| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
That warning doesn't just go for Australia, but few are heeding it. By Barney Zwartz in the Sydney Morning Herald, with thanks to Bark:
LIFE can become untenable when the Muslim population of a non-Muslim country reaches about 10 per cent, as shown by France, a Jewish expert on Islam says.The Australian Jewish News yesterday quoted Raphael Israeli as saying Australia should cap Muslim immigration or risk being swamped by Indonesians.
Professor Israeli told the Herald that was a misunderstanding. But he said: "When the Muslim population gets to a critical mass you have problems. That is a general rule, so if it applies everywhere it applies in Australia."
Professor Israeli, an expert on Islamic history from Hebrew University in Jerusalem, has been brought to Australia by the Shalom Institute of the University of NSW. The Australia-Israel Jewish Affairs Council is co-hosting many of his activities.
He said Muslim immigrants had a reputation for manipulating the values of Western countries, taking advantage of their hospitality and tolerance.
"Greeks or Italians or Jews don't use violence. There is no Italian or Jewish Hilaly [a reference to the controversial cleric Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly of Lakemba mosque]. Why?"
Professor Israeli said that when the Muslim population increased, so did the risk of violence.
"Where there are large Muslim populations who are prepared to use violence you are in trouble. If there is only 1 or 2 per cent they don't dare to do it - they don't have the backing of big communities. They know they are drowned in the environment of non-Muslims and are better behaved."
In Australia, Muslims account for about 1.5 per cent of the population.
Professor Israeli said that in France, which has the highest proportion of Muslims in Europe at about 10 per cent, it was already too late. There were regions even the police were scared to enter, and militant Muslims were changing the country's political, economic and cultural fabric, and demanding anti-Semitic and anti-Israel policies.
"French people say they are strangers in their own country. This is a point of no return.
"If you are on a collision course, what can you do? You can't put them all in prison, and anyway they are not all violent. You can't send them all back. You are really in trouble. It's irreversible."
Professor Israeli said that in Australia a few imams had preached violence. "You should not let fundamentalist imams come here. Screen them 1000 times before they are admitted, and after they are admitted screen what they say in the mosque."
He said some Muslims wanted to impose sharia (Islamic law) in their adopted countries, and when propaganda did not work they turned to intimidation.
Professor Israeli said his task was to describe, not prescribe. He also said his warning did not include immigrants, including Muslims, who simply wanted to improve their lot. As long as they respected the law and democracy, their numbers — Buddhist, Muslim or Jew — were immaterial. It became material when a group accepted violence.
"The trains in London and Madrid were not blown up by Christians or Buddhists but by Muslims, so it is them we have to beware," he said.
Here is the predictable response:
Keysar Trad, of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, said "Not only religious clerics need to be screened before entering Ausralia but also academics … this type of academic does nothing but create hatred, suspicion and division … We should review not only what the man has said but also those who have sponsored him, to see if they endorse those comments."
Note that Trad, true to form, deals with none of the substance of what Israeli said, and offers no alternative vision.
Posted by Robert at February 15, 2007 12:33 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
There is one point I take issue with:
"Professor Israeli said his task was to describe, not prescribe. He also said his warning did not include immigrants, including Muslims, who simply wanted to improve their lot."
And how exactly, do we tell the difference between muslims who want to improve their lot and others? In any case, the weight of numbers gives credence to the Jihadists who want to impose islam on their host.
I have yet to hear of any moderate muslim who will criticise mohammed in any way, shape or form. Or indeed, has any ever stood up and lughed off the Danish cartoons as a harmless joke?
Posted by: Celsius![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at February 15, 2007 12:43 PM
Keyzar Trad is a long time supporter of the global jihad and a disciple of the grand master Bin Laden himself.
On what pretenses did he enter Australia? Like Hilali, the 'catmeat' sheik, he should have never been allowed to put his feet on the ground here.
His own history of spreading hatred is manifested in his own writing:
Keysar on Australians:-
"The criminal dregs of white society colonised this country, and now, they only take the select choice of other societies, and the descendants of these criminal dregs tell us that they are better than us. And because we are not elitists, we tolerate them..."
You see, they are 1.5 % of the population and they 'tolerate' us...
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 15, 2007 12:48 PM
10% is when people begin to take notice. Mohammed places the victory percentage at 33%:
8:66 Now hath Allah lightened your burden, for He knoweth that there is weakness in you. So if there be of you a steadfast hundred they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a thousand (steadfast) they shall overcome two thousand by permission of Allah. Allah is with the steadfast.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/8/index.htm
at February 15, 2007 12:49 PM
And in Australia we have what is called the "Baby bonus" in which the government pays the parents $5000 cash upon birth for every baby, with no limit, even if you are number 4 wife. This encourages people to make more and more babies to enable our population to grow.
Smart eh?
Posted by: payingattention at February 15, 2007 12:50 PM
In addition to which, how do you stop the 2.9% breeding like rabbits on social security and quickly becoming 5% etc.
Posted by: Celsius at February 15, 2007 12:50 PM
Some days I feel like I'm looking through the wrong end of a telescope. This is not necessarily a negative. I want to see more forward thinking, even if I'm looking backwards and find it already on my own blog.
There's still time to get this situation fixed in the West.
This article should also come as a warning when estimates of Muslim populations in France are now at 10%, when just last year the CIA estimated it "6-10%". The "flow" of Islamic immigrants is more like a "torrent" in Europe.
Australia take heed. America shut your doors.
Posted by: Foehammer at February 15, 2007 1:05 PM
"If you are on a collision course, what can you do? You can't put them all in prison, and anyway they are not all violent. You can't send them all back. You are really in trouble. It's irreversible."
Why can't they all be send back? More than 10 milion Germans were send home to Germany from Poland, Czechoslovakia and other countries in Central and Eastern Europe in 1945, after starting World War II. Muslims started World War III, so history can be repeated again.
Posted by: European Crusader at February 15, 2007 1:06 PM
It all boils down to Mother Nature trying to fill the void left after feminism and multiculturalism neutered the Western male. The victim will be our current system of government and the freedoms we currently enjoy. Israeli is wrong when he says that the Muslim population can not be sent back.
