anything but the chilli powder!!!!!!

Posted by: Patriot8 at December 27, 2006 9:40 PM

Nice guy. I didn't know Muslims were so fond of Chili Powder ? lol

That's original . Torture by Spice .

Maybe he should get a friendly Merry Xmas Email from some of us here?

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 27, 2006 9:42 PM

He's a soulja? I'll just bet.
BTW isn't islam a religion of peace® ?

Posted by: Carolyn2 at December 27, 2006 9:44 PM

I sent him this Xmas Greeting:

" Merry CHRISTmas And a Happy new Year!. May Jesus Bless and protect you and help you see the ERR of your ways.


Just kidding...."

The Rest i cannot post here out of decency . lol

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 27, 2006 9:45 PM

By the way, RS, you are nominated for the "Oriana" award at LGF.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23795_Fiskie_and_Oriana_Nominations&only

Posted by: Carolyn2 at December 27, 2006 9:47 PM

Robert:

Congratulations on your new hate-mail. Torture by Chili Powder is common here in Texas, and many macho types brag about how much they can stand before crying.

However, you are advised to add this to your scrap book to prove the probability of persecution should you ever want to (or have to) apply for political asylum and all the freebies that go with it.

Happy New Year!!

Posted by: texan at December 27, 2006 10:00 PM

it really is too bad MSM can't stand to be anything but a dhimmi. Good luck on the "Oriana" from LGF.

Posted by: spinoneone at December 27, 2006 10:01 PM

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

"Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."

Winston Churchill

Posted by: allat at December 27, 2006 10:08 PM

notify the fbi and hotmail; this animal must be hunted down!

Posted by: witness at December 27, 2006 10:18 PM

"i will f**kin chop you up and put chilli powder all over your wounds"

If someone's choped up, I doubt they'll notice the chili powder. You'd better rethink your strategy. You could be cast into hell for a mistake like that.

Posted by: rational at December 27, 2006 10:35 PM

Robert, exposing Islam for what it is, is only further proven by emails such as this. The truth really hurts these jihadists it seems. Keep up your good work.

Happy New Year!

Posted by: sounder at December 27, 2006 10:36 PM

Forward your hate e-mails to Ellison's office. His people are working 24/7 to end the hijacking of the religion of peace. I am sure it will only take a short e-mail from folks who know the true nature of Islam and this guy will send you an apology.

Posted by: godfreyofbouillon at December 27, 2006 10:48 PM

All I have ever heard of you doing was to bring attention to Muslim texts and explain them in simple enough terms that even I could understand them. I would think they would be building shrines in your honor not wishing you pain and suffering. Maybe our misguided emailer should re-read the koran and highlight the anti internet portions. At least then we could understand your supposed crime. I realize you bested the Prophet Mohammad because you own and can operate a computer and old Mo didn’t have one. If that is not it, the only other possibility is your on line pressure is forcing these want to be cyber jihadi to learn to use computers and that is placing them above the Prophet. That must cost them a few virgins in paradise, right? Because you forced him to use an evil email program you have insulted the non computer literate ummah and set Islam above the 7th century mark, you are truly an evil power and a force to be reckoned with. I couldn’t make sense out of the chilli powder reference so I’ll chalk that up to him being a nut. Also, while we are on this topic, it is just you they threaten? How come Hugh never gets hate mail? I bet it’s the tweed jacket, yep that’s it. Most men can’t pull off tweed.

Posted by: Ronin at December 27, 2006 10:49 PM

In physical combat, the Islamic militants hide behind women, children, and babies.

In ideological combat, the Islamic militants hide behind moderate Muslims, faux organizations, and now ... THE SPICE RACK.

Posted by: LoneRanger at December 27, 2006 10:52 PM

Gee, after reading all these posts i almost feel regret for the lovely Email i sent the guy who sent the threats.....

Almost

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 27, 2006 10:53 PM

"Also, while we are on this topic, it is just you they threaten? How come Hugh never gets hate mail? I bet it’s the tweed jacket, yep that’s it. Most men can’t pull off tweed."
Posted by: Ronin at December 27, 2006 10:49 PM

Nope, it's a simple case of linguistics. Robert is direct and easy to interperate. Hugh, on the other hand, can insult someone without them even knowing it.

Posted by: awake at December 27, 2006 10:54 PM

Personally, I find it offensive that you guys sit in here making fun of Mohammed Souljha's promise to Spencer, and am also deeply offended by Spencer's flip implication that there's something wrong with the email.

After all, Mr. Souljha is only celebrating the main sacrament of his religion.

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

The punishment for those who wage war against Allah and His Prophet and make mischief in the land, is to murder them, crucify them, or cut off a hand and foot on opposite sides...their doom is dreadful. They will not escape the fire, suffering constantly.
--- God talking about himself in the 3rd person again in Koran 5:33

And this is the verse that Dubya quoted on TV. Well, almost.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at December 27, 2006 10:57 PM

Nope, it's a simple case of linguistics. Robert is direct and easy to interperate. Hugh, on the other hand, can insult someone without them even knowing it.
Posted by: awake at December 27, 2006 10:54 PM

What's a linguistic?

Posted by: Ronin at December 27, 2006 11:04 PM

OT

This from LGF & Brussels Journal

[-]

Blair on Islam: Standard-Bearer of Tolerance
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Wed, 2006-12-27 08:43
A quote from Tony Blair in Foreign Affairs, January/February 2007

To me, the most remarkable thing about the Koran is how progressive it is. I write with great humility as a member of another faith. As an outsider, the Koran strikes me as a reforming book, trying to return Judaism and Christianity to their origins, much as reformers attempted to do with the Christian church centuries later. The Koran is inclusive. It extols science and knowledge and abhors superstition. It is practical and far ahead of its time in attitudes toward marriage, women, and governance.

