I feel there needs to be a record posted daily of all the atrocities and murders commited by Muslims just so the general public can see the chaos Islam is striving to achieve around the globe. What was posted above is a good beginning. Watch Board also sends out a weekly newsletter of such, however Jihadwatch is where I'm able to get most of my anti-terrorism news not published in MSM.

Posted by: Bonniea at September 7, 2006 12:08 PM

Bonniea:

Here you go:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at September 7, 2006 12:12 PM

THE GOOD THING ABOUT INTERNET IS..

WE HAVE A LOT OF WEBSITES.. DHIMMIWATCH, JIHADWATCH..

THESE ARE ONES WHICH SHOW WHERE THE WORLD IS HEADED TOO..

AS FAR THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE..

iBRAHIM HOOPER.. HE SHOULD BE SUED FOR WISHING AMERICA TO BECOME ISLAMIC.. HOW CAN ANYOONE LIVE AND BENEFIT FROM A COUNTRY'S CONSTITUTION AND GO AGAINST IT?

IS IT NOT TREASON? OR BETRAYAL?

WEBSITES LIKE THESE GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO LOVE FREE WORLD .. THOSE WHO LOVE AMERICA.. THOSE WHO LOVE THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOM GUARANTEED BY THE AMERICAN CONSITITUTION...

GUYS LIKE IBRAHIM WHO WANT TO CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION AND INCORPORATE SHARIA LAW SHOUDL BE SUED.. IF HE WANTS SHARIA LAW LET HIM GO TO SAUDI ARABIA OR PAKISTAN AND LIVE THERE..

PERHAPS HE CAN ENJOY THE 72 VIRGINS OR WHATEVER THAT HE IS AFTER..

WEBSITES LIKE THESE.. PLEASE DONT GIVE UP.. YOU ARE OUR VOICE.. YOU HELP US PEOPLE OF FREE WORLD A FORUM WHERE PEOPLE CAN KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON..

OUR ONLY WISH IS TO KNOW THE TRUTH AND TO PROTECT AND SUPPORT THE FREEDOM OF AMERICA AND DEMOCRACIES AROUND THE WORLD..

WE ARE GOING TO TALK AGAINST ANYTHING WHICH ENDANGERS THE FREEDOM OF THE WORLD.. FREEDOM OF DEMOCRACIES LKE THE USA..EVEN IF THAT DANGER COMES FROM ISLAM...

HOW ABOUT EMIGRATING TO A COUNTRY WHERE SHARIA LAW IS PRACTISED.. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WANT TO LIVE UNDER A SHARIA..?

LEAVE AMERICA AND DEMOCRACIES IF YOU DONT LIKE DEMOCRACY.. LEAVE AMERICA AND GET OUT.. IF YOU WANT TO LIVE ONLY UNDER A SHARIA..

Posted by: 4freeworld at September 7, 2006 12:14 PM

"If I happen to wax hateful and angry from time to time when it comes to the subject of Islam, that is the fault of Islam and its thriving terrorist establishment. . . . It is good to hate your enemies: We are going to have to kill them."

I have previously posted trying to get my JW/DW compatriots to avoid using this kind of language. This "waxing" only gives ammo to the enemy. At least clarifying the antecedant of "we" as in collective governments, not individuals or groups of vigilantes, and clarify who "your enemies" are. This is of course ignoring the dissonance caused to Christian JW/DWers at the reversal of the New Testament mandate to "love your enemies".

Don't get me wrong. CAIR is a terrorist sympathetic front organization and should be banned. Mohammed was a pedophile murderer. Islam is a false religion and Allah is Mohammed's fake hand puppet "god".

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at September 7, 2006 12:24 PM

Hooper is a despicable fraud. Even so-called "liberal" people are wondering why Muslims like Hooper and CAIR are so concerned about telling Infidels that "Islam is a religion of peace" when he should be telling that to the jihadists, including the Muslim mass murders in Sudan. They are desperate to stop the truth from becoming all too apparent about CAIR in particular and the teachings of Islam in general-but they can't stop it. It's too late for their tricks and half-truths to work anymore.

Remember: dogs don't bark at parked cars. This JihadWatch car is ready for victory at the INDY 500 and will leave Mr. Barking Hooper and CAIR in a cloud of dog dirt.

Posted by: Frank at September 7, 2006 12:27 PM

Those are all fairly recent posts that are somewhat passive when compared to some posts I have read. I guess they didn’t want to go so far as to bring attention to more extreme anti-jihadi sentiments posted here. Congrats to, was it Infidel Pride or Eisenhund, who was their #1 pick?

Posted by: tgusa at September 7, 2006 12:28 PM

What really bothers Hooper is that there are people who are really paying attention now to what is done in Islam's name and do not accept the non-sense he and other Muslim apologists are dishing out. People are discovering on their own the real nature of Islam and seeing that Hooper and his ilk at CAIR are nothing but liars trying to keep Infidels in the dark.

That list of Islamic attacks vs CAIR press releases is telling, even if it's no surprise to those of is who know about Islam. The fact is so called "moderate" Muslims are not on our side. If Islam ever becomes dominant, I'm sure we'll see their true colors.

Defeat Jihad!

Posted by: Proud Infidel at September 7, 2006 12:32 PM

Common sense says........what do they (muslims) expect? It's not the Boy Scouts, Brownies, Baptists or little old ladies blowing up, beheading, beating, rioting, burning and screaming "KILL THE INFIDEL, DEATH TO ISRAEL, DEATH TO AMERICA".

It's islam. THEIR cult. Don't blame us for having to watch our backs and be suspicious. When you people become civilized and willing to get along, change your war manual, maybe we won't suspect your actions as being dangerous to us. Until then, your actions speak WAYlouder than your words.

Posted by: freewoman at September 7, 2006 12:39 PM

It is good to hate your enemies: We are going to have to kill them."

I have previously posted trying to get my JW/DW compatriots to avoid using this kind of language. This "waxing" only gives ammo to the enemy.

Concerned Citizen, we are at war. Killing people is what happens in war. The jihadis know this, and any shock they claim to feel is strictly for the press and the apologists they depend on to put pressure on the country to stop the defense of our way of life.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 7, 2006 12:40 PM

I'm not surprised that this latest work from CAIR came from the Chicago Sun-Times. The city of Chicago is very liberal. Plus wasn't this the same paper that quoted Robert as delievering the "Funniest Line of the Year" in ISLAM: What The West Needs To Know? Don't even bother with them, Robert. A self respecting journalist would at least try a get a rebuttal, and not just view the website for five minutes before going to print. In fact, it wouldn't surprise if Hooper didn't point it out to him in the first place just to cover his own butt.

Patriot 1/17

Posted by: Patriot_1/17 at September 7, 2006 12:48 PM

That's how it goes. The jihadists are getting their feelings hurt because anti-jihadists say that they hate them and their violence. The anti-jihadists are getting their heads sawed off (see here for one example of thousands).

If CAIR were real (as opposed to taqqiyah dispensers), they would be focusing their attention on the "few radicals" who have misinterpreted and misunderstood and misrepresented that Noble Religion, that Religion of Peace (tm), and their murderer/pedophile/prophet.

Quote this comment, beeyatch.

Posted by: special_guest at September 7, 2006 12:51 PM

Oh yeah, why don't you tell Mr. Hooper to checkout the college blogging website, www.facebook.com, where the Largest Muslim Group on Facebook has many anti-sematic and anti-Israeli post on it.

Posted by: Patriot_1/17 at September 7, 2006 12:53 PM

How can you tell Douggie Hooper is flush these days with the $50 million CAIR just got from foreign Arab Muslims? He's been wearing a different embroidered beanie each day. Not to be confused with a yarmulke which is worn by real men from a real religion with real prophets. 48 of them

Posted by: dennisw at September 7, 2006 12:58 PM

Robert wrote:
If you attain this goal, would this not entail altering the Constitution to bring it in line with Sharia on questions such as women's rights, the rights of non-Muslims, and other matters? As such, was the poster wrong to say that such an aspiration "contravenes the constitution and espouses treason"? If you deny this, are you prepared to renounce publicly the aspects of Sharia that do indeed contravene the Constitution?

The imposition of Sharia in the U.S.A. would be a huge tragedy both for this country and the world. But it would not contravene the Constitution or be treason. The Constitution is a man-made agreement by the people on how they will be governed. An intrinsic part of this agreement is the ability to amend it. Someone who advocates amending the Constitution is not violating it. People have a right to advocate changes to the Constitution. People have a lot of rights to do things that are bad for our society. When a young woman turns 18 she has the right to sleep with anyone she wants to and get pregnant and have as many children out-of-wedlock as she wants to. Most high schools have classes that try to encourage them not to exercise that right. Not because they don't have it but because they do.

Currently the Muslim population of the U.S. is a little over 1%. If it ever gets over 51% we get the Sharia amendment to the Constitution. We need to adjust immigration and other policies to make sure that that doesn't happen. Not because people like Dougie Hooper do not have the right to advocate for Sharia but because they do.

Posted by: Malta_1565 at September 7, 2006 1:00 PM

The funniest thing is all the lawsuits that CAIR flamed out on recently. These clowns want to subject the American people to Mohammedan thought control.

Posted by: dennisw at September 7, 2006 1:02 PM

BTW, I posted this on the 4th.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/012985.php#c265421

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 7, 2006 1:05 PM

Let's do something about this. Let's send a note to the writer of the article with a CC to CAIR. Contact information is as follows:

jritter@suntimes.com, info@cair.com.

Let's be polite and yet firm. Maybe if they get a bunch of people speaking out it will catch their attention. Here is mine:

Dear Mr. Ritter,

As a frequent reader of the Jihad Watch site, I have to take issue with your article.

As the site gets so many comments each day, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for every comment to be read and screened. The site is open for anyone to speak their mind, within reason. Threats and things like that are not tolerated. Yet Mr. Hooper also neglected to mention that there are often hateful and violent messages left on the site by people in support of jihad. Why did he not give examples of those?

The purpose of the site is not the comments. The purpose of the site is to alert people to news items regarding the violence done in the name of Islam, the way the media handles such incidents, and most importantly, the specific teachings of Islam itself.

Your article would have been far more helpful if it had addressed some of the issues presented on the site. People are concerned about Islam due to the repeated acts of violence perpetrated by some of its followers. These people openly state that their religion is the reason for the things they are doing. Wouldn’t it be more helpful to investigate what Islam teaches in order to better understand why these things continue to happen?

How about a follow up interview with Mr. Spencer to get both sides and add some balance to the situation?

Respectfully,

Posted by: Mo at September 7, 2006 1:07 PM

Here is a message to Jim Ritter and Ibrahim Hooper and his fellow followers of submission from John Quincy Adams - just as applicable today as it was in 1829.

“Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he [Mohammed] connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST; TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE ...While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.”

“As the essential principle of his [Mohammed's] faith is the subjugation of others by the sword; it is only by force, that his false doctrines can be dispelled, and his power annihilated.”

Print it if you dare. Let's put the words of a founding father on trial.

Posted by: Kreuzueber Halbmond at September 7, 2006 1:07 PM

I just sent my email and received a 'thank you' from Mr. Ritter.

Please folks, write in. And do it politely. There is no reason to be nasty. I don't know this writer or his views, but perhaps he'll take it to heart and do another story.

This is the sort of thing we need to be involved in.

Posted by: Mo at September 7, 2006 1:20 PM

Malta 1565 said

Someone who advocates amending the Constitution is not violating it.

If a Muslim-dominated Congress decided to repeal the Bill of Rights and institute sharia, I believe the Supreme Court could still step in and block the change as being un-constitutional itself. There have been many laws passed, either by Congress or by referendum, that were stricken from the books. I hope we never have to find out.

Anyways, at 20% or 30%, the changes would no longer be made via the ballot box, but via the boxcutter or bomb.

Posted by: special_guest at September 7, 2006 1:26 PM

If CAIR wants, I could make an effort to post in a different style.

Something like this:

"19 people of unknown ethnicity, religion and political ideas have killed THREE THOUSAND AMERICANS (including many People from other Countries) on September Eleven 2001."

"Death to America and Death to Israel was the chant sung in an unknown country yesterday, by a crowd of unknown ethnicity, unknown religion and political ideas."

And so on...

I seriously doubt that the effect of these posts would be useful to CAIR goals...

Posted by: POITIERS-LEPANTO at September 7, 2006 1:27 PM

Hooper cannot complain about jihad because his funding would be cut off, his occupancy in CAIR's headquaters' office would be cancelled and his fellow muslims would put his life in jepardy.

The opposite would be (Hooper, I hope you are reading) is that Hooper is a soldier on one of the front lines that islam is fighting. Hooper is a soldier of islam that wants to see the flag of islam over the White House. Hooper, you are being successful in fooling many in the US with the use of the media, ACLU, and politicians, but I don't believe that you will continue to fool everyone. The day law enforcement, arrests you or deports you will be a great day of celebration for us Americans that love America.

I will buy the beer and only pork will be served in honor of your religion and your committment.

Posted by: alaskan1000 at September 7, 2006 1:27 PM

From acage:

http://www.acage.org/news/?day=09032006&id=0003

This article:
http://www.nysun.com/article/38350?access=839775

A man brazenly shoots his way into the Jewish Federation of Seattle, kills a woman, and wounds four others, three critically. As he opens fire, the alleged assailant shouts, "I am a Muslim and I'm angry at Israel," as if to indicate that his religious affiliation gives him permission to kill Jews.
In a second incident, Mel Gibson, a Hollywood director and actor, is arrested in Malibu on suspicion of drunk driving. He allegedly screams at the officer, "The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world," not realizing that nearly all today's wars are Islamic wars. He also asks his arresting officer, "Are you Jewish?"
While Jew hating is not a new phenomena, it has recently become the insult de riguer in many parts of our society. And it isn't just gun-toting rampagers or drunk celebrities — the hatred is evident in the streets. Nowhere is that clearer than in a third recent incident, in which Palestinian Arabs in the streets of San Francisco chant proudly in Arabic and without fear of being castigated, "The Jews are our dogs."
It happened at an anti-Israel demonstration in front of the Israeli consulate in San Francisco on Thursday, July 12, organized by a Palestinian group called Al Awda. The demonstration was loud, boisterous, and passionate. Suddenly, demonstrators began chanting in Arabic "Al Yahud Kelabna," "the Jews are our dogs."
As troubling as it is to hear such sentiment voiced on a street in America, it was even more distressing for me since it conjured up terrible memories of when I was a young boy growing up in Egypt. These memories included Egyptian mobs descending upon the Jewish quarter of Cairo chanting "Al Yahud Kelabna," followed by violence that left some Jews dead and injured and the community dazed.
06 Egyptian Muslim mobs no longer do this, but only because there is no longer an Egyptian Jewish community to speak of. We once were over 80,000. Today there are fewer than 50 Jews remaining in Egypt, according to one official tally. Indeed, once thriving Jewish communities in 10 Arab countries were likewise cleansed. Today, only about 5,000 Jews remain in the Arab Muslim world, mostly in Morocco and Tunisia. Arab sympathizers blame the creation of Israel, but in reality Middle Eastern Jewry began to deteriorate years before Israel was established.
At the beginning of the 20th century, Egypt was a much more cosmopolitan place than it is today. Whatever the broader ills of colonialism, Egypt under British rule was at least a place where Muslims, Jews, and Christians got along fairly harmoniously. But all this began to change as the Muslim Brotherhood, a radical Islamic group two of the offspring of which are Hamas and Al Qaeda, began agitating against both the British and the Jews.
Along with the rise of Arab nationalism and Arab independence, life for Jews in Egypt and other Arab countries became intolerable. All this started happening years before Israel was established. Within a 20-year period starting in 1945, nearly a million Jews were forced out of Arab countries. Being Jewish was criminalized in Egypt in the late 1940s. Other Arab states such as Iraq, Libya, and Syria, passed similar laws. Jews began facing iron walls of discrimination and harassment by the authorities. Most of us were dispossessed. Our schools, homes, synagogues, businesses, farms, and hospitals, were all confiscated by Arab governments. Our rich, 3,000-year-old culture and heritage was decimated. No trial, no jury, no justice.
The demonstrators in San Francisco last week attacked Jews, not Israel. They did it in Arabic, perhaps thinking that only they would be in on the "joke." They didn't count on a group of indigenous Middle Eastern Jewish "dogs" being present at the counter rally across the street. In Arab culture, dogs are considered filthy, dirty beasts, and negotiating with "dogs" is not an option. Jews were often identified this way because for centuries we were living as a subjected people under the dominant culture of Islam.
We were a "protected" minority living under a religious caste system where we had to wear identifiable clothes, pay a special tax, were not allowed to ride horses, were forced to live in ghettoes, and were subjected to other indignities. Our fortunes fluctuated with the benevolence of whoever was ruling at the time. When the ruler was fair and just, Jews prospered. Otherwise, watch out. Massacres of Jews by Arab Muslims were not unknown. While most people know how European Jews suffered, little is known of the Jews of the Arab world.
Today, the Middle Eastern Muslim world is the most anti-Semitic of any region. Much of their media — television programs, cartoons, editorials — promote the kind of anti-Semitism not seen or heard since the time when Hitler walked the earth. In many mosques, too, throughout the region, religious leaders who are quick to take offense over such matters as cartoons about Islam regularly teach the vilest anti-Jewish defamation.
The effects of this "education" are seen and felt even in San Francisco, where a crowd of young Arab men and women feel perfectly free to chant "Al Yahud Kelabna." As long as Palestinian and other Arab children are taught such dehumanizing hatred of Jews, there is no hope for them, and there is no hope for us. Peace in the Middle East will not come with the next ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, but only when tolerance, compassion, understanding, and respect for religious freedom become the dominant value in Arab society. When Arab young people honestly feel too ashamed to chant about Jews being "our dogs," then there will be real hope.

---
This is the future. This story was written by a man who lived it. Dhimmitude.

Posted by: Borg at September 7, 2006 1:30 PM

DISCLAIMER FOR CAIR SPIES READING THIS: Don't blame Robert Spencer or any other JW admin for my words - you can personally quote me Quantum_Infidel.

"CAIR is a terrorist-supporting front organization and that it seeks to overthrow the constitutional government of the United States"

CAIR cannot force a retraction of this statement above because CAIR would be exposed as exactly what Andrew Whitehead defines CAIR as...and why.

CAIR is an Islamic terror support front intent on destroying our way of life and imposing life sucking Sharia law upon us.

This fraud organization known as the Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR) really needs to come clean, be honest and call themselves for what they really are:

The Council of Islamic Terror Relations.

CAIR is an Islamic front group that morally (but not publicly - heh!) supports the subjugation and ultimate extinction of non-Muslim cultures.

CAIR is an Islamic terror front group that has had a significant number of CAIR employees found guilty of terror related offences inside the borders of the United States.

CAIR is founded and operated by fundamentalist MUSLIM terror supporters.

CAIR is a mortal enemy of the United States Constitution and and enemy the people of this soverign nation.

Posted by: Quantum Infidel at September 7, 2006 1:37 PM

http://hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=78018&page=2&highlight=cair

thats the original thread at hannity.com where i found the spreadsheat. below is the post.

Blackrain Blackrain is offline
quasi
Hannitized

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 4,612
Arrow Timeline of CAIR press releases vs Islamic attacks
dammit, I couldn't resist. I took an old timeline I had from religion of peace (which purports that Islam is not a religion of peace), updated it, and went through all 45 pgs of CAIRs press releases (purportedly proving they are a peaceful Islamic religious group without bias).

First I took the ROP excel file, went to their site copied and pasted each of their 5 timeline individually to MS word, then copied each individually to notepad txt files, then copied those individually to excel, organized them with my old one, changed the colors to highlight new vs old stuff, then finally did a sort.

Next I went to the CAIR site, copied and pasted all 45 pages of their press release list (each individually) to notepad. Saved as txt file. copied to excel, added color to differentiate what I was doing, did a sort by date decending, and then finally imported into the updated ROP excel file.

SO, this timeline is not cleaned up, has BS press releases in there and some questionable Islamic terror attacks, and comes from only two sources.

BUT, it is revealing.

(I think this gets me into the internet geek squad)

EDIT
ya know, when I was doing that timeline, I couldn't help but notice CAIR's press releases regarding Kerry and the 04 election....how he had overwhelming Muslim support.

Guess that didn't help somehow. huh, can't figure that one out.

and heres a link to the spreadsheet

http://www.scottmalensek.com/SAMPENDER/Islamic%20attacks%20vs%20CAIR%20press%20releases.xls

Posted by: jimmytheclaw at September 7, 2006 1:41 PM

What I got from the article is that, of the four individuals named by Jihad Adam, the only one worked over in the article is our host. Pretty impressive achievement. The Publisher must be very happy.