Among forms of government one is preeminently right and is the only real government, in which the rulers are found to be truly possessed of science, not merely to seem to possess it, whether they rule by law or without law, whether their subjects are willing or unwilling, and whether they themselves are rich or poor--none of these things can be at all taken into account on any right method. And whether they purge the state for its good by killing or banishing some of the citizens, or make it smaller by sending out colonies somewhere, as bees swarm from the hive, or bring in citizens from elsewhere to make it larger, so long as they act in accordance with science and justice and preserve and benefit it by making it better than it was, so far as is possible, that must at that time and by such characteristics be declared to be the only right form of government.
-Plato
at February 15, 2007 1:08 PM
In some ways Israeli is comparing apples to oranges. There are not huge populations of Buddhists in the named host nations and Italians had a little thing called the Mafia which America had to wage war with.
If you examine the history of the Rothschilds in France, Germany and England who are Ashkenazi converts to a sect of Judaism, they implemented as they have in America via the Rockefeller family a way to progress their mindset of socialism/communism by passing laws which overtook those societies. It was not violent, but it is still a controlling factor that is involved in everything from the National Education Association to controlling the American Medical Association.
One could ask if Hindu's gained control over America how they would implement their sacred cow religion which I was screamed at by last week by a Hindu. Deer currently kill hundreds of Americans and cost billions in auto insurance in accidents, so what would Hindu cows do in the millions set free in America but ruin crops, destroy the environment and kill people in accidents.
Islam just happens to take the overt violent and confrontational approach and millions of them are on the move for cheap labor and because their host nations are ravaged by war, so they spike on the list.
You can go to Minneapolis and see the Mung from Indochina progressing complete racism in moving into areas, buying out all the white people and establishing their own community.
Go to California and places like Sacramento are entirely Russian. They refuse to assimilate and will tell you they are Russian and NOT Americans.
One only has to look at the Mexican situation in crime and welfare breeding fraud to understand that they are an even larger danger to America than Islam. Democrats and Bush are literally giving illegals the ability to gain Social Security and vote not as American citizens.
The MS 13 gangs of El Salvadore are spiking as are Mexican gangs in drug running and violence.
The predation occurs even in the Chicoms filling all those COSCO shipping containers with AK 47's, Asian sex slaves, opium and only they know what else dumped in every western nation.
For Oz, the problem is Indonesians. England has Pakistani. South African Orange Free State have genocide aimed at them from black communists. Germany has Turks. Turkey has Kurds and Armenians. Canada has Chinese. Mexico has South Americans and America has a host.
There are huge amounts of violence in all of these groups. Islam right now is getting the light as they are the most overt.
But remember the LA riots decades ago? Those were blacks rioting over Korean immigrants taking over their neighborhoods and shooting black criminals.
It is not just Islam. All peoples struggle to establish themselves in most cases violently. If Pontiac had won, it would have been the American terrorist in history portrayed by the British press led by George Washington. Victory has afforded the west the definitions in the struggle over the loosers.
Allow any belief system to challenge any established state and violence ensues. People just do not realize some of the overthrows which happen, because some are done with money, some with laws, some with education and some with subverting the religion guiding the nation.
Islam is a problem, but the west has just a big nuclear problem with Russia and a Chinese subversion of bribery and gobbling up resources.
It wasn't Islam meeting yesterday. It was Russia, China and India meeting to contain America. Islam is the proxy, so don't get stuck on the festering boil when a truck is barrelling down on the west.
Posted by: Lame Cherry at February 15, 2007 1:14 PM
"It all boils down to Mother Nature trying to fill the void left after feminism and multiculturalism neutered the Western male.-Plato
Posted by: pez"
Not to mention the fact that the western nations have aborted pretty much all of the generations from 1973 on. No wonder countries need immigrants. We are killing so many of our own children. Scary.
at February 15, 2007 1:17 PM
"this type of academic does nothing but create hatred, suspicion and division"...
And people like Sheikh Taj el-Din al Hilaly encourage love, fraternity and harmony?
Aha. Of course! This is Keysar 'Out of Context' Trad - the man who specialises in taking that Sheik Hilaly's more colourful statements and putting them 'in context' for the benefit of us, the idiot-Infidels.
Maybe Professor Israeli has also been 'quoted out of context', Keysar?
Posted by: A Nonny Nonny at February 15, 2007 1:28 PM
Here's the comprehensive alternative vision that Trad and muslims see, believe in, and live:
Step 1. Hate
Step 2. Kill
Step 3. Repeat
at February 15, 2007 1:33 PM
Raphael Israeli, author of, inter alia, the excellent "Islamikazi," is stating only the obvious. Everywhere Muslim immigrants pose problems that no other immigrant population poses, and that is because theirs is not only an alien creed, but an alien and a hostile creed, a Total Belief System, offering a Complete Regulation of Life and (at no extra charge) A Complete Explanation of the Universe. The heart of Islam is not the Five Pillars of worship, but rather the worldview that uncompromisingly divides the world between Believer and Infidel, and further, between the actual territories controlled by Believers -- the Dar al-Islam --- and those as yet still controlled by Infidels -- the Dar al-Harb. Between Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb exists a permanent state of war, though at any given time, Muslims may not be engaged (when they are too weak, for example, or other methods are more effective) in open combat (qitaal) with Infidels.
And if everywhere Muslims have gone in the Bilad al-kufr they have presented permanent and essentially unsolvable problems of "integration" -- what most of them seek is not integration, but a slow or rapid assault on the legal and political institutions and social arrangements of Infidel nation-states and polities, so that they will eventually remove every barrier to the spread and dominance of Islam -- "Islam is to dominate and is not to be dominated" said Muhammad -- and of course to rule by Muslims, everywhere. That is the final aim of Islam. It cannot be denied, but it can, apparently, be wilfully ignored by a good many Infidels, who don't like to consider reality.
And the threaat that Muslims pose that no other group of immigrants -- Hindus from India, Buddhists from Vietnam, Rastafarians from Jamaica, Old Believers from the former Soviet Union -- do, cannot be blamed on this or that group of Infidels. The problems that one sees in Australia are like the problems in France, or Italy, or Germany, or Great Britain, or Spain, or anywhere that large numbers of Muslims have been allowed to settle, in numbers sufficient to make them think they can be as aggressive as they wish, and they have been, and always will be, and can only be constrained through constant and firm pushing back, and expensive monitoring.
One more time:
"The large-scale presence of Muslims in the lands of the Infidels, but for now especially in Western Europe, has led to a situation, for the indigenous Infidels, that is everywhere more unpleasant, more expensive, and more physically dangerous, than would be the case without such a large-scale presence."
Print that out. Read it over. Understand every phrase. Be prepared to present it, as a capstone to an argument or a discussion, with those you must, as fulfillment of a duty, enlighten about the nature, and menace, of Islam.
Posted by: Hugh
at February 15, 2007 1:34 PM
Prof. Israeli suggests that in France the situation is irreversible.
It's not. But to reverse it will be rough and repressive. It requires that the 90 % of the population that is still French demand that the government take steps to ensure their survival.
Step 1-- stop all further moslem immigration,
Step 2-- deport all non-citizen immigrants, and all citizen-immigrants convicted of crimes
Step 3-- make the remaining moslems the equivalent of dhimmis in moslem countries; i.e. no right to vote, no right to hold government employment, no right to bear arms, no right to various government subsidies, etc.
Step 4-- a sound, traditional French Republican education for everyone, complete with the history course beginning with "Our ancestors, the Gauls . . .", and making no allowances for moslem sensitivities.
Step 5-- re-institute the old French requirement that only the names of Christian saints and French historical figures could be used to register births (without a legal registered birth, there was no legal existence)
Step 6-- re-institute the military draft (I'm not sure on this one, maybe France still has it to some extent), with a jail term equal to the length of draft service for moslems that refuse to serve. For those who flee the country, loss of citizenship with no right of return.
Step 7-- large bounties or tax breaks for bearing non-moslem children.
And so on. It won't be pretty, but it will be better than the alternative of mass blood-letting if the moslems are allowed to continue to expand their numbers and influence; and far better than the alternative of a moslem France -- which would not be France at all.
at February 15, 2007 1:37 PM
Europe has already fell prey to islamofascism the only lone standing great nations are US and Aus. They better control muslim immigration or else face the wrath of the guy named allah
Posted by: Birbhadra at February 15, 2007 1:40 PM
I can't help but agree that Muslim immigration needs to be stopped. There's far too much evidence out there that when their numbers swell so does the level of violence and demands to change your society.
You can point to any ethnic group that has mass migrated to any other country and you still will fall way short when comparing the types of violence and demands to appease them.
Look at the Philippines, Thailand, France, Britain, the Netherlands, Germany, Bosnia any place that there is an even slight increase in Islamic numbers there is a disproportionate amount of terrorist activity and demands to accommodate them.
In Canada where I live there are thousands upon thousands of Asian immigrants. They keep to themselves in many ways, but having said that they contribute to our society, they do not become a burden on our social systems and they are proud to be Canadian. If we had anywhere near the same amount of Muslims in this country we would be in civil war.
Friends of mine that are reserves in the military tell me that they are impressed with the numbers of Asians that enter service as reserves to pay back their new country as a way of thanks. We have many Imams in the world today who state that to serve in a western Police force or Army is un-Islamic as these people are enforcing the laws of Infidels and should be punished.
Get off that Russia is the threat bullshit and keep your focus where it should be.
Niv
Posted by: The fanatic at February 15, 2007 1:41 PM
@pez: "It all boils down to Mother Nature trying to fill the void left after feminism and multiculturalism neutered the Western male. The victim will be our current system of government and the freedoms we currently enjoy. Israeli is wrong when he says that the Muslim population can not be sent back."
100% agreement. Do not leave out the Homosexual agenda though. Destruction of the family unit, and especially the male father-figure, are weakening us, allowing our children to run amok and grow up with utter disrespect for authority and more, and the self-involved homosexual community has played its part in all of that.
I'm not anti-Gay, but I'm against any elements in our intentionally destroy the chances of children to have natural parenting out of self motivations. The first thing a homosexual gives up by way of choice is procreation -- and yet they aren't satisfied with their own decision or path and wish to restructure our entire society to alleviate that little "wrench" in their works. Absolute selfishness at its worst.
And all of this is obviously just more excuse for the Islamists to murder more Westerners -- as if they need more excuses.
Posted by: Foehammer at February 15, 2007 1:47 PM
"our" seems to be clinking around in my brain today.
Edit: "I'm against any elements that intentionally destroy the chances..."
Posted by: Foehammer at February 15, 2007 1:52 PM
Someone said recently about demographics that at 1% , Islam is a lamb of peace. At 10%, it is a scheming fox and at 50%, it becomes a ravenous wolf.
The large-scale presence of Muslims in the lands of the Infidels, especially in Western Europe, has led UNDENIABLY,to a situation, for the indigenous Infidels, that is everywhere more unpleasant, more expensive, and more physically dangerous, than would be the case without such a large-scale presence.
This cannot be said creditably for ANY other groups of immigrants.
However there are lessons to be drawn even in this unfortunate situation.
These are that our civilisation,culture,mora; values and democratic freedoms are not Free, they have been fought for at great human costs, by our ancestors. They must not be taken for granted but fully appreciated and held in high esteem.
When we begin to believe in ourselves, we will be in a postion to defend ourselves.
Bravo Dr Israli
at February 15, 2007 3:02 PM
Limit Muslim migration
At last someone says the truth and is published. Western countries should be very careful as what is happeing in britain, france and germany. these countries will realize that muslims are there to create a state within a state and when finally they are strong will take over from within.
If manpower is needed the west has an obligation to go to nations like phillipines, romania and other countries that are not muslims.
Point: There is not a single church,Temple or any other place of worship for the minority in SAUDIA ARABIA. The country will not allow any churches to be built under any circumtances. GO FIGURE
at February 15, 2007 3:03 PM
That's true, even 1% is to much if one considers their breeding technolgy.
Posted by: Arnie
Why can't they all be send back? More than 10 milion Germans were send home to Germany from Poland, Czechoslovakia and other countries in Central and Eastern Europe in 1945, after starting World War II. Muslims started World War III, so history can be repeated again.
Posted by: European Crusader
First.. even 1% moslem is TOO MUCH! They defile our Holy European and American lands.
And yes, if millions of Germans can be "repatriated" then why can't the same be done with non-Europeans who are disturbing the peace?
And if countries like Lebanon refuse to take them back then we shall have to use force. And NO MORE financial aid either!
And if it's OK for Germany toi cede strategic regions like the Ardennes forest then it seems logical to me that Syria will have to cede the Golan.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Besides, Germany has been pacified now - maybe too much so.
Which means that total destruction, occupation, territorial annexation and mass relocation WORKS!
islam is just beginning to re-emerge as a totalitarian threat of heretofore unheralded proportions.
So let's follow the recipe that has proven to work.
Posted by: scrualla at February 15, 2007 3:03 PM
"Someone said recently about demographics that at 1% , Islam is a lamb of peace. At 10%, it is a scheming fox and at 50%, it becomes a ravenous wolf." ........ Posted by chevalier de st george.
As Bridgette Gabriel said recently, muslims are "awaking from their long slumber".
If we think of the "immediately identifiable" so called small % who are awake now, just wait til 10% plus of them wakes up. Many "moderates" can be coerced into sudden explosive disorder or sudden jhad syndrome in the blink of an eye AND UNCHALLENGED by moderate muslims.
As heard in Canada, from even "moderate" muslims interviewed on TV, they say Islam comes FIRST, and Canada comes second.
Who's side do you think the moderate muslims will take as the population grows?
It is clearly quite predictable.
at February 15, 2007 3:18 PM
This is interesting.
If that had been here the police would have been all over it.
Posted by: Borg at February 15, 2007 3:19 PM
...far better than the alternative of a moslem France -- which would not be France at all.
Posted by: ebonystone
Awesome analysis and very logical explanation of what needs to be done.
The one problem I see is how do we get those 90% original Gauls to remember their roots and get behind the cause?
Posted by: scrualla at February 15, 2007 3:24 PM
The Ace of Spades puts it best:
How Many Muslims Does it Take to Screw Up A Country?
Posted by: JadeDragoness at February 15, 2007 3:25 PM
I just made a graphic that reflects the peril we Europeans are in.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/69385806@N00/391402406/
it is my sincere hope that the USA and AUS won;t go down the same road as we are.
It's probaly too late for Canada too. I wonder if CCanada will break up. The brave Quebeçois are showing signs of getting fed up. Western Ontario is sick of Toronto and so on. Anything east of Quebec would have to go their own way if Quebec were to secede. We'd be left with an Islamicized rump state in Eastern Ontario, threatening to engulf Michigan and parts of Ohio and Minnesota.
Posted by: scrualla at February 15, 2007 3:32 PM
PS. Anyone who wishes to use this graphic I posted above.. Please feel free. I hope this graphic shows the urgent situation Europe is in.
NO TURKEY IN THE EU!!!!!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/69385806@N00/391402406/
at February 15, 2007 3:34 PM
"LIFE can become untenable when the Muslim population of a non-Muslim country reaches about 10 per cent, as shown by France, a Jewish expert on Islam says."
And it has been like that since the very beginning of islam. Submission is islam's core concept and violence is its means to achieve it.
Ever wondered where the Mohammedans would be today if Mohammed hadn't ever used and recommanded violence and deception as a means to spread islam?
I doubt that we would even know the man's name today.
The Meccans, the Byzantines, the Persians, the Egyptians, the Indians etc. They lost on the battlefield, attacked by Muslims, before "becoming" Muslim. Not only did they become Muslim but the Arab language was in most cases also forced onto them. Their daily life became regulated by the rules of islam 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Sounds pretty much like totalitarian imperialism to me.
I don't know of any tribe or kingdom becoming muslim out of free choice. But I'd be happy if someone could tell me otherwise.
Anyone who doubts Mr. Israeli's words please come up with facts of a significant muslim population identifying itself with a nonmuslim host country, producing the average economic revenue of the host country's nonmuslims and with the average muslim producing no more troubles for the legal system than the average nonmuslim.
The French at least will have a very hard time coming up with such facts..
at February 15, 2007 3:54 PM
Critical mass?? I believe such an argument is problematic on a number of grounds (with all due respect for Raphael Israeli). Allow me to present some of the problems:
1) One reads the following account: ..a group calling itself "Jamaat al-Muslimeen (the Muslim group) attacked the national television station and the parliament building. They took forty-seven government official hostage, including the Prime Minister...who was shot in both legs and tied to a chair wired with explosives. Two dozen people were killed in the takeover. Several police officers died when the Muslims rammed a bomb-rigged vehicle into their headquarters. Bodies lay in streets, unreachable because of sniper fire. Fire destroyed part of the capital...The Muslim leader, Yasin Abu-bakr, a former policeman, talked with radio reporters. As for the people killed in the coup, he said: "Whatever blood there is has cleansed us" (from the text Holy Hatred, p.174).
Now, I'll ask, were these followers of al-Qaeda? Were these events taking place after 9/11 with some sort of "copy-cat" terrorist agenda in mind? Was the population of the Muslims in excess of 10 percent? Had the Muslim population reached a critical mass?
The answer to each of these questions is: "NO." The location was Trinidad, the year was 1990, and the demographics of Trinidad? Well, Trinidad at that time was 2/3 Christians, 1/4 Hindu -- and the number of Muslims? The percentage of Muslims was 6 percent. So, where precisely does "critical mass" theory fit in here?
2) Let us next consider 9/11. As most of you should recall, 3,000 people perished in approximately 20 minutes. And the number of perpetrators? 19. Yes, nineteen infiltrators into the United States -- unless one happens to be "math challenged", the number 19 does not comprise 10 percent of the U.S. population. Nor did the great bulk of non-Muslims prevent the violent expression of aggression carried out on 9/11.
3) "Critical mass theory?" -- where is the evidence to support such a belief? And, as for the supporters of this "theory" -- is it not extremely dangerous since it implies that we can all take a break, Americans can all become complacent, since there's absolutely nothing to worry about since, hey, Muslims in the U.S. comprise so tiny, tiny a percentage of the U.S. population.
