Its really sad that the left has sided with Islam considering that they have the most to lose if and when Islam comes into power - they'd be first to be executed given their beliefs and behaviors. Then again they are true to their marxist roots of wanting to destroy the west by any and all means and Islam maybe the perfect weapon for that.

Posted by: waltc at October 6, 2007 3:21 PM

(PLEASE POST THIS ANNOUNCEMENT AT OTHER WEBSITES)

The Jihad Awareness Project (to wake up the U.S. Senate and Congress) currently has 107 volunteers in 44 states.

WE ARE STILL SEEKING ADDITIONAL CITIZEN VOLUNTEERS
FROM ALL 50 STATES, ESPECIALLY THE FOLLOWING 6:

Delaware
Mississippi
North Dakota
South Dakota
Vermont
West Virginia

THE PROJECT: We're looking for people in every state of the Union who would be willing to purchase, from Amazon or any other source, a copy of Robert Spencer's new book Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is And Islam Isn't and mail it, on an agreed upon date, to one of the senators in your state. We want to get the book simultaneously to all 100 senators, in order to send a strong message. If we get more than two people per state, books can also be sent to the U.S. House of Representatives.

If you'd like to participate (or you just have questions), please write to me at traehnam@yahoo.com under the subject heading "Senate," and tell me the state your senator represents, and a nickname. No need for your real name. And I will never share your email address with anyone, not even with other volunteers for this project.

And visit jihadawareness.blogspot.com to get more info on this project and to leave comments other volunteers can read. You can also see there the growing list of participants in this project, and the states their senators represent. I've also designed a graphic that might amuse. Scroll down when you get to the site.

Once we have at least two people from every state, we can agree on a mailing date and then each of us can mail a copy of the book on that date.

Right before each of us mails the book, we’ll issue a press release to media outlets in as many states as possible, and in that way announce and explain the mailing. And perhaps we can come up with some other ways of maximizing the effectiveness of this project and gaining as much positive attention as possible.

One of the project's volunteers suggested contacting Rep. Sue Myrick, who started the Anti-Jihad Caucus in Congress. When we reach the goal of having all 100 senators covered, I'll call Rep. Myrick's office and see if she can help. I've called several congressional offices to get advice on how best to proceed.

Posted by: traeh at October 6, 2007 3:22 PM

We with beards are always misunderstood... :)

Posted by: LazarOfSerbia at October 6, 2007 3:24 PM

I can't wait to see David Horowitz speak here at the Univ. of Wisconsin...that is, IF they let him speak! For those of you who don't know, Madison, WI, and the UW at Madison are notoriously liberal/left-wing/berkie/tree-huggers. There's not much a conservative can do right in this town! I hope Mr. Horowitz is well protected...at least he'll have ONE friend in the audience! Hopefully, they dare not attack a 55 year old grandma who applauds at the wrong (right!) times.

Posted by: mepeteart at October 6, 2007 3:28 PM

The modern left is highly intolerant of anyone who disagrees with its premises. Among those premises are that America is the real problem in the world, Israel is a racist and repressive state and Islam is unfairly being singled out as an intolerant religion. Could you get any stupider than this?

Posted by: Wellington at October 6, 2007 3:39 PM

Isn't "Projection" one of the Seven Pillars?

Posted by: Spiny Norman at October 6, 2007 3:54 PM

Oops! Now with proper quote added:

Yet MPAC warns Muslim students to "demonstrate Islamic ethics and restraint," "not respond," and "report hate crimes and hate incidents," as if it were they who were under threat. It's utter tosh -- but it is an effective tactic.

Isn't "Projection" one of the Seven Pillars?

Posted by: Spiny Norman at October 6, 2007 3:56 PM

I am a Muslim. Lets get that out of the way first. So, do you know what I still find amazing? The growth of Islam in America after 9-11. I personally know dozens of white Americans who embraced Islam post 9-11. Now ask yourself some questions. Why in the world would a sane, white American choose to become Muslim when the only things you hear and associate with Islam is violence and tyranny and women's oppression (btw, a fair number of white converts I know are women). If you haven't noticed, being Muslim isn't really a popular choice in America, so obviously they do it out of concrete conviction. Some of you on this forum may claim that they are not truly informed about Islam, so let me pose this question to you. If you were going to convert to a religion, and make a life altering choice, wouldn't you research absolutely everything about that religion? Wouldn't you look into claims of it being false, or violent? Salaam....

Posted by: IssaHaqq at October 6, 2007 4:10 PM

Greetings:

"Hate crimes and hate incidents can be reported to
MPAC’s Hate Crime Prevention Department by
calling the toll-free hotline number at (800) 898-
3558 or emailing hatecrimes@mpac.org."

