Maybe we are entering the next stage in the ideological fight against the Jihad, where purveyors of the ideology are called out for their words and humiliated, as we saw recently in Australia, if not acutally prosecuted for the incitement and sedition they are so often guilty of. This would be a very positive development. Once they are afraid to speak out, their ideology will be weakened. After all, it is based on hate and misery which take a lot of effort to propigate.

Posted by: Quijybo at October 31, 2006 11:51 AM

"I have a couple of arguments for that - the most important is that he [Imam Fawaz] says, 'the people who have insulted the Prophet Muhammad should die through the hands of God' - he was very specific in that… he says, 'leave it to God'."

Not surprising. What surprised me in reading the Koran was how few times it specifically called for killing infidels in so many words. However, the Koran has that strong infidel killing stench about it that it's impossible not to believe that message otherwise. This guy's speech is in the same mold. "Let Allah kill him" means in Muslimspeak that it's just fine and dandy if Ahmed guns a guy down for insulting the cult of death. This sort of nonsense is similar to the crimes of Hitler-after all, he never did write a memo saying "build Auschwitz". But his orders concerning Jews were well understood nonetheless and faithfully carried out with his approval.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 31, 2006 11:54 AM

While I believe that it is incumbent upon us to challenge and ridicule much of the blather coming from Islamic clerics, we should also strive to protect free speech at all costs. Putting a muzzle on anyone is a double-edged sword. We have the advantage in any war of ideas. We must work to make certain we retain the right to speak.

Posted by: MP at October 31, 2006 12:02 PM

Allah was most probably trying to work out what the stones were for?

Posted by: Daffersd at October 31, 2006 12:12 PM

The Western world, which is always so fearful of being "eurocentric," for some reason does not mind being "eurocentric" when it comes to dealing with and constraining Islam. Apparently the lessons to be learned both from Muslim countries where a leader has, for nationalist reasons, determined to systematically constrain Islam as a political and social force, as Ataturk did, or Bourguiba did in order to bring Tunisia into a semblance of modernity (ahead of its neighbors), and from non-Muslim countries with large and potentially dangerous Muslim populations, such as Singapore, are somehow not to be learned in the West.

But look at how both Turkey and Tunisia monitor their mosques, with the Turkish government approving, or even writing, khutbas to be delivered. Look at how Singapore requires that every successful target of Da'wa be registered with the state, so that any undue inroads can be checked, or at least the state be vigilantly aware of exactly what is going on, and who is converting to Islam, and perhaps why.

Look at those who have experience in dealing with Islam as a political force. The regimes founded by strongmen such as Ataturk and Bourguiba, either secular or "Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only" Muslims and continued, wherever possible, by those who benefited from such systematic constraints, offer some guidance. So does the effort of Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew and successive Chinese-dominated governments, to keep Islam, always a threat, in check.

A little less "eurocentrism" in this matter, please.

Posted by: Hugh at October 31, 2006 12:14 PM

What would Thuggie Pooper have to say about this?
I know, "Death to Infidels", isn't that right Thuggie Pooper?

Posted by: Infidel_Dog at October 31, 2006 12:15 PM

Whenever Muslims engage in terrorism in the West, the media narrowly focuses on the direct culprits, and never questions why and how those Muslims obtained immigrant visas. Nobody asks who instituted the immigration policies, nobody wants to know the names of the government officials who signed on the criminals' immigration papers. Unless these government officials start to be fired and punished, the Muslims will continue to pour in unchecked.

What I want to know is who approved the immigrant visas for the imams.

Posted by: george_rem at October 31, 2006 12:24 PM

Picture baby allah in a diaper throwing a temper tantrum:

WAAA! BAD FILMMAKER MAKING FUN OF ME! ME WANT BAD FILMMAKER DEAD! WAA! MOMMY!

=================

You gotta a problem with that???? You laughing at allah, the compassionate, the merciful? He'll hack the face off your head.

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at October 31, 2006 12:26 PM

Hugh, question for you.
Do you think the Ummah may have abolished the caliphate so as the Infidels wouldn't have somewhere to point the finger at like they can point their finger at the Vatican?
Who can we Blame for their crimes? the Ummah?, Dar al Islam?
Seems they took precautions so as not to be fingered.
Your thoughts on this?