4) Other evidence which contradicts this lullaby -- how come in last summer in Montreal (and in other cities in Canada), we had thousands out on the streets marching in Hezbollah parades? Why is that? Why weren't the Muslims all "frightened" by the majority of the non-Muslims and silent, rather than out in force on a march, waving Hezbollah flags and chanting "death to Jews", etc.? haven't other such displays of Hezbollah support occurred in the United States also? Why is that? Why aren't they (as per the "theory") cowed into silence and like "lambs?"
5) The only portion of the theory which does make some sense is if you factor out the notion that numbers are somehow important in terms of Muslims committing violent acts (I'm arguing that in terms of "violence" numbers are irrelevant), and you consider what numbers mean in terms of democracy. When you consider forming political blocs or lobby groups, etc., then their numbers DO become important. But this is NOT about "violence." And, here, I believe are the REAL challenges. Why, WHY is the UK bending over backwards in appeasement of Muslims? Is this due to "violence"? NO. Something ELSE is at play -- and, I believe it's this "something else" (guilt complex? appeasement? masochism? i don't know), which causes people in the UK to jump should a Muslim snap his fingers. As the cliche goes, "It takes two to tango." Just look at that UK fashion designer -- that utterly contemptible fashion -- do you think the designer had a gun pointed to her/his head? NO. This is all being done WILLFULLY -- NOT as a consequence of "violence." So, to solve the "problems" -- well, there is a segment in our Western societies (I'm talking about the pro-jihadists who are non-Muslims) who aid and abet. And we have to figure out WHY, as much as stopping any more Muslim floods of immigrants into the West. End of rant.
Posted by: J.S. at February 15, 2007 4:08 PM
" I have yet to hear of any moderate muslim who will criticise mohammed in any way, shape or form. Or indeed, has any ever stood up and lughed off the Danish cartoons as a harmless joke?
Posted by: Celsius "
Actually, Cels, I read exactly that just today as I was rooting through the archives of The Religious Policeman blog. He even published some of them over several posts.
If you go here and scroll down a little, you wont be able to miss the relevant posts because one of the first ones you come to is the Mobombhead one. And this man is a Saudi Arabian. A brave man.
http://muttawa.blogspot.com/2006_01_01_muttawa_archive.html
I'm currently working my way through all his archives (completed eleven so far), and half the time I'm creased up laughing. When a Saudi supports Totenham Hotspur football team ('soccer' to Americans?) which is known here as the Jewish team, goes to their matches when in London, and joins in with the regular fan chant of "Come on the Yids", you've just got to accept he's not our enemy, and he has a sense of humour. A definitely British sense of humour too.
Posted by: Sir Henry Morgan at February 15, 2007 4:28 PM
Just look at that UK fashion designer -- that utterly contemptible fashion -- do you think the designer had a gun pointed to her/his head? NO. This is all being done WILLFULLY -- NOT as a consequence of "violence." So, to solve the "problems" -- well, there is a segment in our Western societies (I'm talking about the pro-jihadists who are non-Muslims) who aid and abet. And we have to figure out WHY, as much as stopping any more Muslim floods of immigrants into the West. End of rant.
Posted by: J.S.
The "gun" at her head may have been SOWdiarabian OIL MONEY.
at February 15, 2007 4:31 PM
It's true that how do we weed the good from the bad. I think a small questionnaire before they arrive asking they do accept a country that is not like theirs. Which religion they are? Are they persecuted from their society in a Muslim country because they chose a different religion and they want to come here?
It's sad to think that maybe we have to take these steps but Muslim countries adopted this attitude of not being able to speak against Muhammad and Allah or becoming apostate so you don't need to make new rules when they applied it over a thousand years ago. The Democratic society is fighting to keep democracy like they have fought to keep Islam in place by silly rules. I guess it's tit for tat as they say but it has to be. Muslims that ended up getting away from their societies in western countries, like a lot of immigrants end up close together as like a form of tribal instincts, as low cost areas attract people who has less money in a certain area.
Ok that is fine it happens to all immigrants no matter who but if a Muslim wanted to get away from their religion then going back into that society or area will only make them scared to leave once more and the preachers of hate will just turn them and the new generation into what they were back home.
The problem is Islam is separatist minded in Society and the world over and if they cannot mix you end up with war in your streets. They end up with Islamic schools that further separate society. The Whites don't mind because at least their children can feel safe away from. The Muslims don't mind because at least they are away from infidels and western teaching that is so wrong to them. So the cycle just ends up at causing separate societies and it seems Muslims who are not just religious are political also as law and command are the same.
Individual Muslims end up thinking that the law of their Koran is for them to individually practice rather than have a government take care of the situation. If they are surrounded by democracy that does not comply to their needs they will set the laws for them selves including killing the infidels, because where is the separation of personal commands to the reader of the Koran to the established law holders? I do not know my self but they look inseparable so we get Jihads, self-lawmakers where ever they migrate to.
Like saint's killed for their beliefs they do the opposite kill the unbeliever saint's.
at February 15, 2007 4:42 PM
With more terrorists attacks, killings in malls, people are waking up and asking more questions about islam, most dont like it even not knowing much about it. its the liberal elite who can talk their way and losing any sense of reality about the dangers of islam. they have lost their ability to question, make judgements (something liberals say they hate doing, how can you judge them they say!) the very core of self preservation and common sense it seems the liberal elites have put aside as old way of thinking, they are much more educated than you and l.
What we have to dispel is the notion that "islam" is a religion that deserves this respect, as all religions. we need to show people that islam is not only a religion, but also a total political movement, similiar to facism. when we have presented the facts then islam will not have the protection accorded by our "western values". Take away this protection, and we can ban it from all Western countries. that is the only logical way out to get rid of islam, while using a limited military force, that is evict their immans and anyone still wanting to practice sharia, etc.
People like Sean Hannity, and others like him, have this blinder for respect for all religionis, they just need more education.
at February 15, 2007 4:53 PM
s_sgt7
It is well known that the Australian birth rate is so low that we are not even replacing ourselves. So with a landmass the size of 48 US states and a population of 1/3 of California we need to grow and not recede. So the government is desperately importing people who meet the educational criteria, or family members of those who don't, and they are literally begging us and paying us to have babies. The Treasurer implored us to have more children by saying "One for the husband, one for the wife, and one for the country".