"Hate Incident — an act directed against a
person(s) based on their actual or perceived
race, nationality, religion, gender, disability, or
sexual orientation. The difference between a hate
incident and a hate crime is that a hate incident
is a non-criminal act."

Gee, you don't think free speech could be misinterpreted as a hate incident, do you?

Posted by: 11B40 at October 6, 2007 4:12 PM

Greetings IssaHaqq:

To answer your queries, no and no.

People enlist in all sorts or organizations for all sorts of reasons, intellectual, emotional and spiritual.

Islamic violence is well past "claimed", and may well be the precipitant for enlistment.

Come to Guyana; have some Kool-Aid.

Posted by: 11B40 at October 6, 2007 4:18 PM

A little OT but apropos of the references to threats against Robert:

I hope this won't prompt too much outrage from my fellow JW readers, but since Robert apparently doesn't demand in the face of what I'm sure are very credible threats that the U.S. or any other government pay for special round-the-clock security for him, why is everyone so up in arms about the failure of the U.S. or Dutch government to pay for Ayaan Hirsi Ali's security? I mean, I'm not really sure that the taxpayers should be called upon to pay for the security detail of Islam critics. We should, of course, have a safer overall environment in this country, and that by better Muslim immigration control, but even as it is I think Hirsi Ali or Robert Spencer _are_ safer in the U.S. than in Europe from jihadi attacks.

Good luck with the activities, Robert, and come back safely! Keep up the good work.

Posted by: Lydia at October 6, 2007 4:28 PM

Let me get it straight:

Standing up before a congregation in a mosque and preaching that the U.S. Constitution should be replaced by Islamic Law IS protected free speech.

But denouncing those who preach this is a hate crime?

If I fell in a hole and hit my head and now live in bizarro-world, will somebody please tell me?

Posted by: JohnAdams at October 6, 2007 4:34 PM

Well Issa,

There's just so much to research.

Perhaps the white reverts you know weren't missed this:

Islam or death

I read Le Roy Barnett's letter ("Muslims, speak up," June 26) about Muslims' opinion on Abdul Rahman's conversion to Christianity.

Islam is not only a religion, it is a complete way of life. Islam guides Muslims from birth to grave. The Quran and prophet Muhammad's words and practical application of Quran in life cannot be changed.

Islam is a guide for humanity, for all times, until the day of judgment. It is forbidden in Islam to convert to any other religion. The penalty is death. There is no disagreement about it.

Islam is being embraced by people of other faiths all the time. They should know they can embrace Islam, but cannot get out. This rule is not made by Muslims; it is the supreme law of God.

Please do not ask us Muslims to pick some rules and disregard other rules. Muslims are supposed to embrace Islam in its totality.

Nazra Quraishi
East Lansing

Now, is there a separation of religion and state in Islam?

Posted by: PRCS at October 6, 2007 4:43 PM

Or, perhaps they missed this item, Issa:

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

Posted by: PRCS at October 6, 2007 4:49 PM

" I personally know dozens of white Americans who embraced Islam post 9-11. Now ask yourself some questions. Why in the world would a sane, white American choose to become Muslim when the only things you hear and associate with Islam is violence and tyranny and women's oppression (btw, a fair number of white converts I know are women). If you haven't noticed, being Muslim isn't really a popular choice in America, so obviously they do it out of concrete conviction. Some of you on this forum may claim that they are not truly informed about Islam, so let me pose this question to you. If you were going to convert to a religion, and make a life altering choice, wouldn't you research absolutely everything about that religion? Wouldn't you look into claims of it being false, or violent? Salaam...."
-- from a posting by a Muslim now living in the United States

Why would a "sane" American convert to Islam? But you assume those who convert are perfectly sane. Observation of converts, or "reverts" convinces me that many of them are the kind of people who are either 1) misinformed about Islam or 2) emotionally or 3) mentally unstable. When I write "misinformed" I mean they are unaware of just how deeply Islam digs a permanent divide between Believer and Infidel, and how it is a collectivist faith, essentially one which finds recruits for the army of Islam, and once they have signed up, does not let them -- ever --withdraw, though in the Western world it is still possible, given our police, to protect those who leave Islam. How many of these "sane" converts are told, before they join that army of Islam, that they must from now on owe their sole loyalty only to fellow Muslims and to Islam? How many of them are told that in order to fulfill their now-solemn duty to spread Islam, to tear down all obstacles to the spread of Islam, it is licit for them to lie about the nature of the faith, to lie about their own faith -- taqiyya, kitman -- bedause as Muhammad, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil, said, "war is deception." How many of them are told that sculpture is forbidden in Islam, and that all paintings of living creatures, and most music, are forbidden in Islam? How many are quite clear on the matter of their now being subject to the expressed will of Allah, as located in the Qur'an and the Hadith, and that they are not to engage in free and skeptical inquiry, not to challenge or to question, a single thing about Islam, for it has all been decided, all set down, a very long time ago, and for a millennium the gates of ijtihad have been shut, and will not be reopened.

