to settle anywhere they want. All the earth belongs to Allah.

Yes, we know the drill.

Posted by: Stendec at June 28, 2006 4:43 PM

HEY AMR,

We no longer believe you. The Muslim actions around the world speak louder than words and are a truer conveyor of Islamic intentions. The world is awakening to sounds of bodies exploding at the hands of the Religion of Peace. Your words are meaningless.

Posted by: exsgtbrown at June 28, 2006 4:55 PM

We know and understand you don’t hate America, covet it may be, jealous of it, naturally but hate? Nah, why candy coat it down to hate? History is full of examples of people fighting to free other people, many who did not ask for it and some later turned on their own benefactor. We are much the same, we fight to free islam from itself and everyone else from islam. We don’t expect to save you all nor do we owe you anything. Just imagine for a second the benefits to humanity if islam had never happened, almost 1400 years of progress could have happened, entire cultures could have been saved, sigh.

Posted by: Ronin at June 28, 2006 5:23 PM

We fear it in the Middle East. Many of us read what they say and we are angry about this nationalist agenda that is gaining some ground.
++++++++++++++

damn right. Americans have the right to believe as they wish and are angry about all of the violence, murders and crimes committed by mos against non-mos across the world.

Americans have the right for a nationalist agenda to protect itself from a violent cult including invasion of our nation across our borders.

The Texican.

Posted by: Texican at June 28, 2006 5:40 PM

A slippery and thoroughly unpleasant fellow, is Amr Moussa. While he was in the Arab League, not a word was said about the Muslim Arabs of Sudan and their behavior toward black African Christians and animists in the southern Sudan, and non-Arab black African Muslims in Darfur. Not a word was said about the Kurds. Not a word has been said about the treatment of the Berbers in Algeria, who through their own growing self-awareness and militancy managed to force the Algerian government to permit the use of the Berber language, Tamazight, and to permit Berbers to practice their own traditional customs, wear their dress, prevent still more arabization of their ways.

But he's right about one thing. He's against "nationalism." For if he were an Egyptian "nationalist" instead of a shill for Islam and for the Arab supreamcists within the Arab League, he might have cared about those non-Arab Muslims in Darfur, those Berbers in Algeria, those Kurds in Iraq. He might have cared about the Christians in the southern Sudan, or for that matter he might right now be leading an effort to protect Arabic-speaking Christians in Iraq from those Muslims now taking their Islam "immoderately."

If he were an Egyptian nationalist, then he would be furiously working on behalf of the Copts. He would speak out against the deliberate campaigns aimed at seducing, or kidnapping and forcibly converting, Coptic girls. He would denounce, publicly, attacks on Coptic churches and other Coptic buildings and institutions. But that's not for Amr Moussa. He has more in common with fellow Muslims in Jordan or Syria, Saudi Arabia or Morocco, than he does with the Copts, the descendants of the original inhabitants of Egypt, there before the Arabs arrived bearing, or rather forcibly imposing, the "gift" of Islam.

So he's no nationalist. Give him that. Say He's more at home, has more fellow-feeling for, and sympathy with, a Muslim in Riyadh then for a Coptic Egyptian in Alexandria. The sin of nationalism, from which thank god we still suffer in this country, is beneath the likes of Amr Moussa.

Posted by: Hugh at June 28, 2006 5:52 PM

Hugh: "The deliberate use by Amr Moussa of the word "nationalism" deserves study. All kinds of things are implied by this choice of word:......

The fact that the E.U., which does its best to diminish national sentiments, old-fashioned pride in one's own history, literature, and culture, which weakens the ability of the members of the E.U. to withstand Dawa and demographic conquest.

I don't think this point can be overstated as explaining the beef that Moussa has with nationalism in a nutshell. Anti-nationalism tears down the infidels' self-defense against the jihad, while nationalism shores up the infidels' defenses. Despite the fact that Islam is presumably "trans-national" - Islam is still essentially a form of "nationalism", if not in fact, THE alpha and omega, the VERY SPIRIT of "nationalism". Muslims belong to the nation of Islam, the "dar-al-Islam", which may well cross current national borders as they have been historically drawn but the concept is still grounded in the ultimate "US VS THEM" mentality.