But the mainstream birth rate is still much lower than some religo/politico subgroups that will remain nameless.
Posted by: payingattention at February 15, 2007 5:05 PM
@scrualla: I'm going to put that unofficial flag of Eurabia in my photo gallery. It reminded me of a nice, polite comment I got from a Muslim (assumed) who left behind a EU flag after his name (my comments is set up to automatically figure out where someone is posting from geographically), just a few days ago:
Posted by: Foehammer at February 15, 2007 6:14 PM
“In Australia, Muslims account for about 1.5 per cent of the population.”
Only 1.5% and they’ve already have had Cronulla. Methinks that 10% is well over the event horizon.
“And how exactly, do we tell the difference between muslims who want to improve their lot and others?
Celsius, so long as Islam permits the practice of taqqiya, such a differentiation is utterly impossible to make.
” I have yet to hear of any moderate muslim who will criticise mohammed in any way, shape or form. Or indeed, has any ever stood up and lughed off the Danish cartoons as a harmless joke?”
Either such action would amount to blasphemy or apostasy, both of which are punishable by death. Yet one more reason with respect to, as Fjordman so eloquently says, “Why we cannot rely upon moderate Muslims”.
Muslims are skinless people living in a sandpaper world. End of story.
Islam’s incessant attempts to blame everybody but themselves for their self-imposed misery must finally be regarded as an invalid excuse for their endless atrocities. Few, if any, Western cultures have yet to realize this simple fact. So long as enabling terms like “freedom fighter” and “insurgent” are used in place of “terrorist”, little progress, if any, will be made.
Pope Benedict did the world a huge favor by challenging Islam with respect to freedom of religion. Islam must be given a 3 - 5 year deadline to genuinely put in place protections for freedom of religion. Should Muslim majority countries fail to do so, all countries that practice freedom of religion should ban Islam as a fascist political ideology (which is what it is).
In particular, America needs to pass a constitutional amendment irrevocably banning sharia law such that it can never become a component of our legal jurisprudence, regardless of the voting population’s intent. Sharia’s theocratic rule must be identified as a wholesale violation of the separation of church and state, thereby disqualifying it from all consideration. Islam must be labeled as one massive violation of human rights, which it currently is. Abject Gender Apartheid, Female Genital Mutilation, taqqiya, violent jihad, institutionalized child abuse (arranged marriages), all make Islam anathema to the hard-won liberties gained over the last several hundred years.
Soon enough it may well be necessary to forcibly repatriate all Muslims to their countries of origin so as to impose a complete and total "Quarantine" upon all Muslim majority nations. No travel outside of the Quarantined area, no change in borders or aggression upon bordering nations. No acquisition of nuclear weapons under threat of massive military action. No further terrorist atrocities without immediate and wholly disproportionate military reprisal.
It is only a matter of time before Islam commits an atrocity of such astounding barbarity that civilized nations will have no alternative but to take the abovementioned measures or, more likely, far, far worse. The decentralized nature of Muslim authority literally ensures such a catastrophe. Islam can no more make rivers run backwards than avert further atrocities. It is this unconstrained aspect of Islamic radicalism that nigh well guarantees a Muslim holocaust. Only Radical Reformation can possibly save Islam and the entirety of Islamic doctrine absolutely prevents such a notion.
PS: Superb post, Hugh
Posted by: Zenster at February 15, 2007 6:20 PM
http://foehammer.net/zenphoto/islam-in-the-united-kingdom/eurabia1.jpg
Posted by: Foehammer at February 15, 2007 6:34 PM
Its too late now to limit immigration. The only option left, due the idiocy of our political elite, is to reverse Muslim immigration. And that unfortunately, cannot be done without force and social unrest.
So thank our idiot political elite for making our humdrum lives more exciting then need be.
Posted by: DP111 at February 15, 2007 6:37 PM
Oh, so true.....
To the tune of "I've been working my way back to you, babe"
[chorus]
I've been killing my way back to Islam.
With every throat i cut.
I've been killing my way back to Islam
Kicking infidel butt.
[end chorus]
Every day! (Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Ba-Ba-Bomb)
Killing every way! (Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Ba-Ba-Bomb)
I used to be, an apostate
Eating pork every time i ate.
Letting all faiths have their way.
Not praying five times a day.
Now Osama has shone the light. We have to kill, day and night.
Yes, with every bomb, i'm closer to Islam.
We're gonna kill everyone in the world!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb....
[chorus]
at February 15, 2007 6:42 PM
My view, long held, is a separation from the islamic world. As a start one needs to take them at their own words and agree wholeheartedly that there is indeed a dar ul islam and a dar ul harb, and for the good of humanity, infidels and muslims alike, it is better to live apart in respective dars.
It is a sad fact that muslim presence anywhere leads to discomfort of other already established communities. Soon the established community will leave or forced out by Jihad by mob violence, and yet another region becomes dar ul islam.
For years I felt that a peaceful exchange of populations might just be possible, and thus avoid a global war - Christians in Muslim nations in exchange for Muslims living in the West. That option is no more, as Christians are being chaed out of Muslim nations. Anyway, it was politically impossible, just as limiting or reversing Muslim immigration is now.
We are thus headed towards an exchange of power ie power to be handed over to Islam or wrested by Islam by force. As power is never ceded peacefully, specially to an alien culture, this will inevitably lead to violence - a world civil war.
at February 15, 2007 6:55 PM
From post above: "In particular, America needs to pass a constitutional amendment irrevocably banning sharia law such that it can never become a component of our legal jurisprudence,.."
Absolutely correct! It is these sorts of notions which I really fear (these "peaceful", non-violent ways of destroying the West and our freedoms -- not through bombs, but ballots.)
ironically, in Quebec the Catholics were the one's who always talked about the "revenge of the cradle" (this is how they'd eventually become powerful in a democracy). Now, however, it's another group who has on its mind "the revenge of the cradle," and they're not Catholics.
In Quebec there's a politician, Sam Hamad, who's been elected (he's now some minister in the Quebec government who supposed to look after Quebec City), and he was born in Syria. He wants to bring in immigrants "by the boatload". I can only guess what the source countries will be (perhaps Shiite Lebanese (?)).