Keep talking Ibrahim, keep talking.

Posted by: limes at September 7, 2006 1:48 PM

"Islam is not only a cult, it's a political movement. As such it contravenes the constitution and espouses treason."

As for the other posts you quoted, do you deny that Islam is a political movement? After all, did you yourself not say: "I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. But I'm not going to do anything violent to promote that. I'm going to do it through education." If you attain this goal, would this not entail altering the Constitution to bring it in line with Sharia on questions such as women's rights, the rights of non-Muslims, and other matters? As such, was the poster wrong to say that such an aspiration "contravenes the constitution and espouses treason"? If you deny this, are you prepared to renounce publicly the aspects of Sharia that do indeed contravene the Constitution?

All this is well and good, but this debate is about more than merely CAIR - we should avoid giving them the bloated importance that they don't deserve (beyond being investigated from treason and being outlawed as a hostile organization, similar to the CPUSA or Aryan Nation). Even if CAIR wasn't any of the things listed above, that doesn't make the original contention about Islam false. After all, Jihad is not something restricted to the US - we see it in the Mid East, Indian subcontinent, Europe, East Indies, Africa and the Americas.

In fact, CAIR's owns activities from the above list amply demonstrate that they are more about supporting Jihad worldwide:

6/29/06: CAIR-CAN Seeks Freedom for Rights Activist Held in China

6/29/06: CAIR: U.S. Muslims Condemn Kidnapping of Palestinian Officials

7/1/06: CAIR-Chicago Meets with Delegation of Danish Youth

The first item above was related to a Uygar separatist movement, the second was related to a movement to destroy Israel and either expel Jews and Christians from the region, or enslave them under Islamic rule. Hardly anything to do with relations between the American and Islamic communities, as the organization's name suggests.

Why doesn't CAIR simply focus on making American Muslims - both immigrants and converts - compatible with the rest of American society (similar to Singapore Muslims), instead of focussing on events outside the US with position statements that very often run contrary to US interests?

That's a rhetorical question - don't answer that!

Posted by: Infidel Pride at September 7, 2006 1:48 PM

It will be interesting to see the CAIR end-game on this one.

Obviously, they chose the quotes for a reason; and specifically chose the Chicago Sun-Times to launch this venture for specific reason.

I wonder if the Chicago Sun-Times allowed the NAZI party the same lime light during WW2?

What is telling is that fact that CAIR can exist at all in the US; and given the notoriety and general reputation of their high level members, equally telling is their influence with the American government -- specifically, why are they allowed to have any input on how security forces are trained?

Islam is feared and hated because of what is written in the koran and what was taught by their prophet.

What other religion in the world advocates the beheading of individuals who refuse to join except islam?

And if that is NOT a teaching of islam; then why do so many people who claim to be members, say that it is?

Is there any other religion in the world that takes hostages; hijacks airliners; hijacks ships; beheads people; and does them in the name of their respective god as prescribed in their 'holy books' but for islam?

Does CAIR deny this is so or can it demonstrably show that islam does not hold exclusive claim to these kinds of activities?

Posted by: witness at September 7, 2006 1:51 PM

Excellent analysis Robert. It's revealing why so few of the apologists for islam's intolerance and crimes (all in the name of their jealous, bloody allah) do not take you on directly. They can't.

Posted by: alexon at September 7, 2006 1:51 PM

Quantum Infidel

I endorse your views, and am happy to be tarred and feathered by the same brush.

Yours Infidelly

Posted by: Infidel Pride at September 7, 2006 1:51 PM

To be sure, CAIR is indeed a front organization.The good news however is that the word is being spread and they are being exposed for what they are in spite of the likes of J.Ritter, who gives "aid and comfort" to their cause. I have no doubt though but that they have a high profile on the FBI's radar screen, and that has to make them a bit nervous.

Posted by: krkrjak at September 7, 2006 2:16 PM

Re; "Quantum Infidel

I endorse your views, and am happy to be tarred and feathered by the same brush.

Yours Infidelly

Posted by: Infidel Pride"

IPride-

I too endorse the views, though I am not prepared for the honor bestowed because of the endorsement.

Posted by: Frank at September 7, 2006 2:17 PM

The key to undoing the potential damage CAIR and its terrorism elite ilk is now attempting to inflict on Jihad Watch lies in exposing the Taqiyya, Hudna, and Hudaibiya concepts taught by the Kuran.
Once it is made clear what Islamic teachings are with regards to disinformation campaigns (which is what 'taqiyya' and the other deceit tactics are in essence), undermining CAIR's media asaults should be a piece of cake. Muslims are forbidden to tell the truth to non-Muslims about their 'religion' or anything else for that matter. Muslims are going to start breaking down and violating Islamic law held sacred in the Kuran now (of all times) and tell us the truth? Why would they? And why would we (or should we) believe them? They're at war with us (it's called 'jihad'). CAIR and the terrorist elite can not win Islam's jihad against Americans by telling the truth to the enemy (which is what Muslims have long considered Americans to be).
If CAIR and its terrorism elite ilk are STILL trying to play the "Islam is peace" card, THAT claim can be demolished by a single sentence: "Islam's 14 centuries of jihad warfare render its claims of peacefulness fiction" which as we all know, they do.
However, I am starting to suspect that the reputation of Islam in the United States has been tarished to the extent that not even lavish, PR campaigns mounted by CAIR and its terror elite or the useful idiots of the left can restore it.

Posted by: pythagoras at September 7, 2006 2:21 PM

To IBRAHIM HOOPER,

Since you read this blog.

I came to this website already hating Islam. WHY? Because every day I turn on my news or see worldwide reports on the internet of the evil that Islam causes.

I watch as muslims who are supposed to be 'moderate' remain silent...either because they do not want to disagree with terrorism or because they are frightened by other 'peaceful' muslims!

Your false evil faith makes me sick. The nice thing about this site is that it keeps me up to date on your sneaky plans and tactics to try to force your evil religion down our throats.

I will NEVER convert to your false religion. What I believe completely contradicts what you believe. My religion does not go around trying to kill others, force others to convert via machine guns or swords.

You have come to a CHRISTIAN nation. If you do not like it, take your stinking religion and leave. If you are incapable of living in peace, speaking out against terrorism, showing respect for others rights to have their own faiths that differ from yours....then you should go back to your wonderful Middle East where everything is so perfect. After all, if it is such a wonderful religion and muslims are such wonderful peaceful people then why are you not living over there?

Maybe it's because you know that where you are from is horrible. We know it. So stop trying to ruin America. If you don't love American...leave.

Posted by: The Goobs at September 7, 2006 2:24 PM

actually Mr Spencer this is an organized effort.

I direct your attention to this site from the Arab News the Saudi English site to their sister site "arab Veiws"

Is this article

http://www.arabview.com/articles.asp?article=683

Bush Will Never Get It
Khaled Al Maeena
Editor-in-Chief Arab News. Senior columnist, Asharq Al-Awsat, Al Madina, Urdu News, Gulf News
An Italian friend of mine recently telephoned to ask whether Islam was a fascist religion. I wondered why he had asked such a question until of course he gave me the explanation that anyone these days could have guessed.

“Well,” he said, “we have all heard US President George W. Bush use the phrase ‘Islamic fascists’ — to say nothing of equally defamatory expressions used by his colleagues and associates. Because of who uttered the phrases, they were naturally given wide circulation.”

Well, I told him not to worry. Because first of all, Bush has no idea about Islam; he is unable to make the imaginative leap that would enable him to understand what Islam means, how it is practiced or why it is of such vital importance to people all over the world.

My Italian friend was in agreement with what I said but he still wanted to know why I thought Bush had used that particular phrase at this particular time.

“Well, let’s start from the beginning,” I said. “Mr. Bush used the word ‘crusade’ in the terrible confusion after Sept. 11, 2001. What Mr. Bush knew about the Crusades and how they are viewed — rightly or wrongly — in the Middle East is another matter but his use of the word was widely criticized in the Western press. Obviously somebody knew something that Mr. Bush did not. And then there was Mr. Ashcroft, Mr. Bush’s born-again Christian attorney general. He made the most ridiculous and absurd statement about Islam — that it was a religion in which God required you to send your son to die for Him. Anyone with even the most rudimentary knowledge of Islam would have known that statement was completely false. And then we had Lt. Gen. William Boykin of the US Army who, while in uniform, made public statements about Islam, which outraged both Muslims and non-Muslims all over the country. The list goes on so I am not in the least surprised that Mr. Bush should have now got himself a place on it.

“At the same time, let us not lose sight of the fact that the neocons are upset, very upset in fact. Thirty-six days of Israeli attacks in Lebanon failed to produce the desired results, the expected results, the results that Washington had been told would come. Hezbollah was not eliminated — far from it in fact; Hassan Nasrallah was not killed and the two captured Israeli soldiers have still not been released. As the Americans might say, ‘The situation is back to square one.’ Or, as I see it, quite a long way before square one.”

“Why then,” my Roman friend asked, “does Mr. Bush support Israel so blindly and uncritically?”

“Well let me tell you what I read some years ago. In 1998 Mr. Bush as governor of Texas went to Israel. He went with Mathew Brooks, a director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, and three other Republican governors. On the trip, Mr. Bush met Ariel Sharon and Sharon took him on a helicopter tour of the occupied territories. Brooks says, ‘If there’s a starting point for Bush’s attachment to Israel, it’s that day in late 1998 when he stood on a hilltop, eyes brimming with tears and heard his favorite hymn read aloud.’ He brought Israel back home in his heart.

“In a speech in 2005, Mr. Bush recalled his helicopter tour with Sharon. ‘It’s interesting how history works, isn’t it?’ he said. ‘The future president of the US and the future prime minister of Israel were flying across that country, with him describing to me how to keep Israel secure.’

“In addition to undoubtedly being brainwashed on that trip, who knows how many other ideas and plans Sharon planted in Mr. Bush’s head? There is, however, another major problem — those in the Republican Party with ideological and political connections with Israel. For example, the person who coined the oft-used and oft-condemned phrase ‘Axis of Evil’ was a strong supporter of Israel. Many in the US administration share the same beliefs. And this is according to US media reports.”

Personally, I don’t believe that the religious affiliations of those high in government should be a political issue. Unless of course, it interferes with the way they do their job and keeps them from working in what is perceived by the majority to be the national interest. I am certainly not a believer in any of the all-too prevalent conspiracy theories but I do believe a large number of problems are created by certain people who are well entrenched in the administration and whose sole objective seems to be to create misunderstandings and confusion between the good people of America and the world’s Arabs and Muslims. Also, it is worth pointing out here that the Muslim world was always allied with the US in its fight against communism. Despite Russia’s many overtures, Muslims rejected communism.

I was very pleased that at its last meeting, our Saudi Council of Ministers expressed dissatisfaction with the unfortunate phrase, “Islamic fascists,” and its negative and detrimental effects. People here must realize — most of them do — that the Jews rant and rave and go into virtual hysteria if there is even the mildest criticism, not of their religion but of Israeli policies in the occupied lands. No matter what the atrocity or how bloody and savage it is, Israeli actions are not be condemned or rebuked. To do so is to commit what has become one of the worst sins in our modern world — to be guilty of anti-Semitism.

The reasoning is that we must accept whatever Israel does since to question it would be anti-Semitic (we Arabs are just as Semitic as the Jews!) and anti-Semitism inevitably leads immediately and directly to a Second Holocaust!

We should learn from the most avid supporters of Israel and how they react to criticism.

Any insult to us should be met with the highest-profile media backlash, though of course we must take the greatest care to prevent any kind of violent response. We should employ the same tactics as our adversaries since those tactics have served them well. Why should they not serve us just as well?

And our intellectuals, those who are well educated and well informed and who understand social and political nuances, let them reply. Make so much noise and commotion that no one will dare to use such an offensive phrase as “Islamic fascists.”

Posted by: Bill A at September 7, 2006 2:24 PM

What a whining, sniveling little man Hooper is. (He looks a right smug prick). And Ritter must have spent all of 2 minutes doing his job by culling the standard "views on jihadwatch are unmoderated" to fit his little piece. While some of the posts cited are brusque, there is no context given. These posts were not made in a vacuum. Perhaps these posts were in response to yet another atrocity committed at the hands of jihadis.
Anyway, as the saying goes, there is no such thing as bad publicity and I hope people come here and keep an open mind.

Posted by: TooBad at September 7, 2006 2:25 PM

When Sheema Khan isn't endoctrine the RCMP on how to be sensitive when arresting those peaceful
Muslim criminals, she opines about Muslims being so predisposed to violence that our Foreign Policy actually set-off these Automatons
to embrace murdering God's children for Allah and the Islamic cause for Global Shariah-Law as an Islamic World.

Here's her latest rant to excuse away the Islamic Terrorism even though she used to claim
violence had nothing to do with True-Muslims , I refer to her as representing CAIR because she cites events that happened while she was employed at CAIR-Canada .
CAIR loves to distance themself from ex-yahoo's that worked for them , but she was ,and still is a Pro-Sharia Whahabbi Muslim that supported all 5 of the Muslims held for Terrorism links.
************************************************

*Former CAIR-CAN chair argues in favour of placating Islamic extremists*

The former chair of the Canadian chapter of the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations, Sheema Khan, argues in today’s issue of the Globe and Mail that Western democracies are wrong to dismiss Muslim grievances over foreign policy as a chief cause for homegrown Islamic terrorism.

Worse - though she contends government policy “should not be held hostage to violence” - by pleading for what she calls a foreign policy with "human dignity" which would “serve the best interests of Canada first (not foreign nations) both here and abroad”, it is clear Ms. Khan is in fact implicitly arguing that Canada should appease Islamic extremists by distancing itself from our American allies and Israel’s sister democracy lest Islamic terrorists target Canadians at home.

We cannot help but wonder whether Ms. Khan also believes any changes to Western foreign policy would have prevented the slaughter of over 100, 000 Algerians at the hands of Islamists, the persecution of Christians throughout the Islamic world, the large-scale massacre of non-Arab Muslims in Darfour by Sudanese Arabs, the killing of non-Muslims in southern Thailand or the on-going Jihad in the Philipines.

Canadians expect from this country’s Muslim establishment that it serve as a counterweight to the extremists driven by an ideology of hatred that paints the world as the millenarian struggle between a conquering Islam and its alleged non-Muslim foes. Not as a - perhaps unconscious - fig leaf for their alleged political grievances.

**************************************************

Posted by: ala-sux at September 7, 2006 2:36 PM

I will try and contain myself. Dear mr. hooper, kindly take your buttocks back to the magical kitty-litter land of the middle east, where no doubt your heritage is, so as you may enjoy sharia law as opposed to democracy.

Posted by: mustang65 at September 7, 2006 2:41 PM

Mr. Spencer,

I will say exactly how I feel and why. At one time I didn’t know anything about Islam/Muslims. I had heard it mentioned very few times. Then came 9-11 and I started to read all I could find from different parts of the world. I didn’t fully understand what or why all this is going on. Then I found your site and read very carefully your writings. The more I read, the more I began to understand that there is a very serious threat to all countries, Muslim included. The came the be-headings, one of whom I believe could be a relative of mine. With all this, Mr. Spencer, you don’t “preach” hate against anyone but rather condemn the injustices, murders, and hate that these people are spreading. I have tried to approach the same way of thinking, but when these people continue to commit these crimes and then declare themselves as being “peaceful” and all the other lies they come up with, I have to say I have the opinion as all who post on this site who have “extreme” opinions. I try and keep my feelings and opinions in check, but it appears to me these people same as declared war and an enemy of us then they will reap consequences. I respect and value you, your staff, and this site and will try and contain expressing my most “extreme” opinions. Keep up the good work.

Posted by: THSIMJ at September 7, 2006 2:42 PM

BTW Al JAzeera is now showing a clip of a pre 911 meeting between Osama and some of the hijackers

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060907/ap_on_re_mi_ea/al_jazeera_bin_laden_tape

Posted by: Bill A at September 7, 2006 2:44 PM

I just wrote this to the journalist

Re: Your article on Jihad Watch.

What you fail to understand is that many who find the board are already angry by the islamic violence that we see in the world day to day. We see the fruit of Islam and yet our politicians keep saying it's a peaceful religion. Islam has many times of late threatened Israel's very existence...chanted Death to America, and many other things which most people that we know label as evil ......not peaceful.

What you read on Jihad Watch is anger which is boiling up in America against a religion that is doing its best to force itself on people who do not want it. A good example was the Fox News Journalists who were forced to convert at gunpoint. How peaceful is that?

What you should have asked in your interview is why this CAIR person never ''denounces' Islamic violence/terrorism when it happens in the world. Islamic terrorism is a frequent occurance. Denouncing people who recognise terrorism for what it is...is not the way to solve the problem.

Perhaps the guy from CAIR doesn't wish to bring attention to all the terrorism his 'peaceful religion' is producing. Whether he brings it to our attention or not...it is readily available via news agencies around the world. I'll bet he'd like the power of the nut in Iran....to stop us from being able to access information from around the world.

He's angry because people at Jihad Watch have a place to vent their anger at terrorism.

This person from CAIR would love nothing more than to take away our right to speak freely about how we feel about the things Islam is doing and has done. That is the goal. To shut down people's right to speak out against something they see as evil. As a journalist, this should be the very last thing you would want....to have our freedom of speech stripped away.

You mark my words.....the day will come sooner than you think, when Islam will be a real problem here in the US. It won't be about our foreign policies. It will be the result of their obsessive desire to force Islam on all of us. The desire to make the entire world Islamic. As nutty as this sounds....you mark my words. You will see the day and you'll remember that you were told about it ahead of time.

I would recommend that you interview Robert Spencer for balance. Get his thoughts and opinions. Unless of course you fear retailation from some 'peaceful muslim'.......similar to the journalist who just got beheaded for telling the truth about Islam.

Believe it or not...the only people your article has pleased are the muslims. The rest of us are getting sick of Islam. The good thing about your article is that it will drive more people to Jihad Watch to see what all the fuss is about. This in turn will educate more people on what Islam is up to. Thanks for that.

Posted by: The Goobs at September 7, 2006 2:56 PM

Look folks - I know this is totally totally OT, but you really do have to go here LOL x2:

http://shlemazl.blogspot.com/2006/09/sex-experiment.html

Gotcha!

BTW - I got the hat-trick from al Ghurardian. They seriously don't like it up 'em.

Posted by: Sir Henry Morgan at September 7, 2006 2:57 PM

Mr.Hooper l just sent an email to the editor Ritter who wrote your pathetic diatribe lament on Mr.Robert Spencer. Mr.Hooper you seem to be a regular joe born in the great USA, what made you hate youself so much that you would join a cult, that even if you tried to leave, you would be killed for that action? Mr. Hooper were you not literate enough to read the whole Koran,Hadiths and Suras to see that women and non muslims are threated as secound class citizens?
Lastly Mr. Hooper if you were so lazy and did not read the fine print on Islam, you cannot expect the rest of us (non-muslims ) to be as stupid and lazy as you were!

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at September 7, 2006 3:01 PM

Well, I wasn't expecting to get quoted in a major U.S. newspaper, but I stand by my words, despite the fact that they were printed without the full context of my statement.

"If I happen to wax hateful and angry from time to time when it comes to the subject of Islam, that is the fault of Islam and its thriving terrorist establishment. . . . It is good to hate your enemies: We are going to have to kill them."

I will for the record, say once more, what I stated originally in the first part of the paragraph that was quoted: Robert Spencer is in no way responsible for my statements.

I'm an educated American. I draw my own conclusions when given evidence and I've been drowning in "terror" for 5 years now. If you are expecting to create appeasing lemmings with groups like CAIR, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda and Hammas, allow me to break it to you blunty: it's not working.

What would Patton or Churchill say any differently than I have stated so clearly, over and over again?

Islam is the enemy. (The truth is ugly, I know, but somebody has to say it, and last I checked, I'm still protected under the Right to Free Speech.)

Posted by: Foehammer at September 7, 2006 3:02 PM

Hooper said he wishes he could dismiss such sentiments as fringe opinions. "But that's not the case."

Oh, if only this were true. We are on the fringe. But things are getting a little better. Over lunch I listened to an aghast wondering at the Sudan editor's head being sawed off by Sharia; Prager couldn't help but point out that Islam sure does get highjacked a lot. Hamas. Prez Mahmoud. Sudan. Hizbullah. Al Qaeda. Moslem Brotherhood. The list goes on ad nauseum.