From Richard Reid, to Jose Padilla, to Yvonne Ridley, to John Walker Lindh, to David Hicks, to assorted neo-Nazis and skinheads and antisemites (the three groups overlap) who have now, in Germany and elsewhere in Europe, found their true faith in Islam, one has acquired quite a good idea of the kind of semi-demented, the psychically (and socially) marginal who find that Signing Up With a Group, the Group of Islam, is not one whit different from what young Germans, singing lustitly the Horst Wessel and marching in step, and giving the Heil-Hitler, and above all Belonging to Something Greater Than Themselves -- well, the lure of the Total System, in which one loses one's sense of self, is for many, especially those who just cannot cope with the complexities of modern life, quite a relief. So they join the Army of Islam. Nothing more to think about. When in doubt, Ask Mr. Fatwa, or one of this thousand variants and incarnations.

And of course those on their Spiritiual Searches, who stop the bus at the arret named Islam, and get off, never get on that bus again. Not because Islam is so wonderful, but because they can't.

If Islam attracts the psychically and emotionallly and economically marginal, those who leave Islam are the most impressive, articulate, and intelligent of the set of people born into Islam.

Put, on one side, the converts to Islam -- Reid, Padilla, Hicks, Ridley, Lindh, and all the rest. Put, on the other side, Wafa Sultan and Ibn Warraq and Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Nonie Darwish and Walid Shoebat, and all the rest. On one side, total mediocrity. On the other -- among those who have left or jettisoned Islam, one apostate more impressive than another.

The comparison is telling. Or, rather, there is no comparison.

Posted by: Hugh at October 6, 2007 5:03 PM

IssaHaqq,

Now ask yourself some questions. Why in the world would a sane, white American choose to become Muslim when the only things you hear and associate with Islam is violence and tyranny...

For some, that reputation for voilence and tyranny is attractive, especially to those who feel put down by society at large, and the thought of belonging to a supremecist group is very appealing. Why would otherwise normal, intelligent young men join groups like the Klu Klux Klan or Neo-Nazi groups, who are far more ostracized in American society than is Islam? Besides, most of the post-9/11 growth of Islam is in prisons, where Islam's reputation for violence is very attractive. Islam gives these men divine sanction for their violent urges, so long as they are directed towards the infidel only.

...and women's oppression (btw, a fair number of white converts I know are women).

Many women, especially those raised in permissive households, or with no fathers, have "daddy issues" and/or a psychosexual need to be dominated by their men. Most of them go from one abusive relationship to another, and Islam provides a "sanctuary" for others.

If you haven't noticed, being Muslim isn't really a popular choice in America, so obviously they do it out of concrete conviction. Some of you on this forum may claim that they are not truly informed about Islam, so let me pose this question to you. If you were going to convert to a religion, and make a life altering choice, wouldn't you research absolutely everything about that religion? Wouldn't you look into claims of it being false, or violent?

People join wacky New Age cults all the time without "checking up on them" - the sense of belonging is very attractive to many people. And, as I noted above, Islam's long reputation for violence and power may be very attractive to those who perceive themselves as weak and powerless. Posted by: Spiny Norman at October 6, 2007 5:03 PM

Robert, good luck with the conference, and thanks for your tireless efforts and courage speaking out and educating about Islam and the threat it poses to the West.

commenter above asks:

"Why in the world would a sane, white American choose to become Muslim...?"

...good question. But they choose to become Scientologists and other idiotic things besides. All it goes to show is there's no end of stupid, venal, foolish nonsense afoot in the world.

Posted by: Zeno at October 6, 2007 5:04 PM

The Real Six Tips discovered under a rock in Pelayo's back yard:

try to demonstrate Islamic ethics and restraint
pretend to support free speech
do not respond without further instructions
lie to campus administrators
spread some rumors to other student groups
make up some hate crimes and hate incidents

Posted by: Pelayo at October 6, 2007 5:34 PM

I personally know dozens of white Americans who embraced Islam post 9-11. Now ask yourself some questions. Why in the world would a sane, white American choose to become Muslim when the only things you hear and associate with Islam is violence and tyranny and women's oppression (btw, a fair number of white converts I know are women).

- Posted by: IssaHaqq

Not all human beings are comfortable with freedom, because it requires personal responsibility, and sometimes hard choices in life. How much easier to be told what to do, to think, how to dominate the 'weaker sex', how to poop, etc., than having to decide for yourself? Slavery is something we are against, but not all 'white' people are anti-slavery, so not all will choose freedom, especially if it is a way to totally regulate their lives for them. By it they even may feel empowered. We don't care, their choice, bad choice, but they're stuck with it. If they try to leave, it's a death sentence. Their problem.

What the rest of us, the vast majority who are not 'slave' mentality, we who take responsibility for our lives and demand the same right for all who want it, we will fight your slavery based religion-socalled of Isalm. Mohammed created a total system of obedience for his slave-like army of Allah, the one YOU belong to, and that is not acceptable in a modern freedom based world. Make no mistake, the world is moving towards more freedom, not less, and your socalled-religion will be left behind. Mock freedom, if you wish, but that is your free choice. Just don't try to leave your religion-socalled, or it is your death. For us the Free, your ideology of war for Allah is unacceptable, and like Hitler and other supremacists imperialists of the past, your Arab imperialism will be stopped. On this, there is no dialogue and no compromise.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at October 6, 2007 5:36 PM

Organizers are billing the event as the "biggest conservative campus protest ever."
.....................................

I may carry a "Liberals against Islamo-Fascism" sign. Islamification is a threat to *everyone* in the West. I must say, kudos to David Horowitz and conservative groups for organizing the events.

As has been pointed out, it is what are often considered "Liberal" causes that would suffer most greatly under Shari'ah--the status of women, status of gay people, status of religious minorities, especially non-"People of the Book" such as Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans and Pagans, tolerance of "transgressive" artists and writers, etc. Despite Osama bin Ladin's recent vaporings about global warming, I doubt the leaders of your average Islamic theocracy would take kindly to Seattle-style environmental protests.

Please note that I *do not* support all of these causes, and find some of them silly or misguided. But I would never want to see the kind of violence and suppression that would be visited upon them in an Islamo-Fascist state. Nor do I want to see the bombing of nightclubs, destruction of churches, or call for murder of filmakers, editors, writers and artists done in the name of "Islamic values".

To IssaHaqq, who wrote:

If you were going to convert to a religion, and make a life altering choice, wouldn't you research absolutely everything about that religion?
..............................

Well, yes, I certainly would.

But I know people who have embraced various belief-systems over the course of their spiritual seekings. Some people, especially at times the very young, might embrace a new religion after one trip to a Mosque or Temple, often in a gush of enthusiasm and fervor, and without much thought or research. This is unwise, but hardly uncommon.

There is a great difference, though--if a convert finds, upon further study, that Hinduism, or Buddhism, or Catholocism, or Judaism, or Wicca, or Native-American spirituality, is not really for them, they can leave and continue their seeking elsewhere. Their Priest or Rabbi or Guru may express regret at the convert's decision not to continue in the faith, and may urge them to reconsider.

But it is only in Islam, in the practice of all major (and most small) religions, where "whosoever changes his religion, kill him" is considered doctrine.

Posted by: gravenimage at October 6, 2007 5:36 PM

Hello. I am glad to see that I am generating a great number of responses.

"For some, that reputation for voilence and tyranny is attractive, especially to those who feel put down by society at large, and the thought of belonging to a supremecist group is very appealing. Why would otherwise normal, intelligent young men join groups like the Klu Klux Klan or Neo-Nazi groups, who are far more ostracized in American society than is Islam? Besides, most of the post-9/11 growth of Islam is in prisons, where Islam's reputation for violence is very attractive. Islam gives these men divine sanction for their violent urges, so long as they are directed towards the infidel only."

People join the KKK and Neo-Nazi groups because they feel that the white race is being threatened by Immigrants and already have a racist bias toward minorities. If a prisoner becomes an ordained minister he has found hope and God, but if he becomes Muslim then he is only doing it because the attraction for violence? What about all the non-violent offenders then (i.e. drug users)? And please provide a reliable statistic that says the majority of conversions to Islam post 9-11 were from prisoners.

"Many women, especially those raised in permissive households, or with no fathers, have "daddy issues" and/or a psychosexual need to be dominated by their men. Most of them go from one abusive relationship to another, and Islam provides a "sanctuary" for others."

Can you prove any of this? Women who have negative relationships or are fatherless find God all the time and could even become strong Christians. Are you saying only the ones who become Muslim have psychological problems?

There are many white and black women who convert that are college-educated and very intelligent that grow up in normal Christian households who have loving fathers. If they want to really be in a "sanctuary" and be dominated by men as you put it, why do they leave their religion instead of just marrying a Christian man who is conservative and a dominating man in the relationship?

"People join wacky New Age cults all the time without "checking up on them" - the sense of belonging is very attractive to many people. And, as I noted above, Islam's long reputation for violence and power may be very attractive to those who perceive themselves as weak and powerless."

For anybody who feels left out and needs that sