Thank you Robert, for vitally thought-provoking questions on Keith ELlison's questionable ties to MAS & ICNA, specially in the backdrop of cries of "Allahu Akbar"!

Almost prophetically, Virgil Goode's predictions have already started coming Good (no pun intended).

Posted by: Alert at December 28, 2006 10:38 AM

Robert's video asked the "one-size-fits-all intolerance" media the right question. In light of the Europe's experiences, especially those of France and Her Majesty's Kingdom. the anti-Goode media ought to heed Robert's advice to step back and examine this issue in greater depth and a little less whitewash.

ohara

Posted by: OHara at December 28, 2006 11:24 AM

Support Goode with whatever is possible.

Posted by: Arnie at December 28, 2006 11:41 AM

Robert,
Indeed thank you very much. I have run into liberals who espouse this feel good stuff and a general PC attitude towards society. The only shame is that your tape will not be viewed by a wider audience. These are the people who need to see it. Thanks and have a jihad free New Year yourelf!

ps I agree: support Goode and others like him.

Posted by: lonewolf at December 28, 2006 11:48 AM

This is a perfect example of the liberal media's stupidity, i.e., the Washington Post's editorial on immigration. Heaven help us Lord, when Pelosi takes over in January. They're going to attempt to get a bill passed giving illegal immigrants citizenship. The Washington Post and Pelosi appear to have no knowledge or concept of Islamic extremism. I strongly support Virgil Goode's comments. He is one of the few who does GET IT.

Posted by: Bonniea at December 28, 2006 12:03 PM

Robert,
Indeed thank you very much. I have run into liberals who espouse this feel good stuff and a general PC attitude towards society. The only shame is that your tape will not be viewed by a wider audience. These are the people who need to see it. Thanks and have a jihad free New Year yourelf!

ps I agree: support Goode and others like him.
Posted by: lonewolf [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 28, 2006 11:48 AM

Good suggestion lonewolf,

I'd say, put it on youtube or google. Many more people would link, put it on their blogs,websites, or link to it.

Posted by: Arnie at December 28, 2006 12:27 PM

If American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of Koran....

Here is a scenario about what would follow next:

The play starts with a group of traveling Eurabian dhimmis aboard a plane which soon will be landing in New York City, U.S.A (United States of Arabia).

[Narrated by one of the travelers]

Upon the announce by our veiled and burqa clad hostess over the intercom, we fastened our seat belts and waited in our seats. The announce was shortly followed by a prayer from the Holy Koran.

Exiting the gates, we proceeded to the passport control. The control booths are filled with bearded men who ordered the women in the group to move to woman-only section.

The checks normally proceeded without any major incident except for a person which was detained by the religious police (the Mutawain) for his overly European physical appearance: blond, clean shaven and also smelling clean and elegant looking. I heard later that he had been released upon paying a jizyah for disturbing the public order. Someone even said that the police made some sexual advances to him, but anyway that was only rumor…

We were picked up by our guide in a bus painted in Pakistani style, i;e with flecks of color all over the deck. We had some minor problem there too; like getting aboard the bus because it was already jam-packed with people (the dhimmi tourist groups are not allowed each separate bus services and there was only one bus allotted for the incoming dhimmi tourist groups.). The airport guards helped us to squeeze ourselves in by pushing us forward.

On our way to the city, I noticed muslim prayer beads dangling out from the front mirror in the bus and the radio was airing out a song by Umm Gulsum, a once and still favorite egyptian female singer. Quotes from the Koran in arabic were inscripted all over the bus.

BTW, I had thought that the name of the airport was JFK but our guide corrected me by telling me the new name: Al- Zarkawi airport.

When we arrived in New York City (new name: New Mecca), I was astounded to see how the city had been transformed. On my way from the airport to the NYC, I counted 340 mosques. Our guide told me that a mega mosque project was under way and its place was chosen to be where once the world trade center had been before it was demolished by “the holy warriors of islam”. We did not tour that part of the city but those who had already visited that quarter told me there were posters of jihad martyrs on the walls who had died in the 9/11 attack.

While passing through what had been Wall Street, I felt relief (secretly) to see that the area was preserved. There were people dressed in businessmen style mingled with people dressed in traditional arab style. The guide told us that these were a few dhimmis who are allowed to work because of their technical expertise, that is, they were specialists in financial computing or financial mathematics, topics which were too specialized or difficult for muslims to substitute them (also to understand). The guide, later, whispered to my ear that these dhimmis are in fact “Jews”. But “sshh” , he said, “no one is supposed to know this”.

Speaking about the jews, I asked him whether we could also visit Brooklyn as well, for the song “Brooklyn by the sea” was among my favorites in my youth days. He told me that the area was “Out of bounds” for the moment as its inhabitants were in the process of being “resettled”. I recalled with horror that the area had once been predominantly Jewish. “Nooo” I said (whisper to myself), could the horrors of the past be recurring?

With a friendly tap on my shoulder, our smiling guide told me that we were now heading for Broadway which now became Al Jazira TV headquarters and tonight there would be the TV broadcast of “Intifada” to be followed by “the Conquest of the Constantinopolis”. “You absolutely shouldn’t miss particularly the executions (by beheading) and stonings which would be broadcast live from AhmadiNajad square (old Rockfeller Center)”, he said. I was shocked.. The fellow sitting next me told me that , though horrifying to watch, it would still be change from watching things like how King Fahd wipe his ass in the toilet or TV shows such as “69 ways of beating and raping your vomen: the islamic style”. “During my last visit here, they made us watch similar things in the hotel and I have had enough of that”, he said.

Our sympathetic guide also apologized for not being able to take us to visit the Statue of Liberty, or rather what it had been for now it was being “restructured” to become the statue of Osama Bin Ladin holding a submachine gun in his right hand.

NOOOOO! This time I yelled out loud and the whole people in the bus turned around to look at me.
…….
I woke up in horror and perspiring…. My wife was trying me to shake me up.. Come on Jim, she told me.. you have had a nightmare…

I glanced at the clock and decided to call my son who is serving in the army in Iraq. Our troops there will soon be pulling out, but I will be damned if I won’t use my relations up in the administration to make sure that he is transferred to Guantanamo.

Posted by: Icarus_Project at December 28, 2006 12:59 PM

Start counting!

Posted by: lonewolf at December 28, 2006 1:06 PM

Great video Robert. Your phrase, "preconceived notion" exactly points out that its really Goode's critics, as you say, who have pre-conceived notions. Those are the heart of intolerance and bigotry.

Many people on many websites have commented that many of Goode's critics have what seems a deep rooted visceral dislike bordering on hatred of anyone who talks with Goode's accent and comes from Virginia.

Intolerance is linked to not listening. Vilification of opponents is part of intolerance. Those who have called Goode a bigot should look at your writings here and your books, as well as the Skeptics Annotated Koran.

Skeptics Annotated Quran

They should look at it in chronological order and look at the last two chapters in that order. The last is a stub, and that leaves Repentance, or chapter 9 in the original order. Repentance abrogates all the peaceful verses from the rest o the Koran. The Skeptics Koran lists the good verses in the Koran. There are 67 total.

Some bigot shouters reference Thomas Jefferson writing on religious tolerance. Jefferson bought the Koran in 1765. He wrote the Declaration of Independence with Adams. That is a declaration of war, and Jefferson understood what it means to justify war based on existing texts.

In 1786 Jefferson and Adams met with Ambassador Adja of Tripoli. Tripoli was part of the
Caliphate, the Ottoman Empire. Thus Adja's words represented the Caliphate, the unitary political, military, religious, and legal entity of Islam.

Joshua Logan on Adja, Adams, Jefferson meeting

quote

These future United States presidents questioned the ambassador as to why his government was so hostile to the new American republic even though America had done nothing to provoke any such animosity. Ambassador Adja answered them, as they reported to the Continental Congress, “that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

end quote

Adja spoke for the Caliphate. The Barbary states were under the Caliphate, and were taking slaves from Europe from before 1500 to after 1800. So the Caliph knew this was happening.

Adja represented the Caliphate, as the supreme authority on Islam, a unitary religious, political, legal, and military entity. Adja's words represent the views of the Caliphate, that it was in declared war on the United States in the 18th and 19th centuries. The Caliph knew this since it lasted centuries and so it represented his views, as the supreme authority of Islam.

The Caliphate in the person of the Ottoman Empire was in declared war on the United States in the 20th century during WWI.

The Verse of the Sword, 9:5 is from the 2nd to last chapter of the Koran in chronological order and therefore abrogates peaceful verses earlier in the Koran, as you and other commentators have said.

Verse 9:5, Adja's statement and bin Laden's Fatwa of 1998 all show the same logic. All say the war is not of their personal making as individuals but that it is from the Koran according the Law of the Prophet, as the Jefferson Adams report of Adja's statement states it.

Verse of the Sword 9:5

quote

slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush.

end quote

bin Laden's Fatwa 1998

quote

On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it,

end quote

The Koran Verse of the Sword, Adja's statement and bin Laden's Fatwa 1998 all use parallel language. Adja, as the representative of the Caliph said clearly that it was written in the Koran that Islam was at war with the United States, because the US had not submitted to the authority of Islam.

Jefferson and Adams were good lawyers, writers of the Declaration of Independence, and skilled ambassadors. They got down every key element of Adja's statement.

The war we are in now, and the wars in every century of the existence of the United States are because we have not submitted to the authority of Islam as stated to our ambassadors by the ambassador and representative of the Caliph, the supreme authority of Islam, a single unitary religious, military, political and legal entity.

Based in this, Jefferson and Adams fought the war the Barbary Pirates and thus the Caliphate and thus Islam were waging on the United States as an entity. According to Adja that comes from our not submitting to Islam and that this is the Law of the Prophet and written in the Koran. That is according to the Jefferson Adams report, an official document of the United States government.

Based on Adja's statements, the reason for that state of war have never changed, because the US has never submitted to Islam. Therefore the statement of the Caliph's representative is still binding and places Islam in a state of declared war with the United States. This comes from the Koran according the representative of the Caliph, the supreme authority of Islam stated to the Ambassadors of the United States, Jefferson and Adams.

This was is therefore still in effect. Therefore no person should take an oath on the Koran in the United States for any purpose.

Posted by: Old Atlantic at December 28, 2006 1:30 PM

Before the media starts expousing tolerance, isn't is at the very least wise to see exactly what we are expected to tolerate? Indiscriminate tolerance is as destructive as indiscriminate intolerance. Evidently it is dangerous to tolerate Islamic fanatics because they would destroy everything the secular west stands for. Then there would be no tolerance of any kind for anyone except th Muslim male.

Posted by: Truthseeker at December 28, 2006 6:14 PM

This case is merely but one reason why I voted for MSM as idiots of the year on LGF. Yes, I do know that's not how it's titled but let's face it MSM for the most part are *idiots*.

I'm happy that there are sites such as this one that give the true stories.

Thank you.

Posted by: Desdinova at December 28, 2006 6:19 PM

Ellison should be in a cell, in Gitmo, not in congress.

Posted by: cheese_burger at December 28, 2006 7:09 PM

The following 3 articles are of fundamental importance to be read.

"Victory in Tripoli "
By Jamie Glazov

FrontPageMagazine.com | May 9, 2006

The following has some very long excerpts of which we quote some small segments. Its important to study every word of the excerpts.

"John Quincy Adams Knew Jihad "
By Andrew G. Bostom
FrontPageMagazine.com | September 29, 2004

quote

John Quincy Adams possessed a remarkably clear, uncompromised understanding of the permanent Islamic institutions of jihad war and dhimmitude. Regarding jihad, Adams states in his essay series,

“…he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.”

end quote

quote

Confirming Adams’ assessment, the late Muslim scholar, Professor Majid Khadduri, wrote the following in his authoritative 1955 treatise on jihad, War and Peace in the Law of Islam :

“Thus the jihad may be regarded as Islam’s instrument for carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers, if not in the prophethood of Muhammad (as in the case of the dhimmis), at least in the belief of God.

end quote

quote

"Adams on Jesus Christ and Christianity, Relative to Muhammad and Islam"

THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE (Adam's capital letters)

..

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.” [p. 269]

end quote

quote

"Adams on Jihad War, Dhimmitude, and the Muslim View of Non-Muslims; Examples of the Perfidy of Muslim States, Including the Ottoman Turkish State"

“As the essential principle of his 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.

...

The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.

...

the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective.

end quote

quote

"treachery and violence are taught as principles of religion.” [p. 274-275]

...