I figure Canada is pretty much doomed.
There was a poll conducted recently of 500 Muslims. 53 percent want Shariah law to be recognized.
{With respect to "violence" -- Another 7 percent felt that the aborted terrorist attempt against Ottawa was "completely justified." Since this was a scientific poll, we can extrapolate to the larger Muslim population -- that 7 percent are potential Jihadis of those polled -- works out to be (from total estimated population of 600,000 which I believe is a gross underestimate, btw) 42,000 potential jihadists in Canada. You know, anytime you get the "extremist" "fringe" margins, you're usually looking at a 1 or 2 percent of a population, here it's a whopping 7 percent!)
Posted by: J.S.
at February 15, 2007 7:08 PM
It requires that the 90 % of the population that is still French demand that the government take steps to ensure their survival.
-- It also requires the MSMedia informing that 90%
Step 1-- stop all further moslem immigration,
-- Not a chance, our politicians want growth at any cost and we all know what the cost will be.
Step 2-- deport all non-citizen immigrants, and all citizen-immigrants convicted of crimes
-- The Brits are arresting them over there and bringing them 'home'
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/02/13/europe/EU-GEN-Britain-Somalia.php
Step 3-- make the remaining moslems the equivalent of dhimmis in moslem countries; i.e. no right to vote, no right to hold government employment, no right to bear arms, no right to various government subsidies, etc.
-- Civil liberty groups and self righteous lawyers will go to town.
Step 4-- a sound, traditional French Republican education for everyone, complete with the history course beginning with "Our ancestors, the Gauls . . .", and making no allowances for moslem sensitivities.
-- There have been many instances where schools inflict on their pupils halal meat, ban a simple cross on a chain, and all the while muslims are taking schools to court for disallowing the burqa.
Step 5-- re-institute the old French requirement that only the names of Christian saints and French historical figures could be used to register births (without a legal registered birth, there was no legal existence)
-- What, Ali Mohammad Abdul Yusuf will not do?
Step 6-- re-institute the military draft (I'm not sure on this one, maybe France still has it to some extent), with a jail term equal to the length of draft service for moslems that refuse to serve. For those who flee the country, loss of citizenship with no right of return.
-- Be damned if you think my children are entering the forces the way they fight wars nowadays.
Step 7-- large bounties or tax breaks for bearing non-moslem children.
-- I can hear those do-gooders screaming discrimination again. I love the idea though, I could do with a tax break.
And so on. It won't be pretty, but it will be better than the alternative of mass blood-letting if the moslems are allowed to continue to expand their numbers and influence; and far better than the alternative of a moslem France -- which would not be France at all.
-- When the 'blood-letting' begins, do not forget the politicians and MSMedia.
Footnote; 1.5% in Australia is only 300,000, or there abouts. It's certainly nice to see comments such as these from Professor Israeli reaching the light of day...
at February 15, 2007 7:55 PM
That would be an excellent foundation ebonystone. Maybe if governments get serious enough about their own security and survival those ideas could be implemented.
Posted by: Nocturna at February 15, 2007 8:18 PM
s_sgt7: Mexico is in North America, non?
Posted by: Brett_McS at February 15, 2007 8:23 PM
And eloivsdiablo, you point out the problems that we need to work on. Those who hinder us from ensuring our own and our children's survival.
Posted by: Nocturna at February 15, 2007 8:28 PM
I read the Sydney Morning Herald forum comments in reaction to Raphael Israeli's observation re Muslim immigration in Australia. Frankly, most either made me cringe or despair. A majority of the comments harped on about Mr Israeli's "racism" (remind me again which race Isam represents?) and the most progressive even linked the whole thing to the "Jews are the new Nazis" meme and of course we should expect that "the abused have become the abusers". Twits.
OT but interesting. An interviewer on ABC Radio National yesterday was told by a freelance journo in Jerusalem that during her interview with the political editor of Al Jazeera, he said (and I'm quoting from memory) "Every day, every Muslim everywhere in the world feels a pain in his heart that the Jews have reclaimed the land of Israel from Muslim rule, including the holy city of Jerusalem." What? No breastbeating about the plight of their "Palestinian" brothers? No sympathy for how they have suffered since they left Palestine before the Arab armies invaded? No. What really twisted his knickers (and obviously those of Muslims worldwide) was that a group formerly humiliated and dominated by Muslims had fought back and won and held on to their lands in the face of Muslim aggression. Pretty much makes a lie of their constant bleating about the "Palestinians" and how so much Islamic terrorism committed around the world is because of the frustration of Muslims everywhere with the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Also, it means no number of concessions will appease the Muslim world until Israel is (in the words of Iran's Mahmoud "I Have a Green Halo" MadInADinnerJacket) "wiped off the map". But then, of course, I have probably taken this man's comments "out of context", haven't I?
Posted by: toothy at February 15, 2007 8:47 PM
(you might want to go get a hanky before you read this)
Gov. Strickland: No Iraq refugees in Ohio
COLUMBUS - Gov. Ted Strickland on Wednesday had a message for President Bush: any plan to relocate thousands of refugees uprooted by the Iraq war to the U.S. shouldn't include Ohio.
The Bush administration plans to allow about 7,000 Iraqi refugees to settle in the United States over the next year, a huge expansion at a time of mounting international pressure to help millions who have fled their homes in the nearly four-year-old war.
The United States has allowed only 463 Iraq refugees into the country since the war began in 2003, even though some 3.8 million have been uprooted.
[...]
G0t that hanky? read it all:?http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070215/NEWS01/702150364
at February 15, 2007 8:48 PM
To do any of those things you suggest, ebonystone, would require starting at the ballot box. Electing like-minded people to public office who would implement those things you suggest. Would a Guiliani be likely to implement such things? Or would your chances be better with a Tancredo? Which do you prefer?
at February 15, 2007 8:56 PM
"A majority of the comments harped on about Mr Israeli's "racism" (remind me again which race Isam represents?)"
That would be the race practicing Islam.
at February 15, 2007 8:59 PM
Anyone daring to stand up against Islam might as well be prepared for being called a racist by those who practise Islam.
Those afraid of being called a racist should get behind those who are not.
at February 15, 2007 9:07 PM
Why can't we get distinguished visitors like that saying those things in our major US papers?
There needs to be organizations created to organize citizens against Muslim immigration, like we have them to oppose illegal Mexican immigration.
Posted by: FM at February 15, 2007 9:40 PM
OT, but barely...
Another piece of the U.S. immigration puzzle falls neatly into place. Some of President Bush's policies and decisions seem dangerously delusional at times. That he has surrounded himself with those who are offering questionable advice is becoming ever more apparent.
Ever heard of one Daniel Fried? He is Assistant Secretary, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs.
The State Department Pushes European Muslims' "Integration"
According to an inconspicuous article in the Washington Times the State Department is concerned about a "nativist surge" in Western Europe, and is seeking to counter it by creating “a position to coordinate efforts to reach out to European Muslims and help them better integrate into society.” Daniel Fried, assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, said U.S. embassies and consulates in Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands and other countries will introduce programs tailored to local conditions. The program will be managed by Farah Pandith, until recently a staffer on the National Security Council and a native of Srinagar (Kashmir), who moved to the State Department last week to head the new effort.
Read it all here.
at February 15, 2007 10:37 PM
OT, but barely...
Another piece of the U.S. immigration puzzle falls neatly into place. Some of President Bush's policies and decisions seem dangerously delusional at times. That he has surrounded himself with those who are offering questionable advice is becoming ever more apparent.
Ever heard of one Daniel Fried? He is Assistant Secretary, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs.
The State Department Pushes European Muslims' "Integration"
According to an inconspicuous article in the Washington Times the State Department is concerned about a "nativist surge" in Western Europe, and is seeking to counter it by creating "a position to coordinate efforts to reach out to European Muslims and help them better integrate into society." Daniel Fried, assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, said U.S. embassies and consulates in Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands and other countries will introduce programs tailored to local conditions. The program will be managed by Farah Pandith, until recently a staffer on the National Security Council and a native of Srinagar (Kashmir), who moved to the State Department last week to head the new effort.
Read it all here.
at February 15, 2007 10:39 PM
According to that article:
Fried insists that he has not found strong anti-American feelings among European Muslims during his travels, even though many disagree with U.S. policies: “I don’t get big speeches.” he said. “They say, ‘We want to live in Europe. Can you help us out? Do you understand us? We want to be good Muslims and good Europeans.”
What planet is Fried living on?
at February 15, 2007 11:07 PM
LIFE can become untenable when the Muslim population of a non-Muslim country reaches about 10 per cent, as shown by France, a Jewish expert on Islam says.
What Raphael Israeli says about Australia would most likely be applicable in the U.S. and Europe too.
at February 15, 2007 11:10 PM
"Daniel Fried, assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, said U.S. embassies and consulates in Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands and other countries will introduce programs tailored to local conditions. The program will be managed by Farah Pandith, until recently a staffer on the National Security Council and a native of Srinagar (Kashmir), who moved to the State Department last week to head the new effort."
Multiculti, ain't we? Daniel Fried, Farah Pandith--a Kashmiri. Hindu is he? Or not?
As to the tolerable percentage of Moslems, an East Indian associate pegs this at various percentages depending on the PC of the government and population. Check it at
http://islamic-danger.blogspot.com/2006/10/even-more-drastic-times-call-for-even.html
Posted by: unicorns62000 at February 16, 2007 12:47 AM
Even a Jewish scholar is now raving about such issues. I am speechless…
I am very optimistic about all this because such an article would have spelled doom for anyone only a few years ago. In the 7 years or so the debate managed to become years ahead of its time. Bravo! Muslims may after all go down in history as the people that brought the age of reason back to the civilised world! He he he…
And concerning Europe… Anyone who knows anything about Euro history should understand that: “Majority of the Europeans never, never do anything until there is absolutely no room left for any other alternative and they are standing with their teeth to the wall. And then there is a violent backlash expressed through revolution or radical approach coming primarily from a tiny minority of the population”. The reality that most don’t seem to understand is that the Europeans are wealthier and happiest that they had ever been. They are having a capitalist party, and no one is going to sober up there until the party is over and depression sets in.
at February 16, 2007 2:26 AM
The above refers to Toronto
Posted by DebV
Yes I know. Having to work with some of these "secular" moslems and seeing them in action everyday almost makes my skin crawl. I am looking at getting into investment real estate. Orginally thinking about Toronto to do it in but now I am thinking elsewhere. Reason one
A short list of the mosques in the GTA (greater toronto area). I know for a fact two are not listed ( Danforth and Jones, Lawrence an Midland for those of you in the area)
Reason two is irrelvant for the site and off topic.
I am thinking of going back north to where men keep firearms and are proud of it, and when crime is bad but everyone in town knows who to point the cop to.
I worry sometimes about what this once great city is going to become. Paris anybody?
Posted by: Paladin3000 at February 16, 2007 3:11 AM
How interesting that this subject is being talked about openly and in a main stream newspaper.Muslims can no longer fly under the radar and are wearing out their welcome in many places in the Western world.I also read several of the more recent remarks in the comment section and I'd say about 60% agreed with the author that Muslim immigration should be limited.Interesting how far we've come since 9/11. Almost no one believes Islam is a "relgion of peace" anymore.
Posted by: Roxane at February 16, 2007 5:26 AM
1984
WAR IS PEACE - Islam is the Religion of peace.
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY - Islam means submission or slavery.
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH - The followers of Islam generally speaking, are truly the most ignorant people on earth. Their religion limits their ability to study other texts with an open mind.
Posted by: DP111 at February 16, 2007 9:54 AM
Oops, bye bye "Weizman." I guess I wasn't the only one who got tired of your trolling.
Posted by: Abu Allah at February 16, 2007 9:54 AM
"Why can't they all be send back? More than 10 milion Germans were send home to Germany from Poland, Czechoslovakia and other countries in Central and Eastern Europe in 1945, after starting World War II. Muslims started World War III, so history can be repeated again."
Back then people had balls, today we have 5th column headed most of Western goverments.
In USA Religion-Of-Piss chief lover, Jorge Bush, would rather go down as the worst president in history than offend his Multi-Culti friends and Saudi handlers.
Posted by: mik_infidel at February 16, 2007 4:11 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)