Geez if I don't attend our Babtist Church the attendees don't wave when we pass, thank goodness I'm not muslim.

Posted by: AMartinez at April 23, 2007 8:32 PM

What I like about this story is that the caller spoke, not loudly but with passion.

One wishes that thousands of people, familiar with Hirsi Ali's work, were similarly incensed. Where is the left? Where are the feminists?

Elbayly (not having caught up with the ways of public relations in the west) is speaking the truth. Islam does mean harm, and not only for the worthy Hirsi Ali.

Posted by: StillBreathing at April 23, 2007 8:35 PM

I wish this caller had recorded the phone call so we could all hear it. Damn, this is awesome.

I do fear though, that the authorities will more likely investigate the J Watcher who called ElBayly (if ElBayly complains to the police about a "threatening" call) rather than ElBayly. Or if not that, then ElBayly could have a few people from his mosque "pay a visit" to him.

Kudos man, whoever you are.

Posted by: wrathofasma at April 23, 2007 8:53 PM

It's really heartening to realize that someone like Hirsi Ali can emerge from an environment of poverty, ignorance and religious backwardness and see her way to enlightenment and decency.
Now it's up to us to make sure that she has a safe and secure place to live. We can do that by jailing or expelling the imam and keeping his kind out of our country.

Posted by: jewdog at April 23, 2007 8:56 PM

The poor lost soul doesn't realize that he is nothing but a marionette with Satan pulling his strings and he has deceived himself into thinking he is God's servant. If he does not repent of his unbelief, he will find himself right next to Mohammad, cooking in sulpher stew for all of eternity.

Posted by: IAmFree at April 23, 2007 8:56 PM

Muslims can threaten anyone in th U.S. They are somewhat above the law, semisharia if you will. Out of respect for the Religion of Peace, our President's fantasies, and fear, nothing will be done. Bet on it.

Posted by: MontyRockIV at April 23, 2007 9:00 PM

this is how we fight them!!! this is our blueprint to end their reign of terror! lets use our laws in the west to combat them when they threaten us.

it worked in the cartoon demos outside the danish embassies. the police at the time of the protest made no arrests. yet they had to act and arrest those demonstrators because of complaints made to new scotland yard by members of hte public. every call is logged and every calls for arrest are carried out. i actually wrote to scotland yard and sent in quotes and images from the demo stating that a terroristic act had just been committed.

the muslims are using the squeaky wheel concept, so should we!

as for Imam Fouad ElBayly's quote, "She was disturbing the peace." what a nasty little threat he made.

robert, did Ayaan Hirsi Ali contact the FBI regarding this threat? can we do this for her?

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at April 23, 2007 9:09 PM

Death threats issued by an imam? No problemo.

Joe Sixpack leaves a slice of Canadian Bacon outside the local terror masjid?

- Federal "hate crime."
- Federal "civil rights" crime.
- Federal interference with practice of a protected "religion" crime.

And on and on.

The fbi and federal prosecutors would be all over that like stink.

Those secret muslim terror front group meetings and terrorist sensitivity training sessions really pay off. The KSA never bought more for their dollar.

Posted by: Arm A. Geddon at April 23, 2007 9:23 PM

Good one!

But will a prosecutor take it upon himself to book this guy for incitement to murder?

On another note, is it correct that the term 'breeders' is no longer permitted to be used and do such posts get deleted on JW/DW?

Just wondering?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at April 23, 2007 9:23 PM

"It's really heartening to realize that someone like Hirsi Ali can emerge..."
-- from a posting above

Don't get your hopes up. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the remarkable exception, not the unremarkable rule. There are others, possibly tens or hundreds of thousands, or even a few million supposed Muslims, who may have quietly jettisoned Islam. But there are hundreds of millions who haven't.

You can pay close attention to, learn from, help to publicize, such unusual people -- those who were the signers of the St. Petersburgy Declaration. But don't be lulled into thinking that such people are easily fashioned or, once recognized, sufficiently protected so as to declare themselves and to help others do so as well.

Posted by: Hugh at April 23, 2007 9:29 PM

...what Ali did is called corruption on earth. It is worse than murder. She was disturbing the peace.

Enturbulation!

How Scientologist of him.