Posted by: Infidel_Dog at October 31, 2006 12:43 PM

Well, I looked up the redoubtable Hans Jansen (not Jensen, my elementary mistake) and found this

http://www.arabistjansen.nl/

and his email address.

j.j.g.jansen@gmail.com

I suggest you all write to him to thank him for his insightful, revolutionary and brave stance. I know I'm going to.

Best,

Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at October 31, 2006 12:44 PM

Funny thing is that NOVA television (who is a dhimmi, socialist and anti-US tv-show, even by European standards) uncovered this radical mosque in 2002, but nothing happened ever since. Our current moderate-right-wing government did absolutely NOTHING against it.

It's VERY weird that it is now, four years later, action is being undertaken while there are no new facts at all.

The imam is just as radical as he was in 2002 and the mosque too. We still have the same minister of Integration and we still have the same Harry Potter-like PM.

I do not believe in conspiracies. I do not believe in the Eurabia conspiracy. I do not believe in the "New World Order" or any other 9/11 conspiracy, but this really is weird. It makes one wonder.

Posted by: DrWolffenstein at October 31, 2006 12:50 PM

Hey Wolfenstein, you play it? RTCW?

Anyway, makes me wonder too mate. I didn't have any questions prior to about a year after 9/11, more fool me.

Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at October 31, 2006 12:52 PM

The imam asks Allah to make Ms Hirsi Ali go blind and give her cancer of the tongue and brain.

Despite the claims in the recording, Ruud Peters, a professor of Islamic Law doesn't believe the imam's words are incitement to commit murder:

"I have a couple of arguments for that - the most important is that he [Imam Fawaz] says, 'the people who have insulted the Prophet Muhammad should die through the hands of God' - he was very specific in that… he says, 'leave it to God'."

Take note, Ruud Peters is a professor of *islamic* law. Much different from our own. And I bet he probably said inshalla at the end - which actually means god willing and should be seen as an *affirmative*. They say it all the time when they do terrorist actions. So, Mr Rude Peters [funny name huh] *SPARE* us.. we are hip to the islamic double speakspeak.

Posted by: germaninamerica at October 31, 2006 1:16 PM

The imam is just as radical as he was in 2002 and the mosque too. We still have the same minister of Integration and we still have the same Harry Potter-like PM.

I do not believe in conspiracies. I do not believe in the Eurabia conspiracy. I do not believe in the "New World Order" or any other 9/11 conspiracy, but this really is weird. It makes one wonder.
Posted by: DrWolffenstein

Have you had elections since then?

Posted by: germaninamerica at October 31, 2006 1:23 PM

Let me ask a question here.... even if the imam didn't specifically ask for a 'volunteer' assassin, don't many sermons as for True Believers to step up and be counted?

Does it really matter if the name 'Theo van Gogh' was distinctly mentioned?

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at October 31, 2006 1:48 PM

The imam asks Allah to make Ms Hirsi Ali go blind and give her cancer of the tongue and brain.

The third thing would make her too much like Mo.

Too bad the second thing didn't happen to Mo. It would have saved the world a lot of grief.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 31, 2006 1:49 PM

Also from the article:

b>"This sermon is much worse than anything in mosques, certainly worse than anything presented in mosques in the Middle East."

umm, I've had Friday sermons from the Palestinian Authority piped into my house from memri.org and I'd like to say I don't see much difference.

Sewage, Incitement to Murder, Holy Hate and so on...

It's pretty much the same and at the same level of toxicity.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at October 31, 2006 1:51 PM

All these Islamic sermons are the same. Kill all, burn all, loot all. The "Three Alls" policy Japan used in China during WW2 has been enshrined in these sermons. What other religion espouses this kind of insanity? And this comes from supposed holy men.

And yet Islam gets a bum rap and is so misunderstood. Laughable!