610 * 623 * 732 * 1066 * 1215 * 1453 * 1492 * 1683 * 1928 * 1938 * 1948 * 1996 * 2001

The best defense is a good offense. I like to think of the always-offended Hoop as the Don Coryell of the Islamic War. He's not afraid to chuck the bull up there cuz he knows the obeisant reporters will scramble to receive his pass.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at September 7, 2006 3:12 PM

special guest wrote: "Anyways, at 20% or 30%, the changes would no longer be made via the ballot box, but via the boxcutter or bomb."

Exactly. Muslims could never take over a civilization as deeply, broadly and richly ensconced as America and the West of which she is the vanguard, without at some point having to resort to physical violence -- and lots of it. This fear of Islam taking over like a giant sponge using non-violent osmosis is a ridiculous fear. Violence would have to be a necessary ingredient.

Posted by: remote_control at September 7, 2006 3:14 PM

Between Mark Steyn's brilliant essays and dougie's slanders, let's hope the Sun-Times is steering a few more Chicagoland readers this way.

Posted by: Infidel33 at September 7, 2006 3:16 PM

One thing about Mr. Hooper. He at least is consistent in his pursuits.

Also remember he is incentivized;

1. He can never leave his religion of choice under pain of death. Nice religion that ensures loyalty in this fashion.

2. He probably picks up one fine salary cheque for his lying, deceit, distortion and economy with facts and tacit support for terrorist's. None of these things are sinful when a Muslim is dealing with non-Muslim as we already know.

However, for him to deride other people their right to criticise Muslim’s and Islam.

Well. I have one word for him, HYPOCRITE.

Posted by: Turbinehead at September 7, 2006 3:27 PM

CAIR!!!

KISS MY WICCAN ASS!!

Islam is for FREAKS

People that HATE LIFE

IMAGINE A WORLD WITHOUT ISLAM!!

SO MOTE IT BE

)0(

Posted by: solsticewitch13 at September 7, 2006 3:41 PM

No amount of PR and mere words can change the testimony of the actions of Muslims. It's too late for CAIR or any other Muslim organization to whitewash Islam. While our political leaders in the U.S. are trying to hold the lid on a logicial response to the presense of Muslims and Islam in the U.S., the majority of non-Muslims in the U.S. are getting a clear understanding of Islam--that we are the targets of Muslims and that the writings of Islam tell Muslims to subjugate and attack us. That is clear. The actions of Muslims speak louder than their words.

Posted by: Abby at September 7, 2006 3:41 PM

Thank you Robert and KillHankKill. I've saved the site to my favorites and will forward to my friend who can't seem to realize the danger Islam poses to us and Western societies. By the way Robert, you looked quite dashing and handsome on Glenn Beck's show regarding 8/22. I keep hoping MSM will feature you as a guest more often to wake up the rest of the world and thank you for JihadWatch where we can all share our views and the information you provide.

Posted by: Bonniea at September 7, 2006 3:42 PM

It appears CAIR and other apologists have a conditioned knee-jerk reaction to any criticism at all of their belief-system. They completely ignore what inhuman horrors their belief-system had done to the world, what it still intends on doing with its jihadi ambitions, while simultaneously crying for sympathy because these are criticized, playing the pathetic victim. This is their conditioning, so they cannot respond in any other way. If we criticize them at any level, they will cry. Ignore them. Nothing will change until they reverse this childishly perverse pattern and speak out against the horrors. But this never happens.

Criticism is not against them personally but against their actions. Do they understand the difference? Do they understand anything at all beyond their pathetic crying that their belief-system is being criticized for all the murderous criminal activities of which it is guilty? If their conditioning leaves them blind to their own faults, then we can expect no better from them. When they learn to take responsibility for their actions of their criminal war-cult, then perhaps we can give them equal value for their words. Until then, ignore them, because they will always respond with the same mechanical conditioning. If anything is said against their murderous belief-system, or its founder cult-leader, they will immediately call out they are being singled out for unfair criticism. They can't help it, like machines can't help it. The unfairness is all their own, of their own doings, in perpetrating crimes against humanity. Where are their demonstrations against the horrors? Not a word.

Machines cannot be held responsible for their actions, and neither can these cult followers. Therefore, CAIR cannot be held responsible for its words or actions. It is conditioned to say and do how it had been programmed by its belief-system. When machines go bad, we dismantle them.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at September 7, 2006 4:52 PM

Make so much noise and commotion that no one will dare to use such an offensive phrase as “Islamic fascists.”

I too am deeply offended by use of the term Islamo fascist, but for a different reason.

If you're a Moslem, by logical deduction you are a fascist. This must be so based upon the Islamic scriptures.

Islamo fascist as a concept is like radical Islam and moderate Moslem, squeamish non sequiturs that imply good things about an ideology that has little or no good in it.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at September 7, 2006 4:55 PM

Make so much noise and commotion that no one will dare to use such an offensive phrase as “Islamic fascists.”

I too am deeply offended by use of the term Islamo fascist, but for a different reason.

If you're a Moslem, by logical deduction you are a fascist. This must be so based upon the Islamic scriptures.

Islamo fascist as a concept is like radical Islam and moderate Moslem, squeamish non sequiturs that imply good things about an ideology that has little or no good in it.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at September 7, 2006 4:55 PM

This ones for the CAIRorists out there.

Enjoy Mohamedans!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUiwe_R1p-M

Posted by: km at September 7, 2006 7:19 PM

Pardon me for jumping in without having read the other comments, but I have one kinda all-purpose answer to these criticisms of Jihad Watch by CAIR.

It is something like this: "CAIR, open up your web site to unmoderated or very loosely moderated comments for a few months. Then you can reasonably criticize other web sites with unmoderated or loosely moderated comment sections. Until then, be quiet."

Pilgrim

Posted by: Pilgrim at September 7, 2006 7:31 PM

Islamofascist CAIR Doesn't Like the Term "Islamic Fascist": FNC video, 8/14/6 http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/FN081406.php

CAIR Terrorist Apologist Blames Israel, FNC video, 8/12/6 http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/BG081206-2.php

Free Patriotic Corner Banners: http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/cb/

Posted by: Terror-Free Oil at September 7, 2006 7:32 PM

The accusations and examples by this talking head from CAIR are indeed quite disingenous and weak, since the entire spectrum of responses are revealed here at the comments section. You pretty much could make a case for this site being anti-ANYTHING by pulling out a few comments from thousands. Personally, I have been critical of more than Islam here quite a bit.

I really don't think the majority of US citizens take CAIR or any other TC/PC group who whines about how Muslims are mistreated seriously any more, since we hear next to nothing regarding what they are going to do about the Jihadists in their organizations. The incessant whining is heard more than their feeble encouragement to the US general population about how peaceful and pro-democracy and human rights that they are.

Now the goal should be to get more of the leadership of this country in step with the general population. Maybe I am dreaming.

Posted by: amana39 at September 7, 2006 7:33 PM

yes, please sue him

Posted by: charleston at September 7, 2006 7:51 PM

Alarmed Pig Farmer, l personally dont care what adjective they use with islam, anywhich way to let us know that islam is bad. Hooper be careful what you wish for, for you just might get sent to live with the Saudis, and see how perfect sharia is, oh that is after you get a sex change.

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at September 7, 2006 7:56 PM

Robert, you must ignore the charges coming from CAIR, and not give them front page news everytime they, or one of their agents, makes them. Any anti-islam site is an affront to Allah and is racist by default, so the very existence of jihadwatch can never be excused in their eyes, or even the eyes of the dhimmi readers of the MSM. So my advice is not to react to such charges, as they will come ad nauseum, and nothing you can say will mean anything to people who have yet to understand what we are all talking about.

What is good, however, is that CAIR gives you such a plug in a major newspaper. That will get people to visit to check things out for themselves. "Hmmmm, what's this about a hate site? Let me check it out." Then they will be hooked. Watch some new anti-jihad names pop up here in the next few days, thanks to CAIR. Don't forget to send Hooper a thank you note.

CAIR is incredibly stupid to give you such free publicity like that, but then again, muslims are, at their emotional core, stupid people.

There's my racist comment for the day.

Oh, and Hooper, you can quote me on that.

Posted by: August22 at September 7, 2006 7:57 PM

Robert:

I feel bad about Ibrahim hooper using one of my statements against you. It's a bit embarrassing.

Of course, the unctuous Mr. Hooper is paid to whitewash the crimes and imperialism of islam. Slandering anybody who dares to describe "the theology and ideology of jihad" accurately is part of his job description. He'll continue to smear you no matter what is written in your comments section, so his antics don't surprise me.

I AM surprised that he stopped eating long enough to give Ritter an interview. How he got so morbidly obese without eating pork is beyond me. He's so porky, he could take the Blue ribbon at the Iowa State Fair. That has got to be haram.

Ironically, some of the people who read Ritter's story will agree with my comment about islam's political agenda contravening the Constitution.

Hooper better get used to such "fringe opinion." Americans are starting to educate themselves about islam. The fact that he singles you out for attack so often means your education effort is reaching a lot of people. He's scared, and it shows.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at September 7, 2006 8:00 PM

There are plenty of other sites in existence where much worse is said, and where that content comes straight from those sites' ownership. If CAIR wanted to find a "slam-dunk" example of "virulent" hatred on the internet for Mr. Ritter, they'd do much better at one of those.

But I suppose Hooper couldn't pass up the opportunity to take a potshot at Jihad Watch in the media when he had the chance: Unlike the aforementioned sites, we're clearly posing a problem for their attempts to monopolize the conversation about Islam.

Posted by: MarisolJW at September 7, 2006 8:11 PM

Call Reed D Rubinstein ( http://www.gtlaw.com/biographies/biography.asp?id=1768 ) and surgically remove the traitor’s balls, one at a time.

Posted by: Alert at September 7, 2006 8:15 PM

Malta 1565:

Attempting to impose sharia on an unwilling population contravenes the Constitution. Hooper and his islamopath pals aren't trying to put sharia on the ballot; they're trying to yoke us with it.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at September 7, 2006 8:16 PM

CAIR has been very helpful in drawing attention to Jihad Watch, let them keep jibber jabbering, it only helps the ratings here.

Posted by: DCWatson at September 7, 2006 8:21 PM

Hijab Hooper and Bin Laden, dueling it out this week for media coverage. One the one hand we have Hooper crowing for sympathy and crying foul here in the States while halfway around the world we see the release of a UBL/hijacker video.

What do these two seemingly unrelated events have in common?

They both feature men who support jihad as a method of advancing Islam;

They both highlight men who desire to see Islam achieve global hegemony;

They both play to the Islamists' greatest ally, the media;

And both represent the different approaches toward the domestic and foreign Islamist strategy of spreading the 'faith' of Satan's child molester... Ibrahim playing the 'woe is me' card and UBL starring as the militant sheik overlord.

I'm wondering though, Ibrahim, where was the article condemning Gadahn, UBL and his Bruce Lee-esque video, the London perpetrators, and on and on? Are CAIR's dollars devoted to bringing jihadists to justice? Or are you looking for jihadists with OJ while he hunts the real killers? Your silence and complicity in jihad make recruitment to the anti-Islamist cause as easy as finding a Katyusha in Dearborn. I hope we gain a thousand posters a day here.

Feel free to leave OUR country anytime bud. And take the other 3 million or so future internment candidates with you. We'll provide the barges.

Posted by: MadrassasippiBurnin at September 7, 2006 8:26 PM

I have said some things that have rubbed some people the wrong way; but not to have any of my comments cited by CAIR is a real disappointment.

Posted by: Pelayo at September 7, 2006 8:50 PM

solsticewitch13,
I have 4 of them...heh heh

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 7, 2006 8:58 PM

My email to Mr. Ritter w/ a cc to the CAIR info address someone posted above:

Mr Ritter,

I have been a reader of JihadWatch (and other blogs like it) for a couple of years now, and I take umbrage the points you make in your article.

First of all, I fail to understand why you would conduct an interview only with CAIR rep Mr. Hooper and not include Mr. Spencer because it makes your article look incredibly slanted and biased.

That said, I feel you do not understand the intent and purpose of websites such as JihadWatch.

Mr. Spencer performs an invaluable service to us 'infidels' here in the West, because he explains to everyday average people, using quotes from the Koran, Mohammed's hadiths, and other Islamic teachings I might add, exactly what Islam is about, the reasonings behind jihad, and why these people want to kill us. Without him, so many people would go on ignorant to the immense problem we face from Islam. Islam is not only a religion, it is a political movement (which is clear when you have the likes of Mr. Hooper claiming to want to see America run under Sharia law, as well as what the various jihadis claim, that they want to see Islamic rule across the globe) which seeks to replace the freedoms and equalities enjoyed by the civilized West. If you don't believe me, I urge you, for just one day, to read the postings by Mr. Spencer on JihadWatch to see what is REALLY happening in our world, and to have it explained using ISLAM'S OWN TEACHINGS. That is quite powerful, and frankly I understand why Mr. Hooper is so afraid for us to learn about Islam's teachings -- he knows once we are all educated as to what would happen to our way of life, our freedoms, under Islamic Law, the idea of Islam as the "Religion of Peace" will cease to exist and we will (finally) fight back.

One last thing, which I'm sure you are aware of -- JihadWatch readers post hundreds of comments a day, and it is clearly stated that these comments are not only unmoderated, but are also NOT endorsed by Mr. Spencer. He merely gives us a forum to express our discomfort and dislike for a religion with not a small number of followers who commit tens of terrorist acts a day in various parts of the world, all while claiming they are doing it for their God, Allah. Yes, we have a reason to be frightened and angry for we (the West) are being physically attacked and killed daily - and these attacks are not the sort of 'virulent rhetoric', profiling discomforts, and 'bias' that Muslims 'suffer'...

I'd much rather be on the receiving end of some harsh virulent rhetoric than the business end of a long knife anyday.

Posted by: JenBee at September 7, 2006 8:59 PM

Sometimes it's more useful to contact an editor or a publisher rather than a reporter, who has little motivation to change his behavior. However, editors and publishers don't particularly enjoy getting angry emails.

Chicago Sun-Times Editorial:
John Cruickshank, Publisher jcruickshank@suntimes.com

John Barron, Editor
jbarron@suntimes.com

Posted by: s at September 7, 2006 9:02 PM

A couple of interesting facts:

Don't forget the "email this entry" link at the bottom of every article here.

Jim Ritter has an email addy: jritter *at* suntimes.com

That is all, carry on.

Posted by: infidel4life at September 7, 2006 9:04 PM

I hope, Mr Spencer, that you have forwarded a copy of your reply, not only to Mr Ritter, but to the Publisher of the Chicago Sun Times, as well as the appropriate editor (Mr Ritter's boss)

Hooper is a despicable fraud. Even so-called "liberal" people are wondering why Muslims like Hooper and CAIR are so concerned about telling Infidels that "Islam is a religion of peace" when he should be telling that to the jihadists, including the Muslim mass murders in Sudan. Posted by Frank

Well this Jihad Watcher is, in comparison to the FREEPER mentality that seems to be a majority on JW/DW.. a liberal, leftist But I don't wonder why Hooper does what he does, I know why..he is acting strictly in accordance with the dictates of his precious ideology...err religion and emulating the "perfect man".. No mystery there.

By the way I'm only partly liberal and leftist, at other times I'm conservative and rightist.. depends on the issue, the circumstances and the personality of the person(s) with whom I must contend and tolerate.

Posted by: Nariz at September 7, 2006 9:12 PM

Nariz you must fight with yourself all the time? but at least you have the islam thing correct.. too bad more liberals dont feel the same way.. l mean you would think it natural that liberated women would want to see their allies in muslims lands get rid of that burka! and liberals would want to get rid of tyrants..oh well they are misguided fools, they dont realize that islamofacists would kill them first.

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at September 7, 2006 9:26 PM

>>solsticewitch13,
I have 4 of them...heh heh

Posted by: Carolyn2 >>>

EXCELLENT Carolyn2.

Send the link out to all your brigades.

Everybody,, send this to ALL the folks you know.

The EXPLODING PIG PEN,,

www.susbloodlabs.com,, is NOW the OFFICIAL Pen of NorthEast Intelligence Network,,

http://www.homelandsecurityus.com

If everybody has a EXPLODING PIG BLOOD PEN,,
these sick, perverted, TWISTED ASSCLOWNS,,

WILL NOT GET THEIR VIRGINS!!

NO VIRGINS FOR TERRORISTS!!!

KISS MY WICCAN ASS CAIR!!!

Posted by: solsticewitch13 at September 7, 2006 9:39 PM

Solsticewitch13, are you heavier than or lighter than a duck?

Quranic science demands an answer.

Prophète Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at September 7, 2006 10:47 PM

As most of you here will be aware, I post to this board from the UK - sometimes, if I have a moment, from work but mostly from home.

Earlier today I was called into the office of the legal advisor to the company for which I work and was ordered to stop posting to this site or, and I quote, "any other right-wing or islamophobic American or European site or any site that purports to offer comment or criticism of or about islam" from my work because doing so is illegal in the UK. I was told that if I persisted in posting to such sites from home that I would be fired from my job as posting to these sites is illegal under UK law. I was asked to give, and sign, an undertaking that I would desist from posting to such sites that the legal advisors found unacceptable.

This I refused to do. I was immediately dismissed from my employment. I can ill afford to lose my job but I refuse to be silenced by the PC re-casting of UK law which has gone on over the last few years. I'll find another job - indeed, I already have the offer of one - but if it can happen to me then it can happen to anyone.

Eurabia - it's already here. America, defend yourself.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at September 7, 2006 10:49 PM

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future...But I'm not going to do anything violent to promote that. I'm going to do it through education." - Ibrahim Hooper CAIR Spokesman.

"Those who stay in America should be open to society without melting, keeping Mosques open so anyone can come and learn about Islam. If you choose to live here, you have a responsibility to deliver the message of Islam ... Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." - Omar Ahmad Co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 7, 2006 10:50 PM

From a posting by Dominic above that needs to be made the subject of an article, of many articles:

As most of you here will be aware, I post to this board from the UK - sometimes, if I have a moment, from work but mostly from home.

Earlier today I was called into the office of the legal advisor to the company for which I work and was ordered to stop posting to this site or, and I quote, "any other right-wing or islamophobic American or European site or any site that purports to offer comment or criticism of or about islam" from my work because doing so is illegal in the UK. I was told that if I persisted in posting to such sites from home that I would be fired from my job as posting to these sites is illegal under UK law. I was asked to give, and sign, an undertaking that I would desist from posting to such sites that the legal advisors found unacceptable.

This I refused to do. I was immediately dismissed from my employment. I can ill afford to lose my job but I refuse to be silenced by the PC re-casting of UK law which has gone on over the last few years. I'll find another job - indeed, I already have the offer of one - but if it can happen to me then it can happen to anyone.

Eurabia - it's already here. America, defend yourself.

Dominic."

Would Dominic please send to me, via Robert, any further details he cares to share, including -- if he knows it -- the law which supposedly exists, according to which any criticism of Islam is now illegal. This is important.

If, by the way, it turns out that there is no such law, one wonders if there are those samaritan organizations in England, those barristers who offer pro bono services just as American lawyers often do, who will take the case, so that the employer who fired him under false claims -- if such a law does not exist -- can be sued, up to the hilt.

This has to be given further study, all over the Western world. One is familiar with the attacks on Will Cummins, who was then cravenly fired by the British Council. One is familiar with the case of Michael Graham, fired after Muslim pressure groups demanded it, from a job as a talk-show host in Washington. One has heard of other such cases. They need to be brought together, to be published urbi et orbi, and fury expressed, and punishment exacted, on those who think, as Dominic's employer apparently thinks, that free speech can be curtailed when it is a matter of discussing Islam in anything other than glowing, complacently sentimental, entirely misleading terms.

Posted by: Hugh at September 7, 2006 11:15 PM

From a posting by Dominic above that needs to be made the subject of an article, of many articles:

:As most of you here will be aware, I post to this board from the UK - sometimes, if I have a moment, from work but mostly from home.

Earlier today I was called into the office of the legal advisor to the company for which I work and was ordered to stop posting to this site or, and I quote, "any other right-wing or islamophobic American or European site or any site that purports to offer comment or criticism of or about islam" from my work because doing so is illegal in the UK. I was told that if I persisted in posting to such sites from home that I would be fired from my job as posting to these sites is illegal under UK law. I was asked to give, and sign, an undertaking that I would desist from posting to such sites that the legal advisors found unacceptable.