Posted by: Spiny Norman at April 23, 2007 9:31 PM

"ElBayly: Before anybody gets into the relations with Islam [I couldn't type fast enough to type everything he said] ... you don't get into the relationship with Islam [...] what Ali did is called corruption on earth. It is worse than murder. She was disturbing the peace. That is not a peaceful life." [from the conversation between a poster and El Bayly]

Robert's comment:

Qur'an 5:33 speaks about corruption on earth, or "corruption in the land" as the Muslim translator Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall has it: "The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom."

Nota Bene: Qu'ran 5:33. Without it Quir'an 5:32 (taken from a Jewish text) makes no sense. But it is Qur'an 5:32 that Bush, and Blair, and similar naifs like to quote, as "representing" the essence of Islam. No. It is Qur'an 5:33 that represents the true essence of Islam. And El Baylly knows it. And so do you. But how many others do so, among those in the American government, and in other Western governments, whose duty it is to instruct and to protect us?

Posted by: Hugh at April 23, 2007 9:32 PM

Killing and beating up women in Allah's name?
It sounds like "Islamic Chivalry" is about to join "Business Ethics" and "Military Intelligence" as a standard oxymoron.

Posted by: jewdog at April 23, 2007 9:32 PM

Hugh, as an American what I don't understand is, How as free people to worship or not as we choose. How have we allowed ourselves to become hijacked by this so called releigion of peace.

Posted by: AMartinez at April 23, 2007 9:35 PM

Good work PA JW'er.

Let these weasels know we're listening, watching and responding to their crypto-terrorism.

Hirsi Ali just got a lot more bodyguards.

Posted by: profitsbeard at April 23, 2007 9:48 PM

Kudos to the one that called Elbayly.
The caller who spoke with ElBayly directly may want to fill out a criminal complaint against ElBayly since, the caller, him(her) self heard Elbayly utter the death threat against another person. You have to be prepared to be sued back like for the airplane passengers, but you will have a forum to explain that you yourself heard ElBayly threaten her life.

If whoever called Elbayly adds his or her voice to Ms. Ali's complaint or if he (she) just makes a complaint him(her) self, the establishment will not be able to just ignore it. Moreover, if the police take no action the police and public are on notice, that Ms. Ali who is a refugee from Islamic persecution has been threatened here in her country of asylum. The system will be on notice!

Kudos, kudos, kudos to the one who called Elbayly.

Its interesting how the caller easily showed ElBayly to be the doublespeak weasel we all expected him to be.

Posted by: David England at April 23, 2007 9:54 PM

"Me: I understand that you called for the murder of Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

ElBayly: Oh no no, that was not correct.

Me: I have the quote right here. You said, "She has been identified as one who has defamed the faith. If you come into the faith, you must abide by the laws, and when you decide to defame it deliberately, the sentence is death."

ElBayly: Yes, but that is not my word. That is the call of God."

What an excellent example of something that has to be clearly understood if the west is to prevail in this "long war". Muslims don't use language the way we do. We've seen so many examples - what they mean by "innocent", what they mean by "no compulsion". In this case it's what they mean by "I said". If the intrepid JW'er hadn't followed up on his point, this guy could have possibly gotten away with claiming that "he" didn't say that Hirsi Ali should be killed. Because according to him, Allah said it. Not only do Muslims use language in a different way than we do but they're aware of doing so. I came across an article on the web awhile back that discussed Tariq Ramadan's careful parsing of language. A great deal of care and thought is put into precisely which words to use, how to phrase things. I guess it shouldn't surprise us that folks whose idea of education is to memorize one book from which all knowledge stems would have some spare time on their hands to study how to use language so precisely in order to fool infidels as to their meanings and intentions. I didn't know much about Arabs, let alone islam prior to 9/11 but looking back, I do recall one single adjective from my youth that was used to stereotype Arabs (I didn't connect this trait with Islam at the time). That word was "sneaky". "Sneaky Arabs". I hadn't a clue where this came from and never gave it much thought. Now, of course, I get it. It was about Islam - "sneaky Islam", it should have been termed (and not sneaky Arabs which maligns many Arabs who aren't Muslim). If only this derisory term had been more accurate and referred to "sneaky Islam", maybe we wouldn't be in this mess today, as we would all have been hip to the game a long time ago.

Posted by: Caroline at April 23, 2007 9:58 PM

Strike "sneaky Islam". Islam isn't a person and so can't be sneaky. It's "sneaky Muslims".

Posted by: Caroline at April 23, 2007 10:01 PM

Deportation!Deportation! Deportation!

Posted by: DavidE at April 23, 2007 10:11 PM

Islam: You will convert, submit or die.

Me: Are you threatening me?

Islam: No! I threaten no one. It is Allah who says this.

Me: That's a load of rubbish.

Islam: You are a blasphemer. The penalty for your crime is death.

Me: Are you threatening me?

Islam: No! I threaten no one. It is Allah who says this.

Me: That's a load of rubbish...

Posted by: USBeast at April 23, 2007 10:14 PM

To Pennsylvanians:

If just one of you jihad-watchers calls a senator or representative, that call is calculated by politicians to represent the opinion of another 1000 people who didn't have time to call.

Therefore, below in this comment are phone numbers and websites to call your senators and reps and tell them that the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review of April 22 reported that Imam Fouad ElBayly, president of the Johnstown, Pennsylvania Islamic Center,
identified Ayaan Hirsi Ali "as one who has defamed the faith" of Islam..."and when you decide to defame [Islam] deliberately, the sentence is death," said Imam Fouad Bayley.

Politely tell your senators and reps that you want Imam Fouad ElBayly prosecuted and put in jail for as long as possible and fined as heavily as possible for making that death threat, and that you will watch what politicians do about the Imam and his death threat, and you will vote for the politician who takes the strongest punitive legal action againt the imam.

Here are the phone numbers of the Pennsylvania senators:

Senator Arlen Specter (R)
Ph (202) 224-4254 / Fx (202) 228-1229

Senator Robert P. Casey (D)
Ph 202-224-6324 / Fx 202-228-0604

Here's a web page with all the phone numbers of Pennsylvania representatives:
Penn Reps' Phone numbers

If you aren't sure who your representatives are or their numbers, go here:
Who is My Penn Rep?

Don't let this murder-inciting killer-imam get away with it.

(Here's the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review April 22 article web page:
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/rss/print_503977.html )

Posted by: traeh at April 23, 2007 10:18 PM

This is the typical problem with Islam. Everyhing is in the name of allah or mohead. Therefore all is well. Muslims are never the blame but infidels are to be blamed for questioning anything islamic. Those who left islam or speak out against islam must die. allah's will, you know. Muslims are always excused for utttering death threats in their own mind because allah says it's ok.

Some day our nations will wake up and smell the sh*t.

Posted by: sounder at April 23, 2007 10:21 PM

Well done 'Jihad Watcher' in exposing people like Imam Fouad ElBayly to the light of day. Murder threats should never be permitted in any free society.

sheikyermami writes:
"On another note, is it correct that the term 'breeders' is no longer permitted to be used and do such posts get deleted on JW/DW?
Just wondering?"

So am I, sheikyermami, as I was the one who had my post deleted yesterday(http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/016159.php#comments). I'm still waiting for a reply.

Posted by: descendantofacrusader at April 23, 2007 10:23 PM

When they act like that how do you not make war with them? They are the ones who are at war and so state! Because Hirsi slides..for now anyways,,others will die is what is being spoken I believe! Sounds right awyways! Got to have that blood and power on someone's life!
Bush and Blair, I really thought they knew what this war is about! 'Religion, mis-concept!'
Battle of the times! Holy jihad! Yep! Our religion too is being hi-jacked by people that do not even know what it is about! I would say even on both sides! The one side has not killed any one in the name of their religion but they damn well know what it is about! Even if I feel their religion also a little misconstrued.
I do not understand the Pope! What the,,,hey! Hillary, what the?
I do not believe him! She spoke of the threats on tv. She is a really nice young woman! There is another woman she is also very strong and she makes very good points!

Posted by: MZ at April 23, 2007 10:25 PM

Well done to the caller.

Islamic Center of Johnstown
P.O.Box 5192
Johnstown, PA 15904

Posted by: pez at April 23, 2007 10:29 PM

While it is commendable someone stood up to the ElBayly, it has opened a hornet's nest.

Citizens calling up Muslims and using "righteous passion" in talking loudly to someone, a prosecutor could very well term that a crime of various orders in threatening a Muslim.

CAIR reads this site and would like nothing better than to haul the caller into another court case, since they have the phone number now. Furthermore, it now being shared on Jihad Watch links Jihad Watch as a co conspirator as was noted in historical FBI cases against the White Supremacists when their vocal leader on websites was putting out information and people he only inspired acted upon it.

