| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Note once again that we have never seen this kind of rage against Osama bin Laden or any of the others whom we are endlessly told have "hijacked" Islam.
By Ben Hoyle in the TimesOnline (thanks to all who sent this in):
Sir Salman Rushdie celebrates his 60th birthday today in familiar circumstances: he is once again the subject of death threats across the Islamic world.Eighteen years after the Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa calling on Muslims to kill him, a government minister in Pakistan said yesterday that Rushdie’s recent knighthood justified suicide bombing.
[...]
Hardliners in Iran revived calls for his murder yesterday. Mehdi Kuchakzadeh, a Tehran MP, declared: “Rushdie died the moment the late Imam [Ayatollah Khomeini] issued the fatwa.”
The Organisation to Commemorate Martyrs of the Muslim World, a fringe hardline group, offered a reward of $150,000 (£75,000) to any successful assassin.
Forouz Rajaefar, the group’s secretary general, said: “The British and the supporters of the anti-Islam Salman Rushdie could rest assured that the writer’s nightmare will not end until the moment of his death and we will bestow kisses on the hands of whomsoever is able to execute this apostate.”
Effigies of Rushdie and the Queen were burnt in Pakistan, where presidential elections at the end of the year have destablised an already volatile political climate. Hundreds of protesters in Multan, Karachi and Lahore set fire to British flags and chanted “Death to Britain, death to Rushdie” and Islamist leaders called for nationwide protests after Friday prayers.
Ijaz-ul-Haq, the Religious Affairs Minister, told the assembly in Islamabad that the award of the knighthood excused suicide bombing. “If somebody has to attack by strapping bombs to his body to protect the honour of the Prophet then it is justified,” he said.
He later retracted his statement, explaining that he had intended to say that knighting Rushdie will foster extremism. “If someone blows himself up, he will consider himself justified. How can we fight terrorism when those who commit blasphemy are rewarded by the West? We demand an apology by the British government. Their action has hurt the sentiments of 1.5 billion Muslims."
Pakistan’s national assembly earlier unanimously passed a resolution condemning Rushdie’s knighthood, which it said would encourage “contempt” for the Prophet Muhammad.
Posted by Robert at June 19, 2007 8:41 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Happy Birthday SIR Salman!
To the muslims of the world who didn't get knighted - grow up, stop all your rioting, stop your BS and maybe, just maybe, someone will grant you a knighthood (you never know).
But .. we all know that will never happen, they are not capable of growing up and joining the human race.
Posted by: CelticCoyote![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at June 19, 2007 9:08 AM
Effigies of Rushdie and the Queen were burnt in Pakistan
Hello? Anyone awake yet? Maybe the realisation dawning that it's not a religion of peace after all? No?...
Posted by: Jesus Worshipping Zionist at June 19, 2007 9:10 AM
Why doesn't Allah just smite Rushdie? Surely it must be within his power?
I mean, how long does Allah need? He's had 18 years already.
Posted by: watling at June 19, 2007 9:14 AM
Courageous and intelligent man who deserves it all. Give Christopher Hitchins a knighthood as well for speaking out against religious bigots everywhere.
Posted by: amana39 at June 19, 2007 9:23 AM
Okay...just to balance it all out, I offer one cent(aust) for each fundamentalist/extremist/fascist muslim relocated from this plane. No group discounts either and blanket weapons such as nuclear/biological and chemical are not permitted.
This post wont last long I suppose but it does represent just how many of us do feel about the fairy way our polticians deal with these lunatics who are equivalent to a plague of rats and deserving of the same fate.
Posted by: MisIslamist at June 19, 2007 9:23 AM
Maybe it might be a news story if we found out what didn't inflame the 'muslim world'. As for inflaming them - we should do it more often and then maybe the world would be inflamed over their poor behavior.
Posted by: R_not at June 19, 2007 9:31 AM
What's the fuss about? Once Chucky becomes king he'll rescind the honor anyway (and probably announce that he's been a closet member of the peaceful ones for years). Patience, Islamaniacs, patience.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at June 19, 2007 9:31 AM
Rushdie should fake his own assassination, have a proxy collect the reward, then reappear with the fistful of bloodshekels, and say:
"Thanks for the vacation money, Mahmoud."
For doubting Mohammad's veracity in "The Satanic Verses" (in essence saying: "If Satan could deceive Mo once, how do we know the devil didn't deceive him always and in every way?"), and for mocking the ayatollahs, Salman is condemned to death.
Allah being impotent, the job is farmed out to a virgin-seeking schmuck.
Here's my counter-fatwa:
May Islam die before Rushdie does.
Posted by: profitsbeard at June 19, 2007 9:33 AM
Pakistan’s national assembly earlier unanimously passed a resolution condemning Rushdie’s knighthood, which it said would encourage “contempt” for the Prophet Muhammad.
I think a bit of knowledge about old mo is all that it takes to "encourage 'contempt' for the bastard mohammed."
mohammed cursing Christian
Posted by: morguerat at June 19, 2007 9:46 AM
Maybe the Queen has a sence of humor and was trying to incite a little muslim on muslim violence?
Posted by: AMartinez at June 19, 2007 9:47 AM
"Their action has hurt the sentiments of 1.5 billion Muslims."
Oh no - here we go again, hurting the feelings of the local bully. How many innocents get to die this time due to islam's lack of self confidence. And by the way, not too long ago we were running the risk of offending about 1.3 billion muslims - sounds like we either need to teach some planned parenthood councellors how to speak arabic, re-introduce imams to the ancient art of "counting", or get ready to begin hearing about the easily-bruised egos/"sentiments" of muslims numbering in the trillions and trillions and trillions.....
Congratulations, Sir Rushdie!
Posted by: oregonjack at June 19, 2007 9:54 AM
Dear "Rev." Sutter:
It's interesting, isn't it, that so much of what you tout as condemnations of terrorism comes from the Council on American Islamic Relations, an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism funding case. Who's zooming who, as they say.
And as for the rest, more, much more, soon.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at June 19, 2007 10:01 AM
Yes, Mr. "rev." Sutter,
Thank you for once again reminding us of those disingenuous imposters amongst us who will do and say what they feel is necessary to garner acceptance by their masters. Keep your head buried deep in that sand, sir, or you might just get a glimpse of reality.
With all due respect to your posted title, of course.
Posted by: oregonjack at June 19, 2007 10:11 AM
Not true. Now imagine if Salman Rushdie wrote a book critical of Zinism, the political ideology, not judaism, do you believe he will recieve the honor?
Posted by: progressive at June 19, 2007 10:11 AM
Yes, the good 'Reverend' is of course totally correct that it's Islamophobic&trade not to believe Muslim Taqiyya.
I bet he got his title from the same place as Col. Sanders. Keep drinking the CAIR-ade, Rev!. ;)
Posted by: Un:dhimmi at June 19, 2007 10:16 AM
Now imagine if Salman Rushdie wrote a book critical of Zinism
You utter buffoon.
Firstly, the book in question was written around twenty years ago - you think the authorities here have just been sitting around waiting for another affront to pull on the bearded ones?
Secondly, do you imagine, for one moment, that the British Government, with its appalling record of utter dhimmitude, to the Saudis, to the Iranians, to pretty much any pack of seventh-century savages who shout loudly enough, has decided to go into reverse, handing out laurels to all those who insult islam?
Thirdlyly, the book is not 'critical' of islam, in any sense which you would recognise.
And finally - yes, given the disgusting antisemitism and downright anti-israel sentiment that abounds in the British left and the labour party, if Salman were to produce a book critical of 'Zinism', they would probably make him the last hereditary Lord...
Posted by: Jesus Worshipping Zionist at June 19, 2007 10:23 AM
Oregonjack:
He is no "Reverend." He is a mendacious poseur who has claimed to be an ordained Catholic minister, "higher than a Deacon, but slightly lower than a priest" -- a position that does not exist. There are three levels of the ordained ministry in the Catholic Church: deacons, priests, and bishops, with nothing in between.
http://groups.google.com/group/bit.listserv.ada-law/msg/98eeaf68912e2cf5?hl=en&
Then elsewhere he has contradicted himself, claiming not to be a Catholic deacon/priest at all, but to have been a Catholic Eucharistic Minister, which is not an ordained ministry, and to have received his ordination from a Baptist entity:
http://revjimsutterfacts.blogspot.com/2007/04/just-facts.html
There is much more about this unsavory character that will come out in due time. Of course, his unsavoriness doesn't mean that what he is saying is false. That is demonstrable on numerous other grounds, as I have explained in many examinations over the years here of the condemnations of terrorism that he touts. But it does give us some indication of the quality of the judgments he offers.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at June 19, 2007 10:25 AM
Dear AMartinez,
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's the Prime Minister who suggests to the Queen who should receive an honour and she merely signs the consent. I'm not sure what to read into what will probably be Blair's parting shot.
Posted by: Elephant at June 19, 2007 10:33 AM
Rev. Sutter:
I am wondering, why do you find it necessary to defend the muslims, and why do we not hear any of these muslim leaders condemning the acts of violence commited daily, not only here, but in their homes.
And, wasn't "rev. jim" the drug addled idiot taxi driver on a sitcom a few years back?
at June 19, 2007 10:37 AM
Rev. Jim Sutter
I found this interesting nugget from your site:
It is Jihad when a muslim is called upon to make an extra effort - for example, to get up before dawn in order to pray, to fast during Ramadan abstaining from all the things which would invalidate the fast
So when jihad is declared on the United States, Britain, India or other countries, is Osama really asking people to wage "fasting" and "getting up early" in order to defeat the great Satan?
Please convince muslims of all this because the Kaffirs aren't buying a single word of it.
Posted by: Greek Fire at June 19, 2007 10:41 AM
"Rushdie knighthood inflames Pakistan"
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/rushdie-knighthood-inflames-pakistan/2007/06/19/1182019118266.html
at June 19, 2007 10:41 AM
It is an excellent way to get 1.5 billion otherwise lazy people out of bed really fast :)
Posted by: bonncaruso at June 19, 2007 10:47 AM
Is there a technical name for this way of behaving, it is obviously some form of arrested development. They throw tantrums like spoiled kids. They seem to have lost all contact with reality, I get the same sort of feeling when I watch old films of Hitler addressing the Nazi multitudes it has an orgasmic quality. These muslim crowds seem to have that same quality, their ranting and raving is like a group orgasm a form of mutual masturbation. Has anybody else noticed this?
Posted by: Holger Dansker at June 19, 2007 10:56 AM
"He later retracted his statement, explaining that he had intended to say that knighting Rushdie will foster extremism. “If someone blows himself up, he will consider himself justified. How can we fight terrorism when those who commit blasphemy are rewarded by the West?"
In other words, you in the West do exactly what we Muslims tell you if you want to avoid being killed by our Islamic terrorists. To begin with, Say nothing that we consider insulting to out Phrophet or Islam, Muzzle your press by not printing cartoons or using words we consider offensive to our religion, Do not publish books or articles that we disapprove of, punish anyone in your socities that express opinions that are not favorable to out Islamic beliefs.
The bottom line is, you must acknowledge Allah as the one true God and Mohammad as his Prophet. You must reject all the ideals and principles your Western societies are founded on. Freedom of the press, speech and, religion must be suppressed in Western countries.
Do these things, and we might not kill you. Don't do these things, and we are justified in whatever murderous acts we might commit.
We in the West have developed societies based on the greatest set of ideals and principles humans have ever known, and, yet, we act as if these primitive, backword, barbaric and murderous regimes in the Islamic world are our moral superiors, and we must cater to their legitimate demands to lay aside our principles so as not to offend them.
We are not their inferiors, we are their moral superiors, and Western leaders -- political and religious -- should tell them that. We should tell them that we consider them morally corrupt and barbarous, and that Muslims, not us, had better get right with God, and they can forget about any notion they might have that we're going to surrender our superior beliefs and way of life so as not to offend them.
I'm embarrassed and ashamed by the gutlessness of Western leaders.
Posted by: rational at June 19, 2007 10:59 AM
Dear Elephant Well I'll toast the Prime Minister then, has it's beerthirty on a rainy tuesday in Alabama.
Posted by: AMartinez at June 19, 2007 11:11 AM
From above:I'm embarrassed and ashamed by the gutlessness of Western leaders."
So am I, but can you just magine the reaction if we did get a "strong man" with both the required courage and intelligence and with no need to worry about his postpolitical income? As soon as the west gets a leader with testicles he is compared with Hitler immediately.
Scaringly we need a nonpolitically correct figure with no fear of taking the necessary action and no fear of the left wing recriminations which will avalanche upon his presence.
It is the NEED for this strong man which scares me as once he has the power to solve the problem will he have the integrity to know when to stop
or will there be any way of so doing if he does not?
Despite this I would welcome his appearance.
Posted by: MisIslamist at June 19, 2007 11:23 AM
Pakistan’s national assembly earlier unanimously passed a resolution condemning Rushdie’s knighthood, which it said would encourage “contempt” for the Prophet Muhammad.
Never read Rushdie's book, but I have nothing but utter contempt for the Prophet Mo. ( pig piss be upon him.) Go figure.
Posted by: TEXROCK at June 19, 2007 11:32 AM
Lord Ahmed (The first Muslim Lord btw), of the House of Lords over here in the UK, seems to be rather put out by this award.
Amongst some of the rubbish he spouts on this topic is this little gem:
"Two weeks ago the Prime Minister was calling for building relations between the Muslim world and Britain, then suddenly this knighthood is given to a man who has not only been abusive to Muslims, but also to Christians - because he used abusive language towards Jesus Christ."
Well there you have it Christian guys. Get on out there and kick some effigy ass!
I do hope someone pulls him up on this and asks him why we don't see and effigy burning and threats of violence and death from those Christians around the world who have been insulted by this mans 'book'.
Oh he also goes on to say:
"Forgiving and forgetting is one thing, but honouring the man who has blood one his hands, sort of, because of what he did, I think is going a bit too far."
Now what does he mean by this first sentence? Does he mean that the British are allowed to forgive him? A bit of a cheek really telling us what we should take offence at etc.
Or is he trying to imply that the Muslim world had forgiven him and forgotten his past indiscretions but because of this award it will now be our fault if something bad were now to happen?
at June 19, 2007 11:35 AM
"...honouring the man who has blood one his hands, sort of, because of what he did," -Lord Ahmed.
Strange logic here - all the deaths at the time of the 'Satanic verses' furore were the result of violence by devout Muslims.
at June 19, 2007 11:51 AM
Happy 60th, Rushie!
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 19, 2007 12:07 PM
Dear Rev. Jim,
I noted the following from your site:
Pat Robertson Again Makes a Fool of Himself
http://hatewatchhallofshame.blogspot.com/2007/06/pat-robertson-again-makes-fool-of.html
"Pat Robertson stated, "Ladies and gentlemen, we have to recognize that Islam is not a religion. It is a worldwide political movement..."
Now, let's throw in one more definition of the word Islam:
"Islam is the name of a way of life which the Creator wants us to follow. We avoid the word religion because in many non-Islamic societies, there is a separation of "religion and state." This separation is not recognized at all in Islam: the Creator is very much concerned with all that we do, including the political, social, economic, and other aspects of our society. Hence, Islam is a complete way of life."
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/notislam/misconceptions.html
Ordered those new glasses yet, Jim?
at June 19, 2007 12:16 PM
Robert,
Thank-you for standing up to phonies such as this rev jim sutter. He is no "Catholic minister" because in the ordained state of life as you stated well there are only three levels: deacon, priest, and bishop. If he is a Eucharistic Minister, then he is NOT supose to wear cleric cloths because that would confuse the people who would received Jesus in the Holy Eucharist, people who are homebound. An EM is a special ministry but is NOT an ordained ministry. There is special training and from my home diocese, one is only to be such for up to 6 years. The only thing to represent this ministry is a special cross they are to wear around their necks.
Getting back to Mr. Sutter, folks like him only make it much harder for the truth about Islam to get out. Keep up the good work Robert.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 19, 2007 12:20 PM
From the Islamonline article on the same subject:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1182170384817&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
"Liaquat Baloch, the deputy Secretary General of the six-party religious alliance, Muttehida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), said the government should register a strong protest on the issue.