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 31, 2006 2:02 PM

“Maybe we are entering the next stage in the ideological fight against the Jihad, where purveyors of the ideology are called out for their words and humiliated, as we saw recently in Australia, if not acutally prosecuted for the incitement and sedition they are so often guilty of. This would be a very positive development. Once they are afraid to speak out, their ideology will be weakened. After all, it is based on hate and misery which take a lot of effort to propigate.”
Posted by: Quijybo

Yes, the war of words jumps from the Internet into the Public sector. The Pope’s comments, the Pres. islamo-facist remark, yes I know he backed off but he still threw it out there, John Howard and other Aussies speaking out. Look for the jihazi to become more angry and violent (SJS and more) as more people begin to speak out. A wounded, cornered animal becomes extremely dangerous, and we all know how easy it is to wound their pride/arrogance.

Posted by: tgusa at October 31, 2006 2:18 PM

Yes, that whole "leave it up to God" thing was pure bollocks. "Inshallah" is indeed invoked when jihadis kill, and even a dunce of the calibre of the above imam knows that. He knew, moreover, that some among his congregation would also so interpret it.

Now, for him, it's all "inshallah", "up to God"; if someone else kills van Gogh, well, he can throw up his hands and explain how shocked he is: "well, it's a terrible crime, a horrid, shocking crime - and didn't this killer go to mosque and play footie and eat and breathe and drive a car like everyone else? Shocking! - but, of course, well, you know," - quietly, quietly, "It's the will of Allah. Shh! But doesn't it prove what I've been saying all along, brother, that Allah is all-powerful? Doesn't it show the mercy of his vindictiveness?...But, of course, a horrid, horrid crime. But Allah's will! We denounce it...and rejoice, and denounce, and rejoice, and denounce...and encourage."

Inshallah.

Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at October 31, 2006 2:37 PM

Oy! Wolfenstein! D'you bloody play then, mate?

Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at October 31, 2006 2:38 PM

from Infidel_Dog above:

"Do you think the Ummah may have abolished the caliphate so as the Infidels wouldn't have somewhere to point the finger at like they can point their finger at the Vatican?"
=============

Where did the the media learn the tactic of "label then attack" anyway?

I was looking deeper into the purpose of the halloween legends earlier. It seems people were publicly accused and then attacked mob style. It appears to be a pattern that is at least as old as the gospels, probably as old as humanity itself. Jesus was attacked in this fashion.

It appears that the planners of global jihad have taken a lesson and are currently using against everyone (applied social engineering).

Posted by: squire at October 31, 2006 2:56 PM

Oy! Wolfenstein! D'you bloody play then, mate?
--- Geoff

Easy mate :P Of course I played the game :) Being the son of the greatest game ever: Wolf3d.

Posted by: DrWolffenstein at October 31, 2006 3:43 PM

Three days before the Catholic nun (Sister Leonella) was shot to death last month (18 September) by two Muslims in Mogadishu, Somalia, a Muslim cleric in that same city delivered a Friday mosque sermon in which he exhorted followers to go out and kill Christians because of the Pope's "insult" to Prophet Mohammed.

Posted by: remote_control at October 31, 2006 4:10 PM

Jhn 19:11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

Those who carry out acts of bloody violence - are commiting murder.

But those who pave the way for the murderers - have a great deal more amount of blood upon their hands.

Posted by: Beth at October 31, 2006 6:24 PM

"our government doesn't think islam is a problem"

Posted by: Phximan

It has to be - for the offenses to take place. Or else - it will be said in the end - "God was a liar"

Mat 18:7 Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!

that 'man' is made up of many members} Hbr 11:12

Now is the time- for deciding which man/Man you stand with. There are only two - each made up of many members.

Rev 19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

Is God - the Real One - a liar?

Posted by: Beth at October 31, 2006 6:30 PM

1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

Islam calls the Son of God an abomination.

You are either with the son of perdition - or you're with the Son of God.

You can not sit with those who bow to the table that calls the Son of God an abomination and sit at the Table of the Son also.

Such an act is not possible.

The son of perdition preaches destruction.

The Son of Peace preaches Peace.

Look at the Koran [a very small book to read] and then look at the New Testament.

Which one preaches acts of mercy?

You be your own judge.