Under its guidance, the spread of Islam and its dominance over previously Christian or pagan lands were breathtaking. Over centuries, Islam founded an empire and led the world in discovery, art, and culture. The standard-bearers of tolerance in the early Middle Ages were far more likely to be found in Muslim lands than in Christian ones.

[-]

What did he read?

Posted by: Borg at December 27, 2006 11:06 PM

Borg it is not what he read, it was what he was sipping on that messed him up.

Posted by: Ronin at December 27, 2006 11:08 PM

Blair wrote that? WTF? that is almost sickening . that was some serious appeasing And Dhimmitude. it's alomost like he is trying to Garner favor with his new overlords.

" ahead of it's time" ?

maybe it looks that way because the rest of the world has gone so far ahead of Islam that it is lapping it, so what Blair see's is the Modern world coming up behind Islam. It's lap two and Islam is WAAAY behind.

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 27, 2006 11:16 PM

Chili powder without garlic? Where is this guy's culinary sense?

Maybe he needs a bit of correction...I doubt that sending death threats is a recipe for anything but overdue scrutiny from Big Brother.

Posted by: SabersforEllison at December 27, 2006 11:28 PM

"Terrorist" threat. Best to report it. Make it more uncomfortable for these Moslems.

Posted by: unicorns62000 at December 27, 2006 11:31 PM

Blair is revealing himself ...

I never had a good impression of him. He's to much an opportunist.
This is the top of incompentence, ignorance and immaturity and proven it once again.

Posted by: Arnie at December 27, 2006 11:31 PM

For the threat ...
let him face the music he has to.

Posted by: Arnie at December 27, 2006 11:34 PM

.. and TSA has to undergo "sensitivity" training. Go figure.

Posted by: Alert at December 27, 2006 11:46 PM

Thank you for what you do Robert, and all others who are educating the public. The game Islam plays makes it illogical to speak out as an individual against it, those who do deserve great respect. Stay safe.

Posted by: pez at December 27, 2006 11:46 PM

The whole lot of these politicians, Blair, Bush, Chirac, et.al., reminds one of the Churchill quote: "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last".

Libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.
Men gladly believe that which they wish for. (Caesar)

Posted by: Hubert the Friar at December 27, 2006 11:59 PM

Chilli powder no less, nice touch!

You must have sparked something in the taste buds!

Real men use Cayenne! Its the same color but is a world away from puney old chilli.

Robert, the offer to come out to the country and get a few lessons from my neighbor who shoots coyotes from his back porch is still open.

Keep up the good work, and may this next year be vary rewarding for you!

Posted by: credit man at December 28, 2006 12:09 AM

EliasAlucard,
I like the ® but will on occasion use &trade . ;)

Posted by: Carolyn2 at December 28, 2006 12:21 AM

Robert, so sorry about the ugly threats. You are a very brave man. These people are animals.

Several posters have laughed at the reference to chili peppers--it does seem somewhat less extreme than the "f**kin chop you up" threat. It has even been found that capaisin has been used to speed healing of wounds.

But chili peppers *have* been used in torture--and quite recently. Here's a reference, under the benign-sounding "Unusual Uses of Chili Peppers".

"1. As instruments of torture, for prisoners, thieves, unfaithful spouses, etc. Said to have been used for the torture of prisioners as recently as the Iraq/Kuwait war."

http://www.isrl.uiuc.edu/isaac/Habanero/FAQ/HabaneroLore.html

Note the reference to the Gulf War. And again:

"Occasionally red chili powder has also been used as a weapon, e.g., by squirting it into the eyes or as punishment or torture, rubbing it into wounds."

http://www.botgard.ucla.edu/html/botanytextbooks/economicbotany/Capsicum/index.html

Posted by: gravenimage at December 28, 2006 12:24 AM

It certainly seems doubtful that a "moderate" Muslim could have written this - by definition of what we mean by "moderate" Muslim. Hence, it must have been written by an "extremist" Muslim. But extremist Muslims tend to agree with the likes of Usama bin Laden so its hard to understand what issue they could take with Spencer's take on things - the Koranic verses he cites and the hadiths etc which merely reveal the aspects of Islamic theology from whence the "extremists" get their ideas. So why on earth would extemists issue such death threats to Spencer?. Is it the case that Muslims alone are permitted to understand and speak about their violent scriptures but it is impermissable for infidels to acknowledge those very same scriptures as the source of their actions? Well, frankly, that's pretty weird! Is there some unstated Islamic law that applies here? And if so, what is it?

Posted by: Caroline at December 28, 2006 12:49 AM

Caroline: I'm not sure if there is a Koranic verse, (Robert would know), but historically, infidels may not comment on Islam in any way, shape, or form.

Posted by: Hubert the Friar at December 28, 2006 12:55 AM

Only moderate muslims use chili powder..the extremists use jalapenos. What a wuss!!

Posted by: pismopal at December 28, 2006 12:55 AM

"...while messages like this one from jihadists, and jihadists who commit actual violence in the name of that ideology, don't faze them at all."

And will continue not fazing them until they understand that the threats and violence will inevitably come visiting upon them too, or their children, in time.

Right now they can see no further than the nose on their face.

Posted by: alexon at December 28, 2006 12:59 AM

"The Koran is inclusive. It extols science and knowledge and abhors superstition. It is practical and far ahead of its time in attitudes toward marriage, women, and governance. "

This is undoubtedly why people in Saudi Arabia are still being arrested, tried, and convicted for sorcery and black magic.

Posted by: jay at December 28, 2006 1:03 AM

The latest from Keith Ellison:

I'm not a religious leader

Ummah News Links

Posted by: ummahnewslinks at December 28, 2006 1:04 AM

It's really easy to make idle threats from the comfort of your keyboard.
This is the stock and trade of your basic bedroom jihadi.
It's still unnerving though.