US VS THEM. That IS Islam! So this objection is entirely disingenuous in principle. Moussa only objects to nationalism becomes it represents one of the only defensive barriers left for infidels against the UMMAH - the "nation" of Islam, which seeks to conquer the world.

But he uses this term cunningly because he knows that westerners desire peace amongst peoples and that nationalism has indeed represented an historical dividing block among them and so for that reason "nationalism" has come to be a dirty word among western liberals because of its "us vs them" connotation. So he is attempting to play on western guilt sentiments here, even as he (as a Muslim) ruthlessly represents the very penultimate in nationalism (its crucial spirit, and the very reason it represents a problem the first place) - namely, the US vs Them mentality, of which Islam is the most perfect, still extant representative on the planet.

Posted by: Caroline at June 28, 2006 7:15 PM

I should have added (with the caveat that I am no historian by any means - I am just using common sense here) - that "nationalism" is the last defense against "tribalism". As long as people maintain an "us vs them" mentality (again, Islam being the penultimate example of this mentality) - then it becomes very dangerous to break down national boundaries because that allows the intimate penetration into our communities of primitives who still bring with them into our communities the "us vs them mentality". So the breakdown of nationalism leads directly to within-state tribalism. It will be family against family WITHIN the now-defunct national borders. The Muslim family/tribe's hand raised against every infidel hand on the streets, in the community, house to house. That's how it goes with Islam. If you break down the nation state's defenses you have gang/tribal warfare, and Muslims are absolutely brutal enough - in comparison to Christians and Jews and Buddhists and Hindus (none of that messy conscience to deal with which afflicts the latter) - to win that sort of savage contest. And Moussa knows that.

Posted by: Caroline at June 28, 2006 7:30 PM

Did the press follow the Islamic spokesman around the corner after this proclamation and watch him double over with uncontrollable laughter after this masterpiece of doublespeak?

Posted by: profitsbeard at June 28, 2006 7:50 PM

Norseman - El Presidente Jorge bin Jorge al-Bush is the new calipha.

Is it just me or has Dubya secretly taken Shada?

Posted by: Alert at June 28, 2006 10:40 PM

Caroline, the Us/Them paradigm of Islam is anti-Nationalistic insofar as it seeks to eliminate the healthy tension between nations as it has developed in Western political history: Islam seeks to eliminate that tension and establish one "nation" to rule the world. Nationalism, as it has developed in Western political history, is an indefinite forestalling of any unity that would eliminate the multiple divisions -- not just a binary state of division, is seen as healthy, but a constellation of multiple divisions is optimally healthy (because it most comports to the mysteriously recalcitrant imperfections of reality and thereby maximalizes dynamic progress within those limitations).

Of course, on another level, Islam is also structured by the recognition that there will always be strife until the eschatological End of History. So Islam's pursuit of an anti-national unity is also, paradoxically, a zealous participation in the Us-vs.-Them division until the end of time. To put the Islamic paradox in a nutshell: in fighting and trying to eliminate division in the name of their supremacist vision of unity, Muslims find themselves perpetuating division because they must remain vigilant to the fact that there will apparently always remain "enemies" of Islamic unity until the last days.

Posted by: Television at June 28, 2006 11:16 PM

TV-

And constitutional (small "c") totalitarians hate competition.

Posted by: profitsbeard at June 29, 2006 1:30 AM

Like every Arab dictator, this Amr Moussa guy is still around. He deserves only exposure and ridicule.
Exposure so that more people know the snake.
Ridicule because logic does not work with his kind.