"This act has hurt the sentiments of the entire Ummah," he told IOL.
You know, I just haven't seen much outrage from the Parguayan Muslim community about this.
at June 19, 2007 1:56 PM
quote
The Organisation to Commemorate Martyrs of the Muslim World, a fringe hardline group, offered a reward of $150,000 (£75,000) to any successful assassin.
end quote
quote
PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, well, first, just call a spade a spade. Virgil Goode is a bigot and he’s an idiot.
end quote
Paul Begala waylays Bay Buchanan, Virgil Goode, and 9-11 Truth
quote
Virginia's senior senator, Republican John Warner, said in a statement Thursday that he respects the right of congressional members to freely "exercise the religion of their choice, including those of the Islamic faith utilizing the Quran."
end quote
Ellison: Lawmaker has 'a lot to learn about Islam'
at June 19, 2007 2:15 PM
I wonder if "Rev. Jim" Sutter is receiving any special favors, of a financial kind, from anyone who might take a special interest in promoting the image of Islam.
Posted by: Hugh at June 19, 2007 2:24 PM
Holger Dansker:
There are a number of well written meditations on the emotional aspects of crowd behavior and experience.
You're probably familiar with Eric Hoffer.
But a less well known author who addresses the visceral aspects of crowds is Elias Canetti in Crowds and Power.
"There is nothing that man fears more than the touch of the unknown ...
It is only in a crowd that man can become free of this fear of being touched. ...
The more fiercely people press together, the more certain they feel that they do not fear each other."
I don't do him justice with this tiny mutilated quote. It is a fascinating book.
===============
Certainly when a crowd is on the move in an angry and destructive mood, as is often the case in the mohammedan world where mob stonings are still practiced and riots are common, one can see the visceral appeal of being safely (if filthily) ensconced in the center of the crowd, rather than facing its wrath or hiding in fear.
===============
There is a cathartic aspect to certain types of crowd experience. The question is, what particular psychic condition is being catharted so to speak.
I suspect in the case of the mohammedan crowds of today, what is being grappled with is the chronic fear engendered by a lack of self-reliance, most importantly intellectual self-reliance, and a life lived under the continual weight of irrational (and hence incomprehensible) authoritarianism.
Posted by: joeblough at June 19, 2007 11:34 PM
For this alone he deserves a SAINTHOOD.
at June 20, 2007 5:07 AM
Dear "Rev." Sutter:
First, less than 1% of the Muslim leadership condemnations I posted are from CAIR
Factually false. Of the purported condemnations of terror on the front page of your site alone, 70 are not from CAIR (or at least don't mention CAIR in their headlines) and 51 are from CAIR. You do the math, but that is not "less than 1%."
You continue to deliberately ignore the thousands upon thousands of condemnations from Muslim leaders worldwide, very specific condemnations, showing how Usama and you are wrong in perverting the religion of Islam.
Factually false. I have discussed many of them here over the years, as you would know if you had troubled to do any research. You are being gulled. Most of them are condemnations of Muslim-on-Muslim violence, or condemnations of "terrorism" or attacks on "innocents" or "civilians" without defining those terms. Yet when jihadists claim that their actions are not "terrorism" and their victims are not "innocents" or "civilians," those terms must be defined for the condemnation to have any force.
As to your repeating the defamation of my cyberstalker, be advised that since you have already reviewed my licensing and my factual biography, any statements based on the forgeries presented by my cyberstalker are considered to be made with malice aforethought.
Your threat is noted. Be advised that your own statements about me are being closely watched for libel and defamation. Meanwhile, as for your "cyberstalker," I posted no second-hand material, but two contradictory statements written by you, both of which were readily available on the Internet. Are you now saying that one is a forgery? If so, which one? And how can we be sure which one is the real you?
The above, aside from the matter of its being another use of logical fallacies, this one being ad hominems and attacking the messenger, in order to distract from the facts presented. Be advised, logical fallacies only weaken the position of those who use them.