I've already offered my services to Robert in an email amd he's more than welcome to take me up on my bodygaurding skills free of charge.
Unfortunately I live in the U.K. which is a long way from undisclosed locationsville.

We may be all scholars to some degree on this site but i'm also into defending myself and people I respect,It's a biker thing and a truth thing that I have.
I'm not a pacifist and I can handle myself and have been in many difficult situations.
Suffice to say Robert,If you need a hand I can walk the walk and talk the talk...
It's a handy skill to have just like anything.

I know that real academics need time to think and reason whilst all around mayhem may occur..

Well...if that moment did occur I would be the one to knock the little jihadi punk out and stamp on his neck.

I'm professionally trained and have connections,so all you need do is call.
I'm also a wonderful dinner guest and can talk about particle physics too.

Godspeed to you Robert and never be cowed by cowards.

Posted by: ovinesongs at December 28, 2006 1:05 AM

"Robert, so sorry about the ugly threats. You are a very brave man. These people are animals."

No, animals would never stoop to such depravity.

Slave-ish followers of Oolah on the other hand...

We know them by their works.

Posted by: alexon at December 28, 2006 1:07 AM

Debbie Schlussel just got another telephone "harassment" if not threat:

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/12/harassed_by_mus.html

More often than not, she's identified the death haters, the most notable of which was a University of Michigan Dearborn student senator named Lola Elzein (who said some really despicable things).

Posted by: sonomaca at December 28, 2006 1:15 AM

Robert

This picture depicts what Brother Soulja has in mind - it has been done before, maybe without the chilli powder.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at December 28, 2006 1:23 AM

It appears there is no consequence for these Pycho's calling and harassing people ? This should be covered / reported in the media, but it it's not cause only Muslims are persecuted!? It's always them threatening us and somehow that makes them the victims? This hypocricy is really maddening!

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 28, 2006 1:27 AM

Robert

When you get such abhorrent emails do you call the police, and if not, why not?

Regards

Payingattention

Posted by: payingattention at December 28, 2006 1:41 AM

"ps bin laden"

What -- is chili powder bin ladens signature trademark?

Posted by: champ at December 28, 2006 1:41 AM

It is a shame that people still think of Bin Laden as some holy man who is doing the right thing.
Such threats are common, but I don't think they are really dangerous. And this person does not speak for all Muslims.

Posted by: Muslim Unity at December 28, 2006 2:10 AM

What is that hypocrite Hooper doing about this terror from his terrorist 'muslim brothers'? Oh I know.. cry 'Islamophobia'. Coward hypocrite!

Posted by: Alert at December 28, 2006 2:11 AM

" Such threats are common, but I don't think they are really dangerous. And this person does not speak for all Muslims."

Forgive me if i take any threat from a Muslim seriously. The track record is just not that good. and i sincerely hope that OBL does not speak for all Muslims, but he DOES speak for about 10-20% and that is hundreds of millions. that's a few million more than i feel comfortable with.

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 28, 2006 2:12 AM

When I say such threats are common, I mean many of us get them. I myself have got them.
I don't know any Muslim personally who supports OBL.You have some stastics which show it is 10 to 20 % who support that animal?

Posted by: Muslim Unity at December 28, 2006 2:21 AM

I don't know any Muslim personally who supports OBL.You have some stastics which show it is 10 to 20 % who support that animal?

Posted by: Muslim Unity

-------------------------------------------------

Well i have read that an estimated 10-20% percent of Muslims worldwide are Radicalized. sorry i don't have the exact source on me at this moment. would you say that is innacurate? worldwide? i'm sure the percentage of Radicalized Muslims in the West is lower than that , but i have a hard time NOT believing that the percentage in Islamic nations is not possibly even higher than even that, What with the tens of thousands in the streets calling for our destruction on what seems a Daily basis.

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 28, 2006 2:27 AM

ummahnewslinks

Can anyone believe Ellison?
I bet he has rehearsed all the perfect answers to the hard questions!
Thanks for posting.

Robert: we are all behind you - from across the globe!

OT but very good. One of those pieces worth keeping!(sorry I don't have URL)

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Gregory Davis, the managing director of Quixotic Media and producer of the feature documentary Islam: What the West Needs to Know. He received his Ph.D. in political science from Stanford University. He is the author of the new book Religion of Peace? Islam's War Against the World.

FP: Gregory Davis, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

Davis: Thanks for having me.

FP: What motivated you to write this book?

Davis: The book is a direct result of the documentary and seeks to expand on the latter's material. My old friend, Bryan Daly, and I had the opportunity to make a small movie and we wanted to tackle something that no one else had, something of social import that was poorly understood. The facile way in which politicians, commentators, and academics dismiss Islam as a 'religion of peace' indicated to us that there was more that needed to be said on the topic. The Muslim terrorists claim to be doing the will of Allah, while Western leaders insist that Islam is peaceful. The obvious question was: who is right? There is no a priori justification to assume that peaceful Muslims represent authentic Islam while violent Muslims do not.

FP: How would you interpret the West's illusions about Islam?

Davis: The West is guilty of the ages-old error of projection, of imposing its own ideas, beliefs, and aspirations onto the other guy. When Westerners approach Islam, they imagine that it is a religion like others that they are familiar with - like, say, Christianity. They see Islam as basically another item on the religious menu available in an integrated world. What they fail to understand, however, is that Islam is decidedly outside the Western tradition and therefore Western assumptions are inapt when assessing it.

In Islam: What the West Needs to Know, we talk with Robert Spencer, Walid Shoebat, Bat Ye'or, Serge Trifkovic, and Abdullah Al-Araby, who all affirm that the most important aspect of Islam not understood in the West is that Islam is less a personal faith than a social and political plan for organizing humanity - really, a system of government.