Posted by: The Pig Loving Maldivian at June 29, 2006 9:22 AM

Islam: A False Religion
Religion/Amil Imani
April 22, 2006
“In science it often happens that scientists say, you know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken, and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion”. - Carl Sagan

As has been said, if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. Islam in general, forbids lying. The Quran says, "Truly Allah guides not one who transgresses and lies." Surah 40:28. In the Hadith, Mohammed was also quoted as saying, "Be honest because honesty leads to goodness, and goodness leads to Paradise. Beware of falsehood because it leads to immorality, and immorality leads to Hell." However, this has not been the case in Islam. Islam is based on big lies and contradictions.

The biggest scam in Islam, especially Shi’a Islam is perhaps the notion of “Taqqiyeh”, an immoral tactic to lie for a good cause and later retract your words. (The belief that the end justifies the means) Islam is all about schemes, war and violence.

Prophet Mohammed was an extremely violent man, a man of war. Historically, Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses. The opposite is true of Prophet Muhammad. That is why we see so many suicide bombers in our era. They simply are following what the prophet of Islam had planned for them. Islam rewards those who become martyrs with 72 virgins. So sex is what the Arab Muslim murderers die for. It is all about sex. This must tell us a lot about the prophet’s own appetite for sex. He did not spare anyone; even 9 year old girls were not immune to his sexual wrath. Worshiping a sex-maniac and a child molester? I think NOT.

Muslims are true victims of Islam. However, they fail to realize that Islam is a cult, and the prophet was a demon, possessed by a huge sexual appetite. Yes, true Muslims firmly believe, that those who die in the act of killing the infidels (Christians, Jews and other non-believers) will not only gain entrance into heaven, but will be greeted by 72 virgin women--most likely, Seventy-Two 9 year old girls.

Being politically correct has back fired and the world seems to be taken hostage by the Islamic fanatics. The more politicians give in and declare Islam as a peaceful religion, the more they give the Muslim fanatics impetus to harass and intimidate people of the host countries where they have been given shelter to live.

Galileo said: "I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them."

The statement above was true then as it is true today. God has bestowed upon humans many different senses, including “intelligence” so that we use them for a better life. The senses he has given us should lead us to enlightenment and prosperity, not the other way around. Is it possible that the almighty has given these treasures to only a few people and abandoned the rest of his creatures in bewilderment?

Intelligence is discerning between true and false or the real and illusory. Islam ultimately defines the real nature of intelligence as coming to realize the absolute nature of Allah and the relativity of all else that is other than He. The Qur'an calls those who have gone astray from religion as those who cannot think, 'la ya'quilun', those who cannot use their intelligence correctly.

It is true that all religions are founded on fear. Fear of the unknown. Fear of death. However, throughout the years, many of the world religions were able to find ways to reform themselves, but NOT Islam. Islam prides itself on having remained unchanged. The Islamic Revolution in Iran presents a clear image of Islam. We do not need to go back to 1400 years ago and see what the prophet of Islam did. We can see a total replica in the words of his disciples, Ayatollah Khomeini, and the new selected president of Iran, Mr. Ahmadinejad. That is how Islam advanced rapidly around the world, with terror and fear.

“Quran says; kill, imprison! Why are you only clinging to the part that talks about mercy? Mercy is against God. Mehrab means the place of war, the place of fighting. Out of the mehrabs, wars should proceed, just as all the wars of Islam used to proceed out of the mehrabs. The prophet has [had] sword to kill people. Our [Holy] Imams were quite military men. All of them were warriors. They used to wield swords; they used to kill people. We need a Khalifa who would chop hands, cut throat, stone people.”

“In the same way that the messenger of God used to chop hands, cut throats, and stone people; in the same way that he massacred the Jews of Bani Qurayza because they were a bunch of discontented people. If the Prophet used to order to burn a house or exterminate a tribe, that was justice.” Ayatollah Khomeini.

Many Islamic scholars vow that Islam is a religion of logic, wisdom, moderation and peace. They vow that Islam invites people towards insight and knowledge and uplifts the position of women in society. This is far from the truth. Islam cannot stand what is logical and it does not invite people towards insight, but entraps humans with a deadly poison. Once one becomes Muslim, there is no way out.