The government gets very jumpy when citizens start stirring the pot. This was not the way to deal with the situation.
Letters to local television station reporters asking for them to investigate is the correct measure which keeps everyone safe and happy. It also moves law enforcement from public pressure to act according to the law.

Elbayly only needs to complain, CAIR only needs to pick up the phone and Keith Ellison only needs to make a speech on the floor of Congress and everything here becomes the story instead of murderous intent against a brave woman.

Posted by: Lame Cherry at April 23, 2007 10:39 PM

If any Pennsylvanians call their senators and representatives about this issue (I gave phone numbers and suggested a call message in a comment above) please let us jihad-watchers know.

Posted by: traeh at April 23, 2007 10:43 PM

Treah,

There you go! I hope every Pennsylvanian within ear-shot of Jihad Watch follows your wise advice.

We keep regarding these nut-cases as harmless clowns because, well, they act like clowns and clowns are harmless, aren't they?

We need to monitor them, call them on every statement and demand that our hired help look after our interests.

Great post.

Posted by: USBeast at April 23, 2007 10:45 PM

Lame Cherry:
Your suggestion to contact television reporters seems a good one, but I don't think I agree quite with your criticism of the person who called the imam. The caller did not threaten the imam, but merely argued to him that the law forbids issuing death threats.

I'm not a lawyer, but as long as a caller does not threaten, or call up and breathe into the phone, or intentionally harass, or intentionally and make himself a nuisance, I don't see why there should be any real legal risk. If the imam or anyone else doesn't want to talk to people on the phone who are merely engaging in an unthreatening attempt at conversation, then the phone should be hung up, and the public number should be switched to a private one.

It's true that there might be some slight risk that the Imam will discover the caller's number and publicize it, and that some avenging jihadi Muslim will take violent action against the caller.

Posted by: traeh at April 23, 2007 10:59 PM

USBeast: Thanks for the encouragement. I hope people call.

With future issues, I'll try to do further such posts with phone numbers and links so people can easily call their politicians.

Posted by: traeh at April 23, 2007 11:06 PM

"She has been identified as one who has defamed the faith. If you come into the faith, you must abide by the laws, and when you decide to defame it deliberately, the sentence is death."

Actually I don't think Imam Fouad ElBayly could be successfully prosecuted for threatening someone's life.

He's already provided us with his defense: He was only quoting Allah. How do you prosecute Allah? You don't!

It all comes under the heading of freedom of religion.

So long as we continue to recognize Islam as a legitimate religion, there's very little we can do to people like ElBayly. They're free to intimate others by hiding behind the first amendment.

ElBayly knows this, and so he's not the least bit impressed by threats to prosecute him.

Posted by: rational at April 23, 2007 11:13 PM

Lame Cherry,

That's why I was talking about. Knowing how CAIR is, they can very well do this. I'm glad this was posted but I do pray nothing happens. I'm sure Jihad Watch as an entity has only pennies compared to CAIR's legal budget.

Oh, and if anyone from CAIR has the tedious job of reading Jihad Watch, comments and all, I and the rest of Jihad Watch give you a hearty hello. I want to say something else, but I don't want to get sued.

Posted by: wrathofasma at April 23, 2007 11:13 PM

"He's already provided us with his defense: He was only quoting Allah. How do you prosecute Allah? You don't!

It all comes under the heading of freedom of religion."

That doesn't mean you can't tie his him up in court for a good long while, cost him a bunch of money and give him a chance to make a bigger ass of himself than he already has.

Civil Law 101: Just because you can't win doesn't mean you can't sue.

Posted by: USBeast at April 23, 2007 11:32 PM

rational:
You have a point. But to a certain extent it doesn't matter whether he can be successfully prosecuted. Even if he were unsuccessfully prosecuted, it would cost him in all kinds of ways. So people do need to call their senators and reps on this, and convey something like the message I suggested in my first comment on this thread.

Even if politicians found it too inconvenient or difficult to prosecute, and even if all the lawyers, despite their notoriously slippery inventiveness, can't come up with a new bill that if passed would permit some kind of legal attack on the imam's death threat without attacking his religious freedom, even if all attempts to legally punish the imam should be frustrated, still, politicians need to know how people feel about such statements inciting to murder. They need to hear our increasing intolerance for violent intolerance, and our demand that something be done.

Such telephone calls to politicians could lead them, even if they can't prosecute the imam, to become more wary about Islam, and about Islamic immigration, and to tabulate, with fingers more trembling, the potential for lost votes from those of us who are fed up with the totalitarian threat.