Noting that you are self-condemned by your own self-contradictory words involves no logical fallacy. If that had been the substance of my disagreement with your statements, it might have been, but in reality I presented it only as an indication of the reliability of your judgments. But in dealing with your half-truths, distortions, and libels I have presented the facts, and will continue to do so. For an example, see here:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/017005.php#c410305
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at June 21, 2007 7:58 AM
"Rev." Sutter:
I am not Hugh, and Hugh is not me. For someone who professes to abhor hate, you have a remarkably uncharitable nature.
You are not promoting the truth. You are promoting lies and half-truths, defaming and libelling people who are trying to resist a totalitarian, genocidal ideology, and impeding our ability to resist the jihadist ideology that mandates the subjugation of non-Muslims.
Yet if your friends succeed in attaining their goals, you will find they are not quite as welcoming of you as you might have hoped.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at June 21, 2007 8:05 AM
One more note about the "Rev." Jim Sutter. At his "Hatewatch Hall of Shame" blog, he says this on the left side of the front page:
This Blog Featured In:* Access Hollywood
* Atlantic Review
* Court TV
* FOX News
* New York Times
* San Francisco Chronicle
* TMZ.com
* Washington Post
Now do a search for "Hatewatch Hall of Shame" at the New York Times, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, etc. Nothing. Then try "Rev. Jim Sutter." Nothing. Then try "Hate Watch," and voila! The NYT, WaPo and the Chron have all mentioned Hate Watch, a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has nothing to do with the "Rev." Sutter or his "Hatewatch" site.
Will the "Rev." Sutter apologize and withdraw these puffed-up and outrageously false claims about his little defamation blog?
Or will he just say this is another ad hominem attack? In fact, it isn't. It is evidence that he, knowingly or inadvertently, posts falsehoods. If he withdraws it, well and good. If not, anyone who takes seriously anything he asserts, without carefully checking it independently, is forewarned.
Robert Spencer
Posted by: jihadwatch at June 21, 2007 8:16 AM
One wonders why the "Rev." Sutter would attract someone who cares about him so much as to forge material about him, but very well -- if he says he didn't write the post claiming to be "higher than a deacon, but slightly lower than a priest," then I will accept his claim.
However, I wonder how his alleged "cyberstalker" was able to get into his "Hatewatch Hall of Shame" site and insert the claim that the NYT, WaPo, Chron etc. were all paying close attention to the deluded and defamatory vaporings of the mighty "Rev." Jim Sutter.
Posted by: jihadwatch at June 21, 2007 8:25 AM
Another question about the veracity of the "Rev." Jim Sutter:
On a site he apparently wrote and stands by, unless he will now claim that it too is forged, he says this:
After serving two years there as Associate Pastor, I moved on to Jesus the Way Christian Fellowship Church in Lorain, Ohio in 1995 as Pastor and then Senior Pastor. Jesus the Way is a nondenominational Christian church, with pastors who are Independent Baptist, Southern Baptist and Pentecostal, and is located at 1822 East 28th Street...In 2005 I went on semi-retirement status at Jesus the Way due to my worsening health, and late in 2006 I became Pastor Emeritus (fancy word for retired.) I still maintain my license and can marry, bury, and baptize people, and the church has been kind enough to allow me to remain in charge of their Internet Ministry Program.
This information is dated April 23, 2007.
Now, check out the "Internet Ministry Program" of "Jesus the Way Christian Fellowship Church in Lorain, Ohio." Start with a Google search for the church itself:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Jesus+the+Way+Christian+Fellowship+Church%22&hl=en&filter=0
Oops. You'll see that you turn up nothing except the "Rev." Sutter's claims to be affiliated with this church. So evidently the Jesus the Way Christian Fellowship Church has an "Internet Ministry Program" but no website.
Then check the Yahoo Yellow Pages for the Jesus the Way Christian Fellowship Church in Lorain, Ohio:
Nothing.
Then check for "1822 East 28th Street" in Lorain, Ohio:
Nothing.
In sum, there is no Internet evidence that Jesus the Way Christian Fellowship Church in Lorain, Ohio, even exists outside of the imagination of the "Rev." Jim Sutter.