“[More from the Ottoman Sultan’s pronouncement to his subjects]...‘all infidels are but one nation…This war must be considered purely a religious and national war. Let all the faithful, rich or poor, great or little, know, that to fight is a duty with us; let them then refrain from thinking of arrears, or of pay of any kind; far from such considerations, let us sacrifice our property and our persons; let us execute zealously the duties which the honor of Islamism imposes on us – let us unite our efforts, and labor, body and soul, for the support of religion, until the day of judgement. Mussulmen have no other means of working out salvation in this world and the next.’”

end quote

The last is the statement of the Sultan, also the Caliph. The Caliph is the head of Islam, a unitary religious, political, military and legal entity. Thus it is an authoritative statement of Islam and the Koran.

The 9/11 Commission and Jihad
By Andrew G. Bostom
FrontPageMagazine.com | July 30, 2004

Posted by: Old Atlantic at December 28, 2006 8:41 PM

John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams were, of our first presidents, the top diplomats. Along with Benjamin Franklin, they were the diplomats who created America and kept it going.

Two of the three were critical to draft the Declaration of Independence. The lives of all 3 were marked by exceptional tolerance.

Jefferson owned slaves, but J Q Adams devoted much of his life to opposing slavery in Congress after he was President. He also spent that time opposing the slavery imposed by the Ottoman Empire on Christians.

These founding fathers were worldly and sophisticated. They were better traveled before becoming President than George Bush or William Clinton. They had dealth with many of the major countries in Europe.

J Q Adams grew up in foreign countries with John Adams. These men had a level of foreign policy expertise and experience unmatched in any president with the possible exception of Eisenhower.

They were exceptionally well read and knowledgeable in the Koran and Islam out of all senior US diplomats and presidents in history.

They wrote what they did about Islam to warn us. They told us we faced perpetual war from the Muslims. J Q Adams says that forcefully. At the same time he labored for the abolition of slavery in Congress. He was no bigot.

J Q Adams wrote what he did as a warning to future generations in this country. One day they would have to finish the war with Islam, once technology and rising populations brought us face to face for control of the planet. That time has arrived. We had to defeat many other totalitarian ideologies, Nazism and Communism. The latter, like Islam, had infiltrated us heavily, complicating the fight.

The war of Islam on the rest of the War started in 622 AD. Their calendar dates from that. Their Koran declares their war on the rest of mankind. J Q Adams says exactly that. Adams says while Islam exists, there is perpetual war.

Posted by: Old Atlantic at December 28, 2006 8:52 PM

Just to state the obvious. In an earlier post, it was stated that the Tripoli Ambassador Adja, was a representative of the Caliph, also Sultan, and thus spoke authoritatively for Islam.

The Sultan's own statement confirms this.

So does the Islamic scholar quoted in the Bostom article, "the late Muslim scholar, Professor Majid Khadduri, ... authoritative 1955 treatise on jihad, War and Peace in the Law of Islam :"

Posted by: Old Atlantic at December 28, 2006 8:56 PM

Hugh goes over some of the same ground below

Fitzgerald: Jefferson, the Adamses, and making sense

Search

"John Quincy Adams" site:jihadwatch.org

"John Quincy Adams" site:frontpagemag.org

Posted by: Old Atlantic at December 28, 2006 9:05 PM

Very clever. Mr. Spencer tactfully avoids commenting on what Congressman Goode actually said. Instead he changes the topic. What is your position on Goode's actual comments, Mr. Spencer? As an American, does a muslim elected official have the same rights as anyone else, or not? Jewish elected officials have the right to put their hand on the Torah, shouldn't a muslim have the same right? Personally I would feel much better if he puts his hand on a book that he actually believes in. If we are going to talk the talk of equal rights and justice for all, we better be ready to walk the walk also.

Posted by: The Pragmatist at December 28, 2006 10:06 PM

Pragmatist, I think it's self evident that the issue is not the fact that Ellison was legally elected and that he could damn do what he wants to do as a congressman. If he wants to he could hop on one leg and wear bright orange pants and green coat while putting hand on a voodoo doll while saying the oaths. But the question is why we have to accept him or his so called holy book. specially if the followers of his holy book have brought violence, misery, slavery, ethnic cleansing, and mass murders to millions of people all over the world throughout history.
Given that none of these crimes are recognized by these Muslims, given that they have never apologized for any of these crimes. Given that they are proud of these crimes. And you think we should just ignore this Muslim in congress? We should ignore his Koran? Try substituting Ellison for a Nazi and the Koran with a "mein kamph". Would you still feel the same way?

Posted by: desidude at December 29, 2006 12:31 AM

desidude: "Try substituting Ellison for a Nazi and the Koran with a "mein kamph". Would you still feel the same way?"

Exactly. Why is this not the next MSM question when you follow the logic of The Pragmatist "Personally I would feel much better if he puts his hand on a book that he actually believes in."

More precisely, would you be equally comforted if a Congressman wanted to swear on a book that explicitly called for the destruction of the US and its Constitution (in direct contravention of the oath of office) in plain English. How about the Communist Manifesto, Mao's Red Book, the PLO Charter, KKK noose, Aryan Nations, or Constitution of the Confederate States? As long as he belives, it's Goode enough?

That is the crux of the biscuit... is the Koran (as written and practised) compatible with or contradictory to our constitution?

The comments of our founding fathers is what leads me to the conclusion that we are still fighting the original world war; what I call WW0 (please note that Roman Numerals do not have a "0" so a conceptual shift is necessary even to understand the concept). The participation of the Muslims as an ally of Germany in WWI and WWII was actually a continuation of the same war. The key impacts of imported "ex"-Nazi's in Eqypt, Iraq, etc. after WWII were also a continuation of the same war. This is the same war we fight in Iraq and worldwide today.

Who is really more bigoted, Mr. Goode, who warns of danger based on the real fruits of jihad, or the Koran, which calls for subjegation and the death of infidels?

My question has shifted from "Can Islam be reformed" to "Does Islam want to be reformed?"

Repeated convictions for direct and indirect support of terror attacks by Muslims has led to the difficult and hurtful but necessary question: how can I tell which Muslim is a loyal citizen and which Muslim wants to destroy America/Europe? This is reinforced when a person honors an organization that promotes the books of the godfathers of Jihad. When this same person has a long history of questionable statements this, like the flying imams, seems deliberately provacative. To what end?

Posted by: Sashland at December 29, 2006 4:13 AM

Here's a really nice attack on CAIR and their lies about Peace and Justice, the intro is brief and then the Rap-Video tells CAIR and Islam that it better not bring its crap into their Hood .
I have said in the past just after 9/11 that Islam made a serious mistake to slaught Afro-Americans in N.Y. , racism and injustice to Blacks was a hot topic for many years and a valid
claim to anger against "The man" , but that's because nobody else has screwed them over in America.
Now that Muslim hijackers murdered people from over 65 Nationalities and from every race and religion , minorities in the USA have a new enemy and it's a death-cult that will kill any person that's not a follower or will submit to Allah( Islam in arabic) .

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5bd89a248b

Posted by: ala-sux at December 29, 2006 8:30 AM

Excellent essay by Dianna West

http://www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20061228-090909-5985r

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com
A question for 2007
By Diana West
Published December 29, 2006