Posted by: traeh at April 23, 2007 11:34 PM

"On another note, is it correct that the term 'breeders' is no longer permitted to be used and do such posts get deleted on JW/DW?"

Hm, surely this should depend on context, not be a blanket ban. The demographic implications of muslims in Europe being the most reproductive group are something we can't afford to ignore.

Posted by: Lili at April 23, 2007 11:40 PM

I can't believe CAIR would dare to sue Jihad Watch. A suit would attract huge attention to the careful, devastating arguments of Robert Spencer, while shining a spotlight on CAIR's numerous terrorist links and its leaders' expressed desire that Islamic law eventually replace the U.S. Constitution. A lawsuit from CAIR might be something to which Robert could even say, "bring it on." But I don't know what he would say.

Posted by: traeh at April 23, 2007 11:43 PM

Imam Fouad ElBayly has apparently been in America for some 30 years or more and still he reflects such teachings in the quran. Does he or would he support such an act if he could remove Ayaan Hirsi to an Islamic country? surah 5:33 also calls for the banishment of a Muslim who speaks against mohammed. I think Ayaan Hirsi has happily banished herself from Islamic lands

Posted by: Mackie at April 23, 2007 11:45 PM

if going to a tv station, try the Fox network, at elast they are a bit more open.
the two senators you have, one is a RINO, and other is Casey who is Dem. and probl.work with cair.
so l would say fox, and call the FBI and local cops. cannt hurt. l would not be surprised if the imman contacts cair or vice versa. these islamist always claim it was the word of their god, like it should matter in the West!

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at April 23, 2007 11:56 PM

kudos to the JWer who acted. Let's all follow that lead and get on the move--where ever it may take us--no backing off.

Alarmed Pig Farmer--put those years up on the screen again--(but I need to know what those are for!!--so throw in the key too--thanks)

Posted by: BB at April 24, 2007 12:00 AM

From a posting above, continued:

Islam: You are a blasphemer. The penalty for your crime is death.

Me: Are you threatening me?

Islam: No! I threaten no one. It is Allah who says this.

Islam: Kuffar, you must be killed!

Me: Are you threatening me?

Islam: No. Its not me who will kill you, its Allah.

Such is the logic of the Islamofascist.

But here, just for fun, you can see the complete meltdown of an Imam:

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/02/10/islamic-school-update/

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at April 24, 2007 12:44 AM

Smart and Clever...wish I had thought of it. Just call him up ask him.

Get your recorders ready!
Get your phone numbers ready!

GO!!!!

Just let them talk! Let them rant and rave about all sorts of things. It should be informative!

That goes for ElBayly and all the other twits and jokers we have seen profiled on this site. They do have phone numbers somewhere.

Oh this is going to be fun...

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at April 24, 2007 1:03 AM

Lame Cherry

"Letters to local television station reporters asking for them to investigate is the correct measure which keeps everyone safe and happy. It also moves law enforcement from public pressure to act according to the law."

Oh come on now I am just wondering about Islam man...Learning the faith. I would just ask questions like....What do you think of Hirsi Ali? What do you think of Robert Spencer?

You know who gets Hellfire first? etc...

Also lets be real the media long ago stopped doing their job and now focus on things like Global warming, Global doom, and latest celebrity sex story. The old media will not do a thing nor will law enforcement do anything.

Jihadwatch is part of the new media. This is what this site is about which is going after the jihadis and exposing them.

Hornets nests and lawsuits be damed and full speed ahead! When the saftey of nation is at stake one should not fear such things! Sometimes rocking the boat is the only way things get done!

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at April 24, 2007 1:21 AM

Me: I have the quote right here. You said, "She has been identified as one who has defamed the faith. If you come into the faith, you must abide by the laws, and when you decide to defame it deliberately, the sentence is death."
ElBayly: Yes, but that is not my word. That is the call of God.

According to El Bayly, Allah/Quran decrees that AHA has earned a death sentence. Using that claim - assuming that it doesn't get formally negated by the top echelons of the Mullahs - AHA could then claim that Islam threatens her. Not El Bayly, but Islam. Law Enforcement would then be obligated to eliminate the threat to her that exists from Islam. Again, note - the origins of this claim would not be AHA, but El Bayly. Keep that in mind.