But please, do not come forth as a judge of this issue - if you're not willing to do your homework.

Posted by: Beth at October 31, 2006 6:43 PM

Listen here to the sermon.

You don't need to speak any Arabic words to understand fully what is being said here.
The imam outperformed Hitler.

BTW. Ruud Peeters is not critical towards Islam. He often visits Iran; the Iranian press applauds him. In the past Peeters acted as a friendly witness for a terror suspect on trial. The state prosecutor has accused him of having ties with terrorist organisations.

Hans Jansen was a close friend of Theo van Gogh.

Posted by: Adelt at October 31, 2006 7:01 PM

Re: "In the recording of the sermon, Imam Fawaz calls Theo van Gogh a 'criminal bastard' and beseeches Allah to visit an incurable disease upon the filmmaker. He also condemns former Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali who was involved in writing the script for Submission. The imam asks Allah to make Ms Hirsi Ali go blind and give her cancer of the tongue and brain".

If a non-"religious" person had made these statements ("The imam asks Allah to make Ms Hirsi Ali go blind and give her cancer of the tongue and brain." e.g.) they would be seen as mentally ill. The Muslim clerics who incite to violence should be put in mental hospitals, just as Hitler should have been put in a mental hospital in 1923. Eventually, the authorities in Europe and elsewhere are going to realize that placing such clerics in mental hospitals will make a profound statement that will not be forgotten by anyone. If Hitler had been arrested and placed in a mental institution in 1923, Germany and the world would not have had to endure Hitler's madness. It's time to view these clerics in the full light of reality and hospitalize them.

Posted by: Frank at October 31, 2006 7:16 PM

This sermon is much worse than anything in mosques, certainly worse than anything presented in mosques in the Middle East.

Oh no. Just what we need.

Another delusional writer and academic on Islam, a slightly resistant Dhimmi who cannot resist the fictive and comforting in order to avert coming to terms with the preposterous predicates underlying his thinking.

Just off the top, I could dig up, oh, 50 or so Mideast mosque sermons as bad or worse than this one. Happens every Friday, in hundreds of Dar al-Islam mosques.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at October 31, 2006 7:25 PM

You don't need to speak any Arabic words

Posted by: Adelt

If they can be spoken for financial gains - then most certainly - they can so be spoken for sprirtual gain [which, by the way - is being done for 'allah']

The Real God does not speak ina tongue of flesh - BUT - is able to speak ALL languages that any man can invent -

no?

Posted by: Beth at October 31, 2006 7:27 PM

Ruud Peters, a professor of Islamic Law said: "I have a couple of arguments for that" (no incitement to commit murder) - "the most important is that he [Imam Fawaz] says, 'the people who have insulted the Prophet Muhammad should die through the hands of God' - he was very specific in that… he says, 'leave it to God'."
I think Ruud Peters is wrong in this.
I, myself have heard muslims say: "it is Allah's will" if someone got stabbed or kicked to death by a muslim.

Posted by: miep at November 1, 2006 2:21 AM

The imam asks Allah to make Ms Hirsi Ali go blind and give her cancer of the tongue and brain.

But at last check, after two years since the imam made this request to Allah, Ms Hirsi Ali appears quite healthy, without a trace of cancer or blindness of any kind.

Snubbing the faithful while sustaining the faithless....guess Almighty Allah Must Indeed Know Best.

Posted by: yadayada at November 1, 2006 2:50 AM

It is clear now that this man (Immam Fawaz) was a spiritual leader for the terrorist gang known as the Hofstad network. He was in close contact with terrorists like Mohammed Bouyeri, Samir Azzouz and Nouredine el Fahtni and he inspired them to commit terrible crimes. For this role he deserves to be jailed and kept in complete isolation, so he can't affect any other prisoners with his poisonous ideas.

Here is a transcript of his sermon in Dutch
http://extra.volkskrant.nl/bijlagen/preekFawaz.pdf
See the last page where he is explicit about wishing Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Theo van Gogh dead. The red parts indicate that he is shouting. Audio fragment at GeenStijl (see above).

Posted by: Hans at November 1, 2006 8:25 AM