This I refused to do. I was immediately dismissed from my employment. I can ill afford to lose my job but I refuse to be silenced by the PC re-casting of UK law which has gone on over the last few years. I'll find another job - indeed, I already have the offer of one - but if it can happen to me then it can happen to anyone.

Eurabia - it's already here. America, defend yourself.

Dominic."

Would Dominic please send to me, via Robert, any further details he cares to share, including -- if he knows it -- the law which supposedly exists, according to which any criticism of Islam is now illegal. This is important.

If, by the way, it turns out that there is no such law, one wonders if there are those samaritan organizations in England, those barristers who offer pro bono services just as American lawyers often do, who will take the case, so that the employer who fired him under false claims -- if such a law does not exist -- can be sued, up to the hilt.

This has to be given further study, all over the Western world. One is familiar with the attacks on Will Cummins, who was then cravenly fired by the British Council. One is familiar with the case of Michael Graham, fired after Muslim pressure groups demanded it, from a job as a talk-show host in Washington. One has heard of other such cases. They need to be brought together, to be published urbi et orbi, and fury expressed, and punishment exacted, on those who think, as Dominic's employer apparently thinks, that free speech can be curtailed when it is a matter of discussing Islam in anything other than glowing, complacently sentimental, entirely misleading terms.

Posted by: Hugh at September 7, 2006 11:16 PM

What were the last few centuries of Anglo-American law all about, to come to this -- to come to the defense of, to brook no expression of dismay or even disgust with, a belief-system that so primitively divides the world between Believer and Infidel, Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb. If this can happen, if this can be allowed to happen, in England -- then what is left? How are we to defend ourselves? How are we to talk openly about what we all know, and wish to share? How can this be permitted?

Posted by: Hugh at September 7, 2006 11:19 PM

"Killing people is what happens in war. The jihadis know this, and any shock they claim to feel is strictly for the press and the apologists they depend on to put pressure on the country to stop the defense of our way of life."
posted above

Carolyn2,

This is exactly my point. Don't give them ammo.

In WW2 we were at war with Germany. That did not give you as an individual citizen the right to go kill the German man that lived down the street. Pre-PC, no one would have said you were going to go down the street and do it if you said, "We need to kill those Germans". To be honest, I actually don't really know how open the fifth column press was about such accusations back then, but Mom and Pop on the farm hadn't been indoctrinated by years of multicultural psychobabble to react negatively to it being said that way back then.

"What would Patton or Churchill say any differently than I have stated so clearly, over and over again? Islam is the enemy. (The truth is ugly, I know, but somebody has to say it, and last I checked, I'm still protected under the Right to Free Speech.)
posted above

Foehammer,

With all due respect (and I do mean that, I've read your postings),

1) You're a better poster than that
2) But, you're probably not Patton or Churchill (i.e. a military leader or statesman generally speaking about nation-state entities)
3) A lot of Muslims are "Muslims-In-Name-Only" and don't know anymore about what their religion teaches than your average "Christian-In-Name-Only". You gonna kill them, too?
4) There are limitations on the Right to Free Speech, and they differ in various countries. Do you want to get the site banned? Would you like to go ahead and name the Muslim-Down-The-Street so your threat might be specific enough to prosecute?
5) You've changed "enemies" to "enemy" and defined it as our ideological enemy Islam. Still not PC, but it loses the blood-curdling quality.
6) If we've just got to let off some steam and do some blood-curdling, could we limit it to those no one is going to shed a Western tear over (bin Laden, Zawahiri, etc.)?

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at September 7, 2006 11:20 PM

Hugh,

I will email you privately and share what I can as, and when, I legally can. You will, I have no doubt, understand that I have, naturally, consulted a lawyer about my summary dismissal and that I will be taking action against my former employer.

In order not to jeopardise my position I feel that I do not want to say any more until I have had a full conversation with my counsel. I am sure you will understand this. I will, however, keep you informed as and when it is legally possible to do so.

Thank-you for your comment. It is much appreciated.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at September 7, 2006 11:28 PM

God Speed to you Dominic.

Posted by: infidel4life at September 7, 2006 11:31 PM

Hugh,

If, by the way, it turns out that there is no such law, one wonders if there are those samaritan organizations in England, those barristers who offer pro bono services just as American lawyers often do, who will take the case, so that the employer who fired him under false claims -- if such a law does not exist -- can be sued, up to the hilt.

Lawyers would take such a case if they were guaranteed 24-7 armed guards for the rest of their lives. There's big money working for CAIR and other Arab-funded slow jihad organizations, big money in suing governments for Muslims. There's little but backward glances if you go the other way. I'm afraid endless PC and ubiquitous Arab payola have us in quite a pickle.

Power from the blades of knives and barrels of guns is very persuasive. Islam never forgives or forgets. Even the lawyers who deny the danger (for money), suing those who mention the danger, know it. It's an advantage in court. A very small number of Muslims completely changes the atmospherics (as you say) in the Dar-al-Harb. Without a somewhat unified front - absent the professional grievance mongers, phony civil rights moralists, accusations of racism, and post-Islamic murder apologists - what lawyer wants to be that guy/gal?

Lawyers consider themselves courageous when willing to accept a contingent fee in a complex case offering a slim chance of victory, not check their six for the rest of their lives.

Posted by: Beagle at September 7, 2006 11:39 PM

Dominic,

Take a copy of the undertaking you were asked to sign. If that undertaking is illegal, sue your employer for an amount you and your family can safely retire on (add 15% for inflation), nothing less!

Posted by: Alert at September 7, 2006 11:43 PM

Dominic; Sorry to hear the bad news. I feel for you but worse for England, if it punishes its citizens participating in these discussions. While I concur with Concerned Citizen's sentiments, most of the things I see posted are analysis and good-hearted comments.

It scares me that you got released.

Hugh is right. Lawyers over here would jump on a case like yours if they find it to be valid, probably for little or no money (they'll want their chunk if you win). I'd like to think that is similar on your side of the pond.

Good luck and don't be afraid to appeal to this audience if you need something.

Posted by: limes at September 7, 2006 11:47 PM

Those who have visited CAIR's website and read its mission statement are probably aware that one of CAIR's primary goals is to EMPOWER MUSLIMS. Now what do you suppose that means? My interpretation of that goal is that the Saudi Wahabbis, who have invested billions in America and intend to maintain a permanent presence, will handpick muslim political candidates and fund their campaigns, or buy their elections. The muslim politicians will be Wahabbi puppets, working for the Saudis. When muslims enter the political arena, so will the corruption for which they are famous. Bribery, nepotism, extortion, theft, larceny, and every other underhanded, mafioso tactic imaginable. As soon as we get the mob under control, here come the muslims.

Why do muslims need to be "empowered", if not to implement changes within our culture and government? The last thing we need in America are any more Wahabbi stooges like the reptilian Mr. Hooper. He is an arrogant, petulant, repulsive liar. I'll never understand why CAIR is granted automatic recognition by the news media and government as a legitimate "civil rights" organization. Maybe that's it right there--civil rights. Say those words and everyone turns to jello. It's not a civil rights organization, it's the headquarters of the islamic fifth column in America.

Posted by: Susanp at September 7, 2006 11:57 PM

I do not see what CAIR is trying to say, anyway. They support these jihadists. Why do they care if we call them what they are?

Shouldn't they stand up and be proud of who they are?

Truth be told, Islam is not a religion one can defend in debate. Islam is not a religion which operates with missionaries. Islam is spread by the sword. Islamic scriptures are chaotic and nonsensical. That is their religion. If they don't like it, leave it.

Don't blame us for your stupidity.

Posted by: NovaRocketMan at September 8, 2006 12:01 AM

On Islam being treasonous and against the constitution:

Islamists who consider themselves at war with the United States of America and wish to overthrow it by violent rebellion and force are treasonous. This same is true for Neo-Nazi militias and Leftist terrorist outfits.

We have historically kept away from such religious and political groups with a ten foot pole. Now, things are changing.

Saying you are at war with your country, threatening violence against your fellow countrymen and women, these sorts of things are not "free speech".

Planning acts of violence against your fellow Americans is not "free speech".

Urging violent overthrow is not "free speech".

Urging violence against your fellow Americans is not "free speech".

Such people are enemies of free speech. They are servants of the Islamo-Fascist totalitarian regimes from which they came. They may claim to be in rebellion against these regimes, but they are truly missionaries of them.

Totalitarian doctrine is not acceptable doctrine. Advocates of totalitarianism are advocates of treason.Advocates of totalitarian doctrines are advocates of the doctrines of tyranny, the very tyranny against which this country was formed as a bulwark.

We can argue about constitutional law and other niceties all day long. We all know these things to be true.

Posted by: NovaRocketMan at September 8, 2006 12:12 AM

Dom:

It sounds like you worked for the BBC.

If what you say is true--and I believe you--I'm sorry you were sacked.

You're a typical Bush-bashing British dillrod, but you stood up for your principles, and I respect that.

Good luck at your new job. Bargholz X-7, agent of BUSH (Bush Undercover Spy Headquarters.)

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at September 8, 2006 12:20 AM

Solsticewitch13, are you heavier than or lighter than a duck? Quranic science demands an answer.

Posted by: Geoff [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 7, 2006 10:47 PM

ROTFL ;>

I also wanted to tell Dominic 'bon-courage', dont let those multi-culti weasels get you down. Please keep us informed as to the progress of the situation.

KM

Posted by: km at September 8, 2006 12:26 AM

Mr. Hooper is not the sharpest tool in the shed. Islam has certainly made dumber and less objective.

His partiality towards Muslims and Islam is deplorable.

One must walk barefoot on eggshells not to offend the victimhood mindset that Islam inspired in him.

Robert: Take a lawsuit out against Mr. Hooper if he defames you.

It is obvious that the law is on your side. Free speech trumps sharia.

Let Mr. Hooper read this over and over again:

"Postings from others are unmoderated and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer."

Posted by: Johnathan at September 8, 2006 1:07 AM

-tgusa,

I believe Foehammer took credit for the first citation. I would have been proud if that oleaginous dipstick Hooper had picked one of my comments. I don't know about the experience of the other posters cited, but I wonder if he avoided picking people who have made no secret of the fact that they've actually sent some of his fellow cultists to meet Mo-Dogg in Hell. In any case, I appreciate the fact that you would attribute Foehammer's comment to me as I unabashedly and wholeheartedly agree with him. I never bought into that whole "you shouldn't hate your enemy, it only clouds judgment" claptrap. I never had a problem hating people launching rounds my way and it only made eliminating them that much easier.