Islam is about forcing women to wear the “hejab” the symbol of backwardness, stupidity and fanaticism. Women are second class citizens in the Muslim world. The prophet Muhammad takes his 9 year old wife to bed. What kind of man, not to mention a prophet of God, would commit such horrible act of pedophilia? The Quran says women are to be beaten by their husbands, yet Muslim women apparently are fine with this violence, or they could not wait to divorce Islam and run away. Quran says four wives are allowed but Muhammad had at least 20 or even more. They say, in paradise, women are chained in different areas for men's pleasure.

Islam definitely is not compatible with logic and democracy. As a matter of fact, Islam is against liberty and freedom. The problem with the Islamic scholars is that they are in denial that the genie is out and now it is way too late to put it back in the bottle.

Khoshroo Gholamali, Deputy Minister for International and Legal Affairs of the Islamic Republic at the Munich Conference on Security Policy said, “Islam’s prime objective is to strike a balance between Islamic tenants and democratic mechanisms. The extremists have manipulated, misconstrued, and tried to hijack Muslim tenants.”

What Mr. Gholamali said in the conference is misleading and untrue. What Mr. Gholamali did not talk about was the achievements of the Islamic republic for the past 27 years as a model country for the Muslim world. He did not mention about the Islamic executions, floggings, stoning and amputations of limbs in public since this peaceful religion invaded Iran.

He did not speak about the promotion of international and domestic terrorism through Islamic jihad, the creation of the Hezbollah who have conducted many terrorist attacks against innocent people and the promotion of Islamic fundamentalism. He did not say this moderate religion has oppressed the religious minorities in Iran and made them to flee their country. He did not mention how savagely the Islamists in Iran have raped innocent girls before executing them because Islam forbids executing virgins, so raping them was very Islamic. Yes, Islam is very democratic, but only for the Islamic terrorists.

Javid Amir in his article “Views of a Muslim-American” says “it must be understood that it is a mistake to imagine that Islam is an inherently violent and fanatical faith. Islam is a universal religion and there is nothing extremist, monolithic and anti-western about it. Doctrinally, Islam is as blameless as other of the great Universal religions.”

But, Mr. Amir, Islam ‘is’ an inherently violent and fanatical faith. It is all written in the holy book of Quran. So please stop lying to the population and face the facts. The problem with Islam lies not only in the holy book, but it lies in the life of the prophet himself. Muslims incessantly proclaim that the mainstream schools of thought misinterpret the holy book of Quran, yet they fail to recognize that the prophet of Allah lived such an unholy life himself and it is due to his narcissistic life and personality that his followers savagely follow his behavior.

It is due to Muhammad’s way of life that Muslims act barbaric and run amuck and burn cars and Embassies each time someone draws a picture of the holy prophet. Behaviorally, the prophet of Allah hallmarks a cult. In other words, we cannot compare Islam to other religions because due to the prophets narcissistic manners, Islam falls in the category of a cult, not a religion. Yes, Islam is a cult founded by an Arab man from Mecca in Arabia, by the name of Mohammed, who lived from 570-632 A.D. A huge problem is that cults are incredibly difficult to dismantle intellectually. The brainwashing is grandiose.

Indeed, the Prophet of Islam’s deeds and words, Islamic law and its interpretation, has always been totally intolerant and he practiced an unholy life. According to Muslims, the prophet of Islam was Khataman Nabiyyeen (The last prophet) and Allah will no longer send prophets. Well, if God chose a man like Muhammad who butchered, raped, terrorized, massacred and killed so many innocent people with the sword of Islam, then we are dealing with a terrorist God here.

Until we understand this and put a stop on this widely spread contagious disease, many innocent people will continue to die. The very survival of the civilized world is dependent upon our understanding that Islam is mankind’s greatest enemy.

Posted by: Jewish Girl at June 29, 2006 1:02 PM

Muslims particularly fear the U.S. because America actually wrote down our principles in a concise fashion and enshrined them, in such documents as the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. That makes it much harder for the Muslims to sell their agenda of sharia. Those stubborn Americans keep pointing to their Constitution and asking whether sharia is consistent with it. Americans' stubborn defense of their Constitution and Bill of Rights is a "nationalism" the Muslims don't know how to overcome.