Now, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I haven't been to Lorain, OH. Anyone who has, or who can get there, is invited to drive by 1822 E. 28th St., which is right on beautiful Lake Erie, and tell us what he or she sees.
But in the meantime, it is exceedingly odd that this self-proclaimed minister would be exercising an "Internet Ministry" on behalf of a church that has absolutely no Internet presence at all, and doesn't even show up in the local Yellow Pages.
The "Rev." Sutter no doubt has a ready explanation, which I'm sure he will soon post. Perhaps this church vanished without a trace between April 23 and June 21. But in the meantime one may be forgiven for believing that this only adds to the suspicions about his veracity and honesty.
Robert Spencer
Posted by: jihadwatch at June 21, 2007 9:01 AM
Jimbo,
Your site notes:
"Pat Robertson stated, "Ladies and gentlemen, we have to recognize that Islam is not a religion. It is a worldwide political movement..."
The University of Southern California Muslim Students Association site states:
"Islam is the name of a way of life which the Creator wants us to follow. We avoid the word religion because in many non-Islamic societies, there is a separation of "religion and state." This separation is not recognized at all in Islam: the Creator is very much concerned with all that we do, including the political, social, economic, and other aspects of our society. Hence, Islam is a complete way of life."
Yet, you persist:
"PRCS: Islam, like Judaism, is both a religion and a way of life. There are secular Jews, there are secular Muslims. Both live by the basic principles of their religion, but do not necessarily attend religious services. Neither negates the fact that both Judaism and Islam are religions. This is what the above quote is referring to."
Perhaps, after you begin wearing those new glasses, you might give the USC MSA a jingle and point out the error of their thinking.
I'm sure they'd be glad to hear from you.
at June 21, 2007 12:29 PM
Ignore Sutter. I have banned him from my own blog for good reason -- he's insane.
Posted by: Foehammer at June 21, 2007 3:44 PM
Foehammer:
Yes, but this man is doing damage and causing harm to good people. Thus his lies need to be exposed.
I have a great deal of material on this malignant libel artist. Here is just a bit more.
Besides the apparent non-existence of his church, his seminary apparently doesn't exist either. He says here, http://revjimsutterfacts.blogspot.com/ , that he "enrolled in King’s Word Seminary, which at that time was in Strongsville (they have since relocated). I began there in early 1989 to receive my Masters in Theology, and spent a couple of extra years working on my Doctorate in Divinity, Doctorate in Biblical Studies and History, and a Ph.D. in Trauma Psychology."
OK, "Rev.," to where did it relocate? A Google Search for "King's Word Seminary" turns up only Sutter's own references to the place:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22King%27s+Word+Seminary%22&hl=en&filter=0
Take out the apostrophe and you only get people discussing his fraudulent claims:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Kings+Word+Seminary%22&btnG=Search
Isn't it odd that a seminary would not have a website, or turn out any graduates who ever referred to the place except ol' Jim himself?
Moreover, on this page, a "Rev. Dr. Jim Sutter" in Ohio claims to be a Licensed Professional Clinical Counselor (LPCC) in the state of Ohio.
http://web.archive.org/web/20020209014905/members.aol.com/revjimsutter/myhomepagecounseling.html
But according to this, there is no Jim Sutter or James Sutter with a counseling license in the state of Ohio.
https://license.ohio.gov/lookup/default.asp
Now, maybe all this is "forged" too. Perhaps the good "Rev." will move to repair his damaged credibility by providing verifiable evidence that his church and seminary exist, and that he has a counseling license -- although he may have given up the latter claim, since it doesn't appear in his latest bio. The church and seminary, however, do, which means it may be time for the "Rev." to manufacture a new set of credentials.
Posted by: jihadwatch at June 21, 2007 5:00 PM
"Rev. Jim":
Spencer said: "Now, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist."
Sutter said: "Gosh, Robert, surely it must be that if you cannot find something on the internet, it doesn't exist! Yet another logical fallacy."
Once again you demonstrate your stellar analytical skills!
Keep up the good work, sir!
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at June 23, 2007 11:50 AM
(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.)