It was only in the West that religious power developed in parallel with secular power but distinct from it thanks largely to the doctrinal distinction in Christianity between giving 'to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God's what is God's.' While religious and secular power have certainly commingled at times in the West, it is fully possible for the two to coexist separately. But in Islam, there has never been a distinction between religion and political power; the two are inseparably united. An Islamic society is invariably a theocracy ruled by Sharia (Islamic) law, which is understood as God's prescribed legal code for all mankind, based on the commandments of the Koran and the precedents set by Muhammad.

There can be no question of the type of government in Islam because Islam is a government, which Allah through Muhammad has ordained to comprehend the entire earth. Once the political nature of Islam and its universal pretensions are grasped, it is not hard to see why Muslims and Muslim societies are so hostile toward the rest of the world.

FP: The Islamization of Europe is occurring at a lightning speed. What do you make of it?

Davis: It is truly astonishing that a civilization as organized and materially powerful as Europe today is voluntarily going to its death. The Europeans could certainly forestall the Islamization of their continent, but so far they have shown no stomach for it. Already portions of Europe's metropolitan areas are de facto Islamic states ruled by Sharia law - the London Telegraph mentioned this the other day with remarkable equanimity.

The Parisian police have admitted that they are in the early stages of a civil war. The negative growth rates of the native Caucasian populations mean that Europe is committing generational suicide while its Muslim populations continue to grow very rapidly. While Muslims in Europe are still poorly organized and outside the conventional halls of power, they nonetheless posses something invaluable that Europe does not: faith. Europe has lost its faith and with it the will for self-preservation. The Europeans who fought to defend Europe through the centuries during the major waves of jihad knew what they were fighting for. They had faith in their God and in the inherent legitimacy of their civilization. Their successors today are freely throwing away what their forebears gave their lives to preserve. It is a tragedy on a civilizational scale and should be a cautionary tale for those of us in North America.

FP: So is there any possibility of building democracy in the Islamic world?

Davis: In a word, no. If one means by democracy nothing more that some kind of nominal electoral process, then technically there are already democracies in the Islamic world, but that definition is not terribly meaningful. If ones means democracy as an open society on the Western model with freedom of speech, religion, and equality before the law, then the answer is categorically no. As we saw in the elections held in the West Bank and Gaza, the will of the people there is for Islamic government.

It is possible to have elections in an Islamic country as long as Sharia law is not violated - which is hardly what we would call democracy. Democracy implies some sort of pluralism, which is the very antithesis of a Sharia state. Installing genuine democracy would first require a program of de-Islamization, which would be simply impossible.

The only means of achieving a form of secularism in an Islamic country is through the sort of repression we see today in Egypt, Pakistan, even Turkey. In Islam, there can be no freedom of religion, freedom of speech, equality of the sexes, or anything that transgresses the highly specific dictates of Sharia law. Any kind of popular movement by Muslims is by nature away from secular, genuinely democratic principles and toward a theocratic, Sharia state. While there are nominal Muslims who would prefer Western democracy to Islamic Sharia - such as those who fled the Iranian Revolution in 1979 - they are being false to their faith, and in any Islamic context, they will not stand against their more aggressive, orthodox counterparts.

FP: What do you think the U.S. needs to do in this terror war in general and in Iraq in particular?

Davis: The 'war on terror' is misnamed. Terrorism is a tactic, not a goal. It would have been absurd to have declared war against 'sneak attacks' after Pearl Harbor but this is essentially what we have done. It is the goal of Islamic terrorism that we need to understand, and this requires an understanding of Islam itself. Islam and its faithful adherents are trying to undermine our secular governments with the ultimate aim of replacing them with Sharia.

Terrorism is a means to this end as are Islamic proselytizing, fund-raising, lobbying, education, etc. As during the Cold War, we are under attack from a hostile political ideology that does not operate in the same moral universe as we do. Broadly speaking, we need to develop a program of containment that will operate on all levels of government policy.

At this point, it seems to me premature to get too specific with respect to policy because the full magnitude of the problem is still so poorly understood. Every Western mainstream statesman, academic, or commentator who opens his mouth on Islam bends over backwards to affirm its peacefulness. Even Western religious leaders, who really ought to know better, continue to demonstrate a depressing lack of understanding and penchant for appeasement.

With respect to Iraq, the main problem there was and is our fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of Islam. There was good reason that someone as brutal as Saddam Hussein rose to the top in that society. In the Islamic world, the most powerful force is not some universal desire for human freedom but the will of Allah and the example of Muhammad. Until we grasp this overarching fact, our policy toward Iraq and the rest of the Muslim world will be fundamentally flawed.

FP: But at the same time, we need to reach out to Muslims who are truly on our side and who truly want to democratize and modernize their religion. What do you think is the best way for us to do that?

Davis: Encouraging democratic or popular forces in the Islamic world is to encourage the resurgence of orthodox Islam with all that entails, namely, Sharia and jihad. Rather than democratizing the Muslim world we should be seeking to secularize it. Contrary to the Western experience, democratization and secularization are not at all synonymous in an Islamic context. To encourage secularization, we will have to deal with undemocratic forces. During the Cold War, we were willing to deal with unsavory characters as long as they forestalled the much worse alternative of Communism. We should take a similar stance with respect to Islam. Secularists in the Muslim world should be encouraged and accommodated, though their success in any Islamic context may necessitate a decidedly undemocratic approach.

I believe that the best way to help nominal Muslims who value peacefulness over Islam is to get them to confront the violent nature of their faith and to reject it. In Islam: What the West Needs to Know, we interview a prominent former Muslim and terrorist who left, and there are many other cases so it is possible.

Obviously, we are not going to convert Muslims en masse to something else, so this is effective at only the individual level. But the unhappy fact is that as long as a Muslim affirms that 'There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet', he is open to the call of jihad even if he never heeds it. We have seen numerous examples of this in the West, such as the American youths from Lackawana, NY, who were turned into aspirant terrorists by a Koranic study group. We must bear in mind - contrary to the protestations of the ruling class - that Muslims who want to de-politicize Islam, who desire societies organized on secular lines rather than according to Sharia, are heretics within their own faith.

I have spoken with such Muslims and, while they are much to be preferred over the true-believing jihadists, the illogic of their enterprise is readily apparent. Within any Islamic context, their position will always been tenuous at best, which makes them inherently unreliable allies. In the current climate of opinion, I think such 'Muslims' do more harm than good in permitting wishful-thinking Westerners to persist in the myth that Islam can be pacified. To secularize or pacify Islam would require it to jettison two things: Muhammad and the Koran.

This is a harsh reality but one we must face. Islam has existed in its violent form for nearly 1400 years and were are kidding ourselves if we think we are going to undo that basic fact. It may be painful for the idealists, but there will likely never be a time of genuine peace where the Islamic and non-Islamic worlds live in harmonious coexistence. As during the Cold War, an uneasy truce may be the best we can hope for - but that's better than losing.

FP: Are you optimistic or pessimistic about the war and conflict we face?

Davis: Power is a function of capability and will. Right now we have plenty of the former but little of the latter. The jihadists' situation is the opposite, but with time we can expect them to acquire greater capability through the diffusion of military technology and the growing wealth of oil-rich Dar al-Islam. If the West possessed the will, there could be no doubt as to the outcome. But right now we are still trying to fight an antiseptic war against a nameless adversary. Islam has declared war on us while we have declared war on 'terror'. The magnitude of the problem is still totally misunderstood. If the demographic trends of the past three decades continue in Europe, that continent will be majority Muslim in several generations' time. If we think we have problems with the Islamic world today, wait until Dar al-Islam reaches from the Pacific to the English Channel.

In short, I am not optimistic. For the West to win, it will have to rediscover the reasons for winning, the reasons that the West and its heritage are worth preserving. Sadly, there seems to be no one today of public eminence capable or willing to articulate the merits of Western Civilization, which would be the first stage in mounting a defense. So far, Islam's atrocities - the Armenian genocide of the early 20th century, the increasing number of rapes of unveiled women in European cities, even spectacular episodes of terrorism such as 9/11 - have not managed to shake the West out of its complacency.

There is going to have to be a sea change in the West's self-interpretation if it is going to survive. It increasingly seems that, as Europe sinks, it will be left to America to nail the colors to the mast. America is certainly much better off than Europe today for two reasons: first, her Muslim population is much smaller (maybe 5 million despite what some people say); second, she is still largely Christian. It is should be easier for Americans to understand the danger of Islam because they can better empathize with the religious motivation of Muslims. Even her leaders, however, have yet to face up to reality.

FP: Greg Davis, thank you for joining us.

Davis: Thank you.

Posted by: Gramfan at December 28, 2006 2:30 AM

Threats are not to be taken lightly though.

This guy on the picture below was working for democracy- a crime?
WARNING! Graphic and Violent Images shown

http://civoc.com/society/?p=26

Posted by: Arnie at December 28, 2006 3:48 AM

Ronin said

What's a linguistic?

It's a type of pasta, excellent with a lightly fricasse'ed jihadist topped with a touch of chili powder. Pigs and dogs love it.

Posted by: special_guest at December 28, 2006 3:50 AM

It (Koran) is practical and far ahead of its time in attitudes toward marriage, women, and governance.” Tony Blair UK PM

One of the most IDIOTIC, if actually THE MOST IDIOTIC statement by a political leader in human history
Women’s rights among the German pagan tribes, 1st century A.D. – excerpts from Tacitus, The Germans (written around 1st century AD) – somewhat long excerpt, but IMO necessary to debunk the persistent myth that Muhammad was progressive in the 7th century
They choose their kings by birth, their generals for merit. These kings have not unlimited or arbitrary power, and the generals do more by example than by authority. If they are energetic, if they are conspicuous, if they fight in the front, they lead because they are admired. But to reprimand, to imprison, even to flog, is permitted to the priests alone, and that not as a punishment, or at the general's bidding, but, as it were, by the mandate of the god whom they believe to inspire the warrior. They also carry with them into battle certain figures and images taken from their sacred groves. And what most stimulates their courage is, that their squadrons or battalions, instead of being formed by chance or by a fortuitous gathering, are composed of families and clans. Close by them, too, are those dearest to them, so that they hear the shrieks of women, the cries of infants. They are to every man the most sacred witnesses of his bravery-they are his most generous applauders. The soldier brings his wounds to mother and wife, who shrink not from counting or even demanding them and who administer food and encouragement to the combatants. .Tradition says that armies already wavering and giving way have been rallied by women who, with earnest entreaties and bosoms laid bare, have vividly represented the horrors of captivity, which the Germans fear with such extreme dread on behalf of their women, that the strongest tie by which a state can be bound is the being required to give, among the number of hostages, maidens of noble birth. They even believe that the sex (YEAH TACITUS IS TALKING ABOUT WOMEN!) has a certain sanctity and prescience, and they do not despise their counsels, or make light of their answers (SO THE MEN DON’T CONSIDER WOMEN IDIOTS BUT VALUE AND SEEK THEIR COUNSEL!). In Vespasian's days we saw Veleda (TACITUS IS TALKING ABOUT A SPECIFIC GERMAN WOMEN PAGAN PROHETESS OF THE BRUCTERI TRIBE THAT WAS A VERY POWERFUL LEADER AMONG GERMAN TRIBES, SO WOMEN CAN HOLD RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL POSITIONS!), long regarded by many as a divinity. In former times, too, they venerated Aurinia , and many other women (AGAIN TACITUS IS TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER POWERFUL SEERESS AND OTHER WOMEN ELEVATED TO POSITIONS OF POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS POWER), but not with servile flatteries, or with sham deification. …For their covering a mantle is what they all wear, fastened with a clasp or, for want of it, with a thorn. As far as this reaches not they are naked, and lie whole days before the fire… They choose certain wild beasts, and, having flayed them, diversify their hides with many spots, as also with the skins of monsters from the deep, such as are engendered in the distant ocean and in seas unknown. Neither does the dress of the women differ from that of the men, save that the women are orderly attired in linen embroidered with purple, and use no sleeves, so that all their arms are bare. The upper part of their breast is withal exposed (SO THE WOMEN WERE MORE EXPOSED THEN MEN, BOTH SEXES WORE A MANTLE THAT EXPOSED THE LEGS, AND WOMEN’S ATTIRE ADDITIONALLY WAS SLEVELESS AND SHOWED OFF SOME CLEAVAGE - SOUNDS SEXY - NO BURKAS!)….Their marriage code, however, is strict, and indeed no part of their manners is more praiseworthy. Almost alone among barbarians they are content with one wife (MONOGAMY!) , except a very few among them, and these not from sensuality, but because their noble birth procures for them many offers of alliance. The wife does not bring a dower to the husband, but the husband to the wife (SO THE HUSBAND GIVES THE DOWRY TO THE WIFE, NOT HER PARENTS, WHICH MEANS THE WIFE CAN OWN PROPERTY). The parents and relatives are present, and pass judgment on the marriage-gifts, gifts not meant to suit a woman's taste, nor such as a bride would deck herself with, but oxen, a caparisoned steed, a shield, a lance, and a sword. With these presents the wife is espoused, and she herself in her turn brings her husband a gift of arms. This they count their strongest bond of union, these their sacred mysteries, these their gods of marriage. Lest the woman should think herself to stand apart from aspirations after noble deeds and from the perils of war, she is reminded by the ceremony which inaugurates marriage that she is her husband's partner (PARTNER, NOT “TILL”!) in toil and danger, destined to suffer and to dare with him alike both in war. The yoked oxen, the harnessed steed, the gift of arms proclaim this fact. She must live and die with the feeling that she is receiving what she must hand down to her children neither tarnished nor depreciated, what future daughters-in-law may receive, and may be so passed on to her grandchildren.….Thus with their virtue protected they live uncorrupted by the allurements of public shows or the stimulant of feastings. Clandestine correspondence is equally unknown to men and women. Very rare for so numerous a population is adultery, the punishment for which is prompt, and in the husband's power. (SO THE FIRST CENTURY GERMAN PAGAN IDOLATERS WERE SUCCESFUL AT RESTRANING THEMSELVES IN FRONT OF “UNCOVERED MEAT” UNLIKE RELIGIOUS MUSLIM “MEN” THAT PRAY TO GOD FIVE TIMES A DAY) Having cut off the hair of the adulteress and stripped her naked, he expels her from the house in the presence of her kinsfolk, and then flogs her through the whole village. (CRUEL, BUT DIVORCE AND A FLOGGING ADMINISTERED BY HUSBAND STILL IS A MUCH BETTER DEAL THAN STONING TO DEATH BY THE UMMA) The loss of chastity meets with no indulgence; neither beauty, youth, nor wealth will procure the culprit a husband (AGAIN APPARENTLY SEXUALLY VERY CONSERVATIVE, BUT WOMEN DRESS NORMAL AND NORMALLY SOCIALIZE WITH MEN). No one in Germany laughs at vice, nor do they call it the fashion to corrupt and to be corrupted (HOW WAS THAT POSSIBLE SINCE ACCORDING TO MUSLIMS A WOMAN DRESSING SEXY MEANS SHE IS A SLUT?). Still better is the condition of those states in which only maidens are given in marriage, and where the hopes and expectations of a bride are then finally terminated. They receive one husband, as having one body and one life, that they may have no thoughts beyond, no further-reaching desires, that they may love not so much the husband as the married state. To limit the number of children or to destroy any of their subsequent offspring is accounted infamous, and good habits are here more effectual than good laws elsewhere….The young men marry late, and their vigour is thus unimpaired. Nor are the maidens hurried into marriage; the same age and a similar stature is required; well-matched and vigorous they wed, and the offspring reproduce the strength of the parents (NO PREBUBESCENT KIDS RAPED IN “MARRIAGE”!). Sister's sons are held in as much esteem by their uncles as by their fathers; indeed, some regard the relation as even more sacred and binding, and prefer it in receiving hostages, thinking thus to secure a stronger hold on the affections and a wider bond for the family.

So let’s see, 1st century A.D. German pagan tribes,- women hold positions of political and religious power because women’s counsel is valued, women dress sexy, monogamy and wives are “partners”, no child marriage, flogging and divorce punishment for adultery, society sexually conservative
Muhammad 7th century A.D.– women cannot hold positions of religious and political power because women are idiots, wives are “till”, polygamy, burkas, stoning to death for adultery, society sexually pathological --- You’ve come a long way baby!
Yup, Muhammad was very progressive on women’s rights issues and in his attitudes to women and marriage, - PRATICALLY LIGHT YEARS AHEAD OF HIS TIME!
In fact he was only about 600 years behind the 1st century German pagan tribes on women’s issues, Blair you hopeless IDIOT!
And those wonderful countries of Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan are now only about 2000 years behind 1st century German pagan tribes on women’s rights right now!
Yeah Blair, Islam was progressive in the 7th century, compared to what, Neanderthal social structures or chimpanzee social hierarchies? In fact, nuking the muslims back into the Stone Age just may be a civilizational leap for them on a scale comparable to what the Renaissance was for the West!