-Dominic,

Fact is I can't say that I'm not surprised at at the reprehensible actions of your former employer. All the stories and postings I read from contributors here notwithstanding, your situation doesn't jibe with what I learned about the history of Britain through my family. I am, quite frankly, very surprised that the nation for which my grand-uncle and two uncles died fighting (the former as a member of the Black Watch in France, WWI, the latter two fighting the Japanese in Burma in WWII) could be reduced to not only allowing but apparently mandating such cowardice and obeisance to an alien culture. Know that this shameful act of dhimmitude is as infuriating to this cousin of yours across the pond as it must be for you, but as a canary in a coal mine, your revealing your personal situation serves as a warning to all of us over here concerning what can happen if we let the Hoopster and his scrurrilous ilk have their way. Good luck on your efforts for redress and give 'em hell.

Posted by: Eisenhund at September 8, 2006 1:53 AM

There is no law that posting at a site considered by the employer to be "rightwing", (or leftwing come to that) is illegal. So that particular reason would not hold water. What would stand in an industrial tribunal is that the employers standard web-browsing policy says something to the effect of "web-browsing is permitted at the discretion of management, provided it does not interfere with work." and they sometimes go on the make an analogy with the existing policy on personal phone calls, that being a well established technology in the office.

Where the employer will be able to justify calling Dominic in for discipline is that they will maintain that the amount of time spent (and this can be any brief period at all, and during authorised breaks, it is their computer after all) was unacceptable. BUT, there must be a series of verbal, then written warnings before dismissal can be contemplated and it does not sound as if your employer has gone through that proceedure. That will be your argument, should you take this to the Industrial Tribunal. Unfortunatley our once supportive Trades Unions are now a shadow of their former selves and many workplaces have no trade union representation at all. Which is why employers can get away with this sort of thing.

I know of one similar case (not my own workplace) where the site quoted where the employee had been browsing was not a political or current affairs site, not a porn site (which I think we all agree would be unacceptable) but the Artichoke Association where he was looking up recipies. His job was that boring.

You do need advice. The Citizens Advice Bureau is not that effective in the employment area in my experience. My union would still be my first port of call. I'll give this some thought.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at September 8, 2006 2:52 AM

Dominis, I see that you have consulted a solicitor who will doubtless be thinking along the lines I mentioned, and others.
All the best GW.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at September 8, 2006 2:57 AM

It's one thing to say what one can or can't do with company property. That's the employer's right. It's something else entirely to try to dictate to an employee what they can or can't do on their own time, off the clock, at home. Lots try for various reasons, all of them stink no matter how they try to justify them (some idiot companies over here trying to tell their employees that they can't smoke tobacco, even when the employee is not at the job, for example). Having one's job depend on bowing to PC nonsense and the whining of seditious, arrogant, childish barbarians is beyond the Pale.

Posted by: Eisenhund at September 8, 2006 3:29 AM

Eisenhund

It is okay for an employer to tell the employee that the latter cannot browse the net during work. It's also okay for the employer to block certain sites - from my workplace for instance, I can't access faithfreedom.org or islamcomicbook.com, since it's classified as a hate site by whoever is providing the site blocking filters to my employer.

However, once the employer does allow employees to surf the net, they can ask them to do only work-related browsing. But if they don't, they don't have any business telling their employees, for instance, that they can surf CNN but not FoxNews. Either they ban the use of the internet for all work unrelated browsing, or they don't. Other than stopping people from viewing porn or gambling, they have no business getting that detailed.

Dominique

I have a newfound respect for you, since had my employer asked me to stop using the internet in any way, I would have. But while they were at liberty to ask you to stop using your work computer for visiting here or elsewhere, they have no business telling you what you can't do from home. Sue their pants off, publicize it, and use it to launch a new Jihad against these Islamo-suckups

Posted by: Infidel Pride at September 8, 2006 4:10 AM

Sounds like Dominic is getting the same treatment in the UK that the Left is giving ABC here in the States! Let the Dhimmitude commence....

Posted by: MadrassasippiBurnin at September 8, 2006 7:42 AM

Dom - welcome to the terror of the New Bolshevik Left, a global movement whose reach is stil potent even 15 years after the fall of the USSR. Keep up the fight.

Posted by: MadrassasippiBurnin at September 8, 2006 8:26 AM

For all the P.I. challenged..

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/watson-jones/alphabet/index.html

Should help with focus?

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at September 8, 2006 9:36 AM

Goobs, amen.

Posted by: mustang65 at September 8, 2006 9:50 AM

Quote: "Why do muslims need to be "empowered", if not to implement changes within our culture and government? The last thing we need in America are any more Wahabbi stooges like the reptilian Mr. Hooper. He is an arrogant, petulant, repulsive liar. I'll never understand why CAIR is granted automatic recognition by the news media and government as a legitimate "civil rights" organization. Maybe that's it right there--civil rights. Say those words and everyone turns to jello. It's not a civil rights organization, it's the headquarters of the islamic fifth column in America." - SusanP

Right. And they lie. Whether slow jihad using our liberal laws against us, or fast jihad with terrorist bombs, the aim is the same, to take away our freedoms so their primitive totalitarian religion takes over. They will do this in any way they can with everything except honor and truth. They will even hide behind their women and children in attacks. That is their way.

I think having CAIR raise concerns about Jihad Watch is great news, furthering public awareness of this site and others like it, that tell the truth about Islam. I hope JW/DW readership statistics go up through the roof. The people need to know what lying cowards these Muslim apologists are all about. Let them expose themselves for their treasonous activities. We are at war. Our freedoms are at stake in this fight against Islamofascism. Never "empower" them by any means, whether apologist, legislative, legal, or military. Expose their lies.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at September 8, 2006 10:40 AM

Spencer is so obviously a bug up Dougie Hooper's a$$, I just love it! He mentions him every time he has a chance.

Posted by: CGW at September 8, 2006 10:45 AM

Dominic:

I'm so sorry about what happened to you. But remember - God doesn't close a door without opening a window. Perhaps this was what you have been intended for all along. This may be your big chance. If so, make a splash - and don't forget lots of positive PR for JW in the process!

Best regards,

CGW (a JW/DWer since the beginning who posts only irregularly anymore but reads daily and leaves the posting to the "new blood" )

Posted by: CGW at September 8, 2006 10:52 AM

I will not change my tune -- not until the danger is gone and our enemies are destroyed.

As far as who anyone might like to judge me by or by what social morays I am to be confronted, none of that means anything in the end. I am an individual human being, born and raised in the United States of America with whatever goals and potential God has intended for me. I am a product of a long line of obstinant types that would stand in the way of Islamic fascism just as surely as I am, and I will let my friends and family judge me when I am gone, because they will be the ones writing the last epitaph on my tombstone, not any of you.

I am not afraid to fight for what I know is right and never have been, and indeed, if I had only been a few years younger as of 9/11/2001, I would be serving in the U.S. Marines right now and commanding part of our forces in the fight directly.

Terrorism and maniacal religious dogma have consequences: they spawn rebellion and retaliation as much as fear. Islam is going to get schooled in what it means to awaken the "Sleeping Giant" that is the USA. Things got personal on 9/11, and I am not about to let it go.

Posted by: Foehammer at September 8, 2006 2:13 PM

Dominic good luck with your fight, it needs to be brought up to the British public, and let those employers feel the sting of their disgusting method of snooping into your private affairs. it is one thing to want control while you work for them, but in your private home, and your time, this does not belong to them! fight the good fight.

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at September 8, 2006 3:35 PM

Dominic,

Honestly, I often take your post's with a grain of salt, but this act of individual liberty in the face of Orwellian-like tyranny speaks volumes about your character. As someone stated above; in addition to legal action, try to get some sort of media play out of this. Bad press is the last thing they want and the general public(while perhaps silent) will be sympathetic. Best of luck on your new career path.

Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at September 8, 2006 5:20 PM

Quranic science demands an answer.

Prophète Geoff

Posted by: Geoff >>

LOL

Not exactly sure what you mean,, HOWEVER,, I *am*
a decendant of dragons, we are now the raptors, and I am totally fed up with the violence on this planet.

And as raptor,, we EAT ducks for dinner.

Alot of wiccans and pagans and bikers on this planet are risking karma,, and using some of the DARKEST Witchcraft on these idiots, who are ruining this world.

There is a global group meditating twice a day,,
us raptors do this one too.

GRRRRRRR

I will never submit to this belief system.

I will not ride my freakin motorcycle in a nightmare called a BURKA!!!!!

BITE ME CAIR!!!!

Posted by: solsticewitch13 at September 8, 2006 7:07 PM

"Things got personal on 9/11, and I am not about to let it go."
posted above

Didn't ask you to. I humbly ask you not to phrase things in a way that can be portrayed as individual vigilante violence against unfocused, unspecified random individuals bearing the presumption of innocence, such as could be damaging to the reputation of this site and all of it's posters.

No one here doubts your passion or your integrity. We just want to keep wearing the grey t-shirts and white bumperstickers and keep the focus on ISLAM and JIHAD and DHIMMI sypathizers/enablers where it is supposed to be, so as to coninue proselytizing the more faint of heart we may encounter.

Sometimes I get the impression that there are some JW/DWers that think if you're not dressed like Rambo with First Blood dripping down your cheeks that you don't belong here.

Here let me show some macho, too. I'm gonna skin bin Laden alive with a red hot cheese cutter, then begin grinding him to bits starting at his heel with a vegetable grater, then open his gut and grill his living visceral organs over some Mesquite until he screams "Allah, Allah, why hast thou forsaken me!". Eat them with some fava beans and a nice Chianti. WooHoo!!! Me Bad!!!

But see, nobody gives a crap about bin Laden; they're almost afraid to say they wouldn't in some quarters. Replace bin Laden with "some Muslims" and now you, me and, God Help Him Tireless Robert Spencer will be posting comments about yet another asinine article about irresponsible blood thirsty comments at JW.

Now if you really mean you're going to randomly toast a few, well the authorities probably already have your IP address anyway. Avoid the prison da'wa and don't pick up the soap.

CAIR readers,
1) F U
2) Please quote the entire post and all of my previous posts. Thank you. And F U.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at September 8, 2006 8:07 PM