Now, Law Enforcement cannot eliminate the threat from a 'religion' without legislative support i.e. legistature outlawing the religion in question. So for them to do this, Congress would have to pass a law outlawing Islam, which the president would then have to sign (or else he could either state that he agrees with the idea of AHA being put to death, or that he disagrees with the notion that Islam threatens AHA, thereby making GWB more representative of Islam than El Bayly.) So let's get those wheels in motion - AHA should make the complaint I suggest above, and then see how Law Enforcement moves on it. That would theoretically provide a great rationale for outlawing Islam.

Of course, we all know that Law Enforcement would not take such a threat seriously, and would at best go after El Bayly. Given that ground reality, the caller above (incidentally, who was it? Mind taking a bow, albeit with your alias?) did the right thing when he slammed El Bayly for threatening anybody in the first place.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at April 24, 2007 1:33 AM

Bravo ME

Lame Cherry....
Your over cautious approach smacks of someone far too shackled by PC to give a TRUE account of what they REALLY think.
Judging from some of your previous posts I personally don't think you are like that, but ?
Are you getting a bit soft.
No malice intended.

It is not the critic who counts,
nor the man who points out how the strong man stumbled,
or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.
The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena,
whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood;
who strives valiantly;
who errs and comes short again and again;
who knows great enthusiasms, great devotions;
who spends himself in a worthy cause;
who, at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement,
and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly,
so that his place shall never be with those timid souls
who know neither victory nor defeat.
- Theodore Roosevelt

Again Bravo ME

Posted by: Freedom at April 24, 2007 1:50 AM

LOL

That assclown passes more bucks than the US Treasury Department!

"Taqqiyahs Gone Wild" anyone?

What a hilarious hypocrite ofthe Nth degree.
(yes, I'm well aware of the magnitude of that comment to a mOslem and is deliberate, too)

lol

Posted by: jcom972 at April 24, 2007 2:16 AM

Of course, I do not know if this was a male or a female who had this conversation with this Muslim madman living in the States, but whoever you are, thank you for showing courage, passion and concern for another human being.

Someone asked, "Where are the feminist?!"
Would it really matter? Had this been a man to speak out as she has against his precious faith, wouldn't he want the man killed as well?

OR, is it really that women are such an awesome threat to these Muslim men as they have oppressed women for so long that they KNOW when other women begin making waves, an army of women will follow. . . one day. . .and hopefully soon.

Posted by: lightinshadows at April 24, 2007 2:54 AM

According to ElBayly, changing one's mind is worse than murder.

If Cult members start to think for themselves, it could destroy the Cult, but murder, especially against a perceived enemy, could only strengthen a cult through fear and intimidation.

Posted by: Xero G at April 24, 2007 3:30 AM

I live in Pa and not to far from Johnstown. I have contacted my representative and await a reply. As soon as I get one I will let you know. This really makes me angry!! Perhaps a protest at this Mosque would be in order?? I am going to contact the press about this also!!

Posted by: becki51758 at April 24, 2007 7:47 AM

"Someone asked, 'Where are the feminist?!" Those heroic folks who love to demonize the Catholic church because they can't be priest - are those the feminist your speaking of? Of course it is rather easy to be brave when you know the one you are mouthing off about isn't all that likely to seperate from your shoulders. In other words, the typical Leftist display of courage.

Posted by: RIslander at April 24, 2007 7:50 AM

Me: It is ILLEGAL in the state of Pennsylvania to threaten anyone. There is no special distinction for any religion.

I don't think this is correct.

The government, by having recognized Islam as a legitimate religion, also conceded to Moslems, willy-nilly, the right to threaten murder.

If this seems far-fetched, think about the fact that we now have terrorist governments in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, Pakistan, the Gaza, Arabia, Libya, and elsewhere that have been accorded de facto recognition.

We can soon add Kosovo to that list.

* 2:216 * 4:74 * 9:111 * 8:12 * 4:96 * 56:22 * 38:51 * 55:56 * 55:76 * 56:22 * 8:74 * 9:2 *

Mark my words: It is only a matter of time before judiciaries across Western civilization come to accept Jihad war murder as an acceptable act under certain extenuating circumstances.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at April 24, 2007 7:55 AM

Caution!!
It is illegal in many states to record a telephone conversation without the other parties permission. That is why you get that message when you call some businesses like the phone company. This call may be recorded or monitored for training purposes. Or whatever. You must tell the person right off the bat that you are recording the call and give them the opportunity to end the call based on not wanting to be recorded.
The penalty can be serious jail time.

Posted by: auntbea at April 24, 2007 8:27 AM

OT FoxNews is taking calls now for the question as to whether the young boy who put the ham sandwich on the table with Somali kids in the lunchroom in school should be charged with a hate crime!

Posted by: auntbea at April 24, 2007 8:40 AM

Lame Cherry(and others),

I've been trying to find an angle to inform the media of stories like this for months. Neither the tip-line or direct emails to corespondents has had any effect. I've tried pleading with them to step up and save democracy. I've tried calling them out as cowards and challenged them to grow a spine. I've tried much the same with congress and other political representatives. Nothing, no response at all. The media really has no value today, other than casual entertainment. The politicians don't want to be recognized as dooms-day criers. Recently I have been asking the more conservative reports to pick up books by certain authors such as Robert Spencer, Mark Steyn and others. Maybe I'll find one that will invite an authority to the table for discussion. Maybe if we where to collectively compose a single hard hitting yet brief message and hit an O'rielly or Hannity from some 100+ JW'rs they would notice.

Posted by: Abrog8 at April 24, 2007 9:20 AM

Since we know about this why doesn't the law in Pennsylvania know about it? Why isn't he slapped with a lawsuit? Telling off a muslim is a waste of energy. They just turn it back onto you in their 'minds' and blame you and feel you should be dead, tortured and whatever else is in their sociopathic minds. All this knothead will do is feel victimized and probably the mainstream press will state his case while ignoring his crime(s). The ACLU will slobber over him and stand up for his rights while ignoring the fact he is the perpetrator.

In another state we non-muslims face having to face criminal charges due to pork being left at a table, while #1. their religion should be left back at the mosque like everyone else is told to leave their religion back at the temple and church and #2. they equate misplaced ham equally with crimes such as they commit against us - murder, rape, etc. And lastly, our law enforcement and FBI actually waste time and money treating it with equality.

And here is the kicker - the muslims took up this abhorance to ham because the Jews did so, and mohammed was trying his hardest to be like them and convert them to his 'religion'. And the reason why many people did not eat ham was because if it had a worm in it and was not cooked properly it would cause a painful death. They didn't know this at the time and so pork was off limits for human consumption by the Jews. They knew enough to ban it from the table, but they just didn't know why. Now we know why - you have to cook it properly. And the muslims took all this, twisted it, and basically made an animal of God to be something abhorant. The pig is much smarter than a muslim from my readings of the last 4-5 years of islam and what it has done to the vast majority of them!!

Posted by: R_not at April 24, 2007 10:32 AM

Public criticism of mockery of Islam and/or Muhammad ("blasphemy") against Islam is considered by many Islamic scholars to fit under the poorly defined category of *corruption/mischief in the land (5:32-33), or corruption on earth. The Koran is not clear in either prescribing or forbidding the death penalty for any definite, explicit, clearly-defined offence, other than murder of a Muslim (though even murder is not well-defined in the Koran). Therefore Islamic scholars have examined the Hadith and Sira, as well as interpretation based on a full reading of the Koran, to find out what is meant by ambiguous terms such as "corruption/mischief". The result is that the loose category "corruption" (fasad) is used in many cases as a catch-all to include public apostasy, adultery, homosexuality, "sedition" (e.g., mere verbal or written dissent, against Islam, made public; also see "spreading false news", 33:60-62), and other words and deeds (violent or non-violent) deemed to go against Islam. (Also see 9:12-14, which orders Muslims to fight [q-t-l: kill] those leaders of disbelief who publicly criticise and disapprove of the Islamic religion..."Allah will punish [q-t-l: kill] them at your hands..." Ibn Kathir notes that it is better (Islamically) to kill one such person [i.e., a leader of disbelief] than to kill 70 ordinary infidels). These loosely-defined categories were used by Muhammad (who boasted that he had the shortest expressions with the widest or broadest meanings), giving himself a great deal of leeway in executing opponents, apostates, critics, mockers, etc. This leeway has been exploited by Islamic dictators ever since Muhammad laid down the example conduct (33:21) for all time.

Zakir Naik, the popular Islamic scholar who has a huge following among Muslims world-wide, writes, citing 5:33 in regard to the blasphemy penalty:

"“In Islam, a person who has committed blasphemy can either be killed or crucified, or his opposite hands and feet can be cut off, or he can be exiled from that land. On the other hand, in other religions there is no other option except capital punishment. Islam at least has four options of punishment for an act of blasphemy.”"