The Muslim poster who calls herself "Naseem" said on this JW forum that to accommodate sharia, the U.S. Constitution must be modified. She's right. But the Muslims know that's going to be a very tough sell with Americans. The European Union, with its 500 page draft "constitution" that nobody can figure out and its bowing and scraping to multiculturalism, is a much softer ideological target.

Posted by: Steven L. at June 29, 2006 2:30 PM

When a Mayan or Aztec high priest stabbed his human sacrificial victim and ripped his heart out,offering it to the gods, he was not acting out of hate. Heck, it was 'religion.' He was doing his theologically mandated job.

So it is with Islam. They massacre our people and sacrifice them to their 365 gods that once sat in the Kaaba now cloaked within a single banner we all know as "al-lah." And bin Looney Tunes Laden has been acting as their high priest.

The ACLU and the 'liberal socialists' that enable Islam's human sacrifice practice (aka jihad or terrorism) around the world are the people who actually hate us.

Posted by: pythagoras at June 29, 2006 2:36 PM

Steven L.: Americans won't buy "sharia't"-- period. Not even when hell freezes over!!!!

Posted by: pythagoras at June 29, 2006 2:39 PM

(TV - the buried thread was finally laid to rest, after a 6 day wake of sorts. Just wanted to say thanks for the recommendations and I do plan to check them out. It makes sense to me to start with the shortest recommendation, for the reason that if the short argument doesn't hold water, it's unlikely that the longer one will do much to improve upon it, no matter how many words are used to flesh it out.)

Posted by: Caroline at June 29, 2006 9:17 PM

TV: "To put the Islamic paradox in a nutshell: in fighting and trying to eliminate division in the name of their supremacist vision of unity, Muslims find themselves perpetuating division because they must remain vigilant to the fact that there will apparently always remain "enemies" of Islamic unity until the last days."

Oh god. Why can't the peaceniks see this? Islam contains within itself the seeds of an endless dynamic for division and violence. This is so obvious. I am waiting for "peaceniks" with just a modicum of reality thrown in for good measure, to understand something so obvious. If they can understand the dangers of nuclear proliferation - then why can't they understand that Islam , as an ideology, is essentially a permanent WMD? I thought peaceniks despised the Us vs Them mentality? Well here it is in spades and apparently they have nothing to say about it at all! It no doubt seems paradoxical to many confused people, but those who oppose Islam (an ideology - not a race) wholeheartedly - ARE the modern peaceniks! They are the very people who are utterly appalled by Islam's calls to violence, calls made merely on the grounds that infidels don't share Muslims' religious beliefs. What is it about those who have so conspicuously claimed to be peaceniks, that they don't get something as obvious as the permanent division of the world into dar-al-Islam vs dar-al-harb, which is obviously a prescription for permanent WAR! One would think that the so-called "peaceniks" might at minimum have something intelligent to say about it. Say - starting with addressing the Koran itself - something they would surely do if they really and truly CARED about peace!

Posted by: Caroline at June 29, 2006 9:53 PM

"The Arab world is the friend of America. The question of hating America is not there. We've never hated America,"

I can feel the love. Hmmm, this guy better get this word to the New York Times and the rest of the liberals, who claim that the world hates America, because of George W. Bush.

The liberal media is wrong again. ;^)

Posted by: Jabba the Tutt at June 30, 2006 9:21 AM

Caroline,

If you want the pithiest Voegelin, I'd suggest the "Science, Politics and Gnosticism" paperback.

"I thought peaceniks despised the Us vs Them mentality? Well here it is in spades"

According to the Leftists, the West invented the Us vs Them mentality and maintained it the most egregiously of any other culture in history. According to them, non-Westerners are as incapable of that "Other" mentality as they are of racism.

Posted by: Television at June 30, 2006 10:17 AM