Posted by: godfreyofbouillon at December 28, 2006 4:18 AM

texan, do you have trouble with reading or something.
The chili powder is not a problem but the "i will f**kin chop you up" does... people like you are obviously are not agaisnt hate mail from Muslims so are you in fact a Muslim...
I for the life of me cant see why people like you cant see that there is non-stop world wide Muslim violence, some people don't seem to have the brains to find out why this and only this religion is causing such devastation. It is not hate mail, it is helping people to know what is going on.. Just before hitler started his rampage, we were being warned by people in the know and they got the same flack. There were many who refuted this as there is today in regards Islam but many of the were quickly killed once hitler came to power...I know in America that you dont get much outside news unless it is on Iraq, but we do here in OZ..
let me put it this way, Joint Chiefs of Staff planners have produced a 27-page briefing, even support of 1 percent of the Muslim population would equate to over 12 million 'enemies.' " thus Islamic extremists may be supported by 12 million Muslims worldwide, but some say that it could be as high as 30%, but even a 10% is horrific and from the lack of outrage from Muslims of attrocities done by Muslims world wide it could be far more.

Posted by: Gaye at December 28, 2006 6:18 AM

and Texan, could you tell me what do all these countries have in common,, UK, Spain, Tunisia, Iraq, Russia, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Turkey, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kenya, Tanzania, Bali, Indonesia, Philippines, USR, Egypt, Britain,
Nigeria, Sudan, Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Armenia, Macedonia, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Bosnia, Chechnya, Russia, Kashmir, Pakistan, Indonesia and the Philippines and many others.
As you dont seem to know what is going on ut there I will tell you, they have all been struck by terror attacks.

What do they all have in common? In each country or province, there is an ongoing struggle involving Moslems and non-Moslems..

And if peace is preached to non Muslims in the Quran , how does Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Grope Islamique Arme', the international front, Jemaah Islamiyah and others Islamic groups get such a horrific hold . Is it because although there are verses of peace etc in the first quarter of the Quran, later once Mohammad aquired enough members Allah changed his mind and in the last three quarters of the quran and others of their holy books there are hundreds of verses of hate, terror, torture, and slaughter until all have submitted to Allah. In their eyes they are not terrorists nor radical Muslims, they are just doing what Allah requires of them. How can you claim hate speech, yet say nothing against the hate written in the quran, or dont you know, or do you know because you are a Muslim.. we all lived in peace until we were attacked. There was no hate then, Muslims have always had trouble getting along with any of their neighbours...

Posted by: Gaye at December 28, 2006 6:35 AM

Maybe I'm wrong about Tony Blair. But what he said rings a bell with me.
When I was young I was being harrased by a thug at school. My mother told me a story, I can't remember it but I think it was from the Bible.
The gist of it was I was to go and say really complimentary and kind things about this thug. It worked. This person wanted to maintain their reputation as a thug and had to make public their real intentions. Before the had blinded everyone to how really mean they were.
By pointing out some of the obvious fallicies about the public image of Islam perhaps he is trying to get people to take a good look at it. If he got this stuff from reading the Koran, I want some of what he's smoking.
I think the telling thing is the reform of Chistianity part. That should wake up SOME Dhimmis.

Posted by: auntbea at December 28, 2006 7:48 AM

Debbie Schlussel just got another telephone "harassment" if not threat

I checked this out. Wow, Michigan used to be such a lovely state.
The guy who commented about being kicked off Yahoo after reporting a threat to our Prez. should not be surprised, a lot of these companies are infiltrated.
I guess it will be no suprise if the four Prez's don't go to Michigan for Ford's funeral.
Although I for one would like to see four secret service organizations descend on that Islamic state. They have NO restrictions on whom they can investigate.

Posted by: auntbea at December 28, 2006 7:56 AM

Mother Ecclesiastica, Before we actually begin the war on Islam (the war to save our skins) we will have to defeat those leaders (Blair et al) who are leading us into dhimmitude or death. People like Blair are the reason that we are loosing at this stage. I hope that the British National Party soon becomes the majority party.

Posted by: Pelayo at December 28, 2006 8:40 AM

Robert, your site is great. I'm glad you shrug off the losers that threaten you. Keep on exposing the thruth. Religion of peace....my ass!

Posted by: americanmadestrat at December 28, 2006 8:41 AM

Gaye,
A fair share of these psychotic rants from closet jihadists would render anyone with a sense of humour sprinkled with a touch of sarcasm.

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at December 28, 2006 8:47 AM

How very brave of Mr. Souljha to threaten Robert over the Internet. He's probably 5'2" and lives with his mother.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at December 28, 2006 9:08 AM

How very brave of Mr. Souljha to threaten Robert over the Internet. He's probably 5'2" and lives with his mother.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at December 28, 2006 09:08

LOL! I was thinking the same thing! Most of the muslims I've seen are these teeny, little, 140 pound weaklings with one-inch biceps. Robert will hammer him! :)

Posted by: A.I. Steamroller at December 28, 2006 10:24 AM

"i will f**kin chop you up and put chilli powder all over your wounds. ps bin laden"

Robert-

This is not so much true Islam as it is true human nature. It is the deceivers (CAIR style, secret-Jew haters, etc.) who practice true Islam.

The belief-system is the only major belief system that condones deception. It is the deception that fertilizes the fields of violence. This is not deception, though it is not to be condoned or taken lightly.

Posted by: Frank at December 28, 2006 10:24 AM

Once upon a lonesome I called up a mosque in Lawrence, KS while doing background research for a news story I was working on. The simple question I asked about whether they subscribed to the doctrine of al Wahhab illicited a string of legal threats and screeching protests, in addition to threatening to call the F.B.I. on me for simply asking (and I've always been polite, no matter my personal opinion of their faith and culture).
And WHY hasn't anyone called the authorities on this imbecile for threatening your life?

Posted by: dailywarren at December 28, 2006 11:21 AM

Please do call both the FBI and also contact Hotmail to have this e-mailer traced.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at December 28, 2006 11:29 AM

Why not curry powder? pi_s bin ladin

Posted by: MP at December 28, 2006 11:52 AM

The Churchill quote above is apt. In Islam the basest human tendencies are uplifted IF done in the name of Allah and promoting Islam, as holy (like suicide bombing). This latest threat from this muslim is in keeping with the quranic command to "let them (nonbelievers) find harshness in you"

"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)." (Qur'an 9:123)

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014203.php

--------------

But to all jihad watch promotors who celebrate Christmas and to Robert Spencer and staff and everybody on here who is fighting the good fight against this darkness I would like to wish you all a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year 2007.

Posted by: THE ALLIES SHALL WIN at December 28, 2006 12:20 PM

This muslim mutant doesn't beat around the bush. He let's us know how cruel he really is. I mean, come on, freakin' chilli powder! That really stings. This muslim should be exiled into the desert. Better yet, the far reaches of Siberia.

Posted by: Truthseeker at December 28, 2006 12:21 PM

It`s a Jooish conspiracy innit ?
This poor retard is upset that his wife is not 9 yet , then he can re-enact Ole Blackbeard the Bedouin`s paedophilia.

Posted by: aladdinsane57 at December 28, 2006 12:22 PM

Muslim unity

Odd handle (muslim unity) for a person who seems to regard muslims as not unified. For example, the OBL approval among muslims world wide is higher than 10%. Ask a muslim in Dearborn about OBL and you will likely get a different answer than the one given by a muslim in Yemen. The answer in Dearborn isn't going to necessarily truthfull either. The bottom line is...you have a tough job ahead trying to defend islam and it's overwhelmingly looney adherents (try to keep a straight face).

Posted by: pismopal at December 28, 2006 12:30 PM

US Infidel,

You said it!

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at December 28, 2006 1:04 PM

You have some stastics which show it is 10 to 20 % who support that animal?

Track down the scientific poll taken in Pakistan a day or two after Sept 11. As I recall OBL's approval rating hovered somewhere around 85%.

Are there no Moslems in Pakistan?

Also, I'd guess that --- in private --- OBL's approval rating here would be in the same ballpark. Write of the 15% as apostates or people to dumb to undertand the Koran and Sunnah, a collection of simplistic documents unto themselves.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at December 28, 2006 1:05 PM

Pelayo is right. The near enemies are the hardest to beat. The ones who are afraid and in denial, the ones who hate their country and their culture, who hate themselves, the ones who are nihilists and fuzzy thinking idealists.

We must attack the near enemy on all fronts, first individually as with friends and family, then, we must work together, underground and in the pubic arena, embarrass them with facts, call them on their pc lies, overwhelm them with knowledge, politely as Robert does. And they, the near enemy, after enough battering, will topple from their self appointed thrones.

The far enemy is ignorant, lazy, a windup toy that can only repeat or do what is in the box of islam that he follows and a cowardly warrior who is blinded to his fate by sacred hate. How pitiful and sad they are.

Posted by: the poetess at December 28, 2006 1:34 PM

muslimunity,
Please show us where OBL is notfollowing the qur'an.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at December 28, 2006 1:50 PM

No joke, Robert. Be careful.

Posted by: Nolo Contendo at December 28, 2006 2:59 PM

My father who was a Lieutenant Colonel said that the Arabs on the whole were cowards, especially individually. They would pretend to be friends with you and when you walked out the tent door they would stab you in the back... Even some imagined slight would put them in frenzy...

Posted by: Gaye at December 28, 2006 5:28 PM

Good grief I hadnt realised that they are terrorising in Scotland as well...how many other countries that we are not told about are they terrorising in..
wow we hear this in every country that Muslims adopt, I wonder why,
Muslims world wide are saying that Muslims were increasingly being victimised on religious grounds. How could it be islamophobia when our own politicians and media bend over backwards to appease them... Strange how they can yell loud and clear about being victimised, but there is no outrage agaisnt their own when there are many terrorist attacks against non Muslims world wide.... and they wont... read the last three quarters of the Quran and others of their holy books to find out why....

Where is this moderate Islam we keep getting forced down our knecks by our leaders? Why do infidels" (Blair, Bush and the media) keep on explaining that global terrorism is a warped misinterpretation of Islam? If this is true, shouldn't it be Muslim's speaking for (not to mention protecting) their own religion? Where are the masses of Muslims who are leading or at least joining the war on terror???? .

Joint Chiefs of Staff planners have produced a 27-page briefing, even support of terrorism of 1 percent of the Muslim population would equate to over 12 million 'enemies.' " so if it is a religion of peace there should be 99% who are helping to try to stop these Muslim terrorists...hmmmm

Posted by: Gaye at December 28, 2006 6:58 PM

Dontcha worry Robert, a rather unstable friend of mine assures me that if the little prick ever did manage to harm even a single hair on your head, he'd be unceremoniously screwed to a one-inch sheet of plywood and his genitalia would be removed using a rusty old pair of nail-clippers saved for just that purpose. If it's a bad day, or if my friend is feeling hung over, I'm told the detached member might then be wizzed up in a food processor (along with a little pork boullion for flavor) and fed back to the a**hole via his nostrils using a pastry piping bag.

Posted by: lietzout berzerker at December 28, 2006 10:38 PM