Taking a whack at prognostication at the end of 2005, it wasn't hard to imagine, as I did, that 2006 would be a rotten year for freedom of speech. Both inside the Islamic world and, more alarmingly, outside the Islamic world, Shariah laws prohibiting criticism of Islam were already working smoothly. When in 2005 we watched the death-penalty-seeking prosecution of editor Ali Mohaqeq Nasab for "blasphemy" in U.S.-liberated Afghanistan, we could see we were dealing with a Shariah state. When in 2005 we watched the early stages of what later became known as "Cartoon Rage" in Denmark, we could see we were dealing with a Shariah state of mind. It wasn't exactly going out on a limb to predict things would only get worse.
And, of course, in 2006, they did. Just ask Abdul Rahman if you can find him. The "apostate" fled Afghanistan for his life last spring. Or Robert Redeker, if you can find him. The teacher who published a critique of Islam in September still lives in hiding in France. Or maybe Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury. The Bangladeshi journalist faces the death penalty when he goes on trial in January for "blasphemy" and treason for writing favorably about Israel and unfavorably about Islamic terrorism. Of course, such censorship is "Over There" and beyond, not in the United States of America, right? And it can't, as they say, happen here. Right? Please, right?
I called 2006 "The Year of Speaking Dangerously," and that was before anyone likely imagined seeing "Behead Those Who Insult Islam" placards on jihadist display outside the Danish Embassy in London. What kind of year will 2007 be? What I fear most is that it will turn out to be "The Year of Shutting Up." As in: Why speak dangerously when you can simply not speak at all?
In fact, the Year of Shutting Up probably began back in September when Pope Benedict famously argued that the practice of forced conversion — key to Islamic expansion over the centuries — is inimical to both faith and reason. The eruption of anger among Muslims at such criticism was instantaneous and severe. Just shut up, the umma exclaimed. Basically, the pope did exactly that.
At the time, Daniel Pipes explained why placating such anger with silence was dangerous for the West: "The Muslim uproar has a goal — to prohibit criticism of Islam by Christians and thereby impose Shariah norms in the West. Should Westerners accept this central tenet of Islamic law, others will surely follow. Retaining free speech about Islam, therefore, represents a critical defense against the imposition of an Islamic order."
Mr. Pipes' language — "shariah norms in the West," "the imposition of an Islamic order" — evokes a potential transformation of our culture that is nothing short of revolutionary. Our elites seem not to have the slightest clue how devastating such a change, which comes under the rubric of Islamization, would be to our Judeo-Christian-rooted civilization. Indeed, it is increasingly clear that they don't know the difference between "an Islamic order" and Judeo-Christian-rooted civilization — or even that there is a difference.
There are exceptions. In November, there was Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida Republican, who stood up for constituents' free speech under CAIR pressure. Now Rep. Virgil Goode, Virginia Republican, has become both the lone standard-bearer of free speech about Islam and the favorite whipping boy of the PC elites. In a letter to constituents about the decision of Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, Minnesota Democrat, to use a Koran at his swearing-in ceremony, Mr. Goode expressed what I take to be his recognition that the laws of Islam — which prohibit religious freedom, freedom of speech and conscience, equality before the law and women's rights — do not augment but rather contravene the founding principles of the United States.
He also wrote: "I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America." It's difficult to argue with Mr. Goode's logic. Indeed, the test case of the age — Europe — demonstrates that Islamic immigration brings Islamic law, which is demonstrably at odds with American values and beliefs. Forgoing debate, however, Mr. Goode's critics have resorted to name-calling and platitudes about "tolerance," failing utterly to notice the gross intolerance of the Islamic tradition. Worst of all, their tactics seem designed to shut up Mr. Goode, and anyone else who might follow his bold example. Will they?
It's the question of 2007.

Posted by: justamomof4 at December 29, 2006 11:19 AM

Robert Spencer defends Rep. Goode by proposing asking Ellison and US-based Jihad support groups some questions.

It is a good idea, but wholly irrelevant to Rep. Goode episode.

Rep. Goode did not suggest of asking anyone anything.
Rep. Goode said in essence:

We must cut Muslim immigration or we will have many more Ellisons in Congress pushing Sharia on us.

Rep. Goode is a pioneer and a hero.
A meakly defense of him about asking questions is no Goode.

Posted by: mik_infidel at December 29, 2006 3:11 PM

Sashland:

"My question has shifted from "Can Islam be reformed" to "Does Islam want to be reformed?"

You didn't hang around this site long enough or you are a slow learner.

Koran is a final word of Allah (piss be upon him), perfect in every way and final.
How can you reform it?

It is like reforming circle as being not round enough or too round. Impossible.

Posted by: mik_infidel at December 29, 2006 3:16 PM

A defense of Robert Spencer's tactics.

Begala tactics turned on them. When Begala went on CNN with Bay Buchana, Begala had a scripted attack. Begale said Goode was a bigot and idiot. He went off, in a staged manner.

Bay Buchanan was stunned and not prepared. She was then asked by Wolf Blitzer to denounce Goode, she complied, partly, but then ended up saying, this is wrong. She was right it was wrong.

This is what happens when you don't script an attack and execute it, you are asked to ritually denounce your own side and own positions.

What was the truth? Bay's brother, Pat, said stop immigration in 1992 at the Republican National Convention. Begala and Clinton scripted an attack then to call him a bigot to undermine Bush Sr. and get Clinton elected. It worked.

Then we were attacked in Feb 93. Clinton and Begala ignored that. They didn't focus public attention on this. Clinton didn't even visit the WTC, speak to the famillies of the dead or comment on it, to any great extent. Why? Because it was done by immigrants. Buchanan was right, so Begala Clinton ignored it.

So what do Begala and the MSM do after 9-11? From 9-11 onwards, they attack Pat Buchanan and even the unnamed truth teller who says stop immigration as bigots in advance. They know they are doing this.

Virgil Goode comes forward. They have already silenced the 9-11 families by threatening to call them bigots and calling them disloyal by some. The 9-11 Commission treated them with disdain. See the Complete 9-11 Timeline and its DVD with the 9-11 Families.

They now unleash their full arsenal of hate on Goode, which they had had to hold back from the 9-11 Families. This is a full attack that includes rounding up his fellow Republicans and pressing them to denounce Goode.

Right leaning TV pundits like Krauthammer and George Will are forced to denounce Goode to keep their very lucrative jobs, huge corporate speaking fees, and who knows what else they get. (We found out Krugman was given a large retainer by Enron for nothing.)

For corporate speaking they are flown in the company jet, stay in luxury, are brought to the speech, which is canned, they are applauded as gods, and they go home on the corporate jet.

So Begala is attacking, even though Begala and Clinton should apologize to the 9-11 Families, Pat and his sister. Instead, Begala makes Bay Buchanan apologize. This is his job. He's good
at it.

What are our people supposed to do? Be tackling dummies for Begala? Their job is to get Begala, Ellison, etc. to have to answer questions about the Koran. Their job is to get on TV and ask Ellison or Begala to denounce the Verse of the Sword.

In this game, when you are asked to denounce your guy, you just attack them. You say, we need a national dialogue on the Koran, religion, or immigration. You say, let's not call names, let's discuss the Koran.

You have to dodge the arrows, bullets and missiles that Begala is sending your way, and get in your own attacks. This is what is going on. The public is hardly aware of the Koran and how bad it is.

The Skeptics Annotated Koran is easy to read because of the simplified almost bullet point versions of the verses that are bad. These are in plain English and intend to bring out how bad it is.

We need to get the public focused on this and all the other things that get the dialogue on what's between the covers of the Koran. Its not Robert's job to call for halting immigration, its to get more education out to more people about what the Koran really is.

Skeptic's Annotated Quran

The ones to go after first are not even the George Will types, but the worst of their side. There are places, like Washington Post, where you can comment on the columnists. The worst who defend the status quo, rain down quotations from the Quran, etc. Always be polite and respond to name calling with more quotations and facts.

There are very few conservatives hanging out at left wing or even mainstream sites pushing Quran quotations, etc. This is the place to put the push.

If your local paper allows comments, comment there. That is where your local Congressman's staff look. Put stuff where they see it. Look up their voting record on these things and quote it, good or bad. Stay polite, brief, and give people a fact or Quran quotation to make them think. Respond to being called a bigot, by another quotation with civility.

The Left is trying to keep the facts from the public. Once they know them, in a way that is digestible, the left loses. Its that simple.

Look at the parallel language of the Sword of the Verse, Adja in 1786 to Jefferson and Adams, and bin Laden's 1998 Fatwa. This is a killer ap, as they call it in software. If we can get the American people to know this, and similar things, then we win.

Begala knows that, that's why he had a scripted attack using the bigot word. Begala launched into his prepared script to prevent any substantive discussion. This carried over to the segment on Sandy Berger destroying documents.

We have to fight Begala with Begala tactics, or we will be apologizing for each other's comments. In this, different people have different roles. Some are neutral teachers like Robert. Others, like ourselves, learn the material here and put it out at other sites for the general public. Its very important that this material end up on the local paper's site where the staff of the local Congressman see it. That's what changes things.

Posted by: Old Atlantic at December 29, 2006 5:24 PM

The Begala Bay Buchanan episode is discussed

here.

Its important to study what Begala did, he is a master. This is important to be ready for it. You are ready for it as he shows, with a scripted attack.

Posted by: Old Atlantic at December 29, 2006 5:59 PM

Remember, Robert's job is not to get on TV to say stop Muslim immigration or that the Koran is bigoted, don't use it for oaths.

Robert's job is to get someone to ask Ellison and Begala, is the Verse of the Sword, slay them where you can find them, bigoted?

Do you judge a text or person bigoted by their most bigoted statement?

If the above two questions have yes answers, then isn't the Koran bigoted?

Getting all 3 questions answered by Ellison and Begala, and George Stephanopoulos who was part of the 1992 campaign that used the ploy of calling Pat Buchanan bigoted to want to stop immigration is Robert's job.

Skeptics Annotated Quran

Posted by: Old Atlantic at December 30, 2006 11:48 AM