Naik neglects to mention that none of those "other religions" today executes or punishes blasphemers. Where Islamic law is not fully in effect, he instead recommends the following courses of action for defending Islam against insults (e.g., insults such as the Muhammad cartoons):

1. Replies via the Media
2. Peaceful Protests and Demonstrations
3. Filing a Legal Suit
4. Economic Embargo
5. Political Pressure
6. Moderate Force

[Source: same as above]

Muslim scholars have also drawn upon the blasphemy laws of the Torah, which Jews do not follow. Indeed, according to Ibn Ishaq's Sira, Muhammad chastised the Jews for not executing adulterers in accordance with their scripture. Consequently he ordered that adulterers be stoned to death. The Koran itself states, in many places, that it confirms the previous scriptures (though that is obviously inconsistent with verses such as 9:29, which orders as an imperative that People of the Book be fought and subjugated).

More information on blasphemy in Islam is being compiled here.

Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at April 24, 2007 11:27 AM

Khaybar Oasis

Thanks for the link...
http://islam-watch.org/CommunityServer/forums/permalink/2914/2914/ShowThread.aspx#2914

After reading all about blasphemy in Islam ..
"YUCK"
Mohammand was one sick #@&*%#
Islam is a cult.

Posted by: Joe Schmoe USA at April 24, 2007 12:57 PM

What's the imams number?

Posted by: PRCalDude at April 24, 2007 1:00 PM

Here is the number for the Islamic Center in Johnstown: 814-467-0640

If this post is deleted, I'll completely understand. But I did find this on a website called Islamicfinder.org. Nevertheless, I hope I'm doing anything bad. Hell, I wouldn't want my phone number out there.

With that said, here are some basic guidelines:
1) No death threats of your own. That IS illegal. Not only will CAIR come after your ass, but the police will too.
2) Try to refrain from yelling like a lunatic but be firm when informing ElBayly of state law in Pennsylvania.
3) Perhaps you can pretend to be a prospective convert and ask him what a particular verse of the Qu'ran says. For example, you can innocently ask about Qu'ran 5:33, then ask the Imam to clarify for you.
4) If you can, record the phone conversation. Then find some way to make an mp3 or something out of it and perhaps email it to Mr. Spencer.

Posted by: wrathofasma at April 24, 2007 2:35 PM

This imam invoking the name of Allha joins the company of Hitler, Charles Manson, Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy who also advocated murder of innocents.

Such intolerance simply demonstrates how these Islamic imams and their flock are incapable of understanding our civil rights and freedoms.

I seriously doubt that Allha is God. Allha is certainly NOT the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. More likely, Allha is Al-lat.

Allha cannot be YAHWEH, because Allha's 99 names conspicuously omits the name of YAHWEH. Therefore, I praise YAHWEH and doubt Allha.

And, the acts of violence and intolerance perpetrated in Allha's name on a daily basis should speak volumes about who Allha must really be.

Posted by: BurkasforHitlery at April 24, 2007 5:24 PM

Commendations and thanks to this brave JW poster who called this 'murder for Al-lat' imam on his incitement to criminal conspiracy to commit murder.

Regrettably, it took a private citizen to confront this thug in religious robes when the news media, Homeland Security, a host of law enforcement agencies, our Congressional representatives, the clergy should have led the charge.

I sincerely hope that someone in government, somewhere out there is watching and listening and waiting to throw a net over this imam-in-jihad against our civil liberties.

I may be deluded that decent men and women are still willing to stand up for what is right and good, but I know that the readers and posters on this site understand the danger that unchecked Moslem aggression parading under the guise of Islam truly represents to our country.

Posted by: BurkasforHitlery at April 24, 2007 5:34 PM

Here is an interesting story;

Wife charged after husband shoots lover

If some deranged person threatens or attempts to kill Hirshi Ali because Imam Fouad ElBayly cried infidel or apostate can ElBayly be charged with attempted murder?

I wonder if the Texas Imams are that outspoken.

Posted by: Jesse at April 24, 2007 8:25 PM

Pennsylvania ia a "two party" notification state for phone recording:

http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-america.htm#State%20Laws%20(Table)

Interstate calls become more complicated (federal).

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at April 24, 2007 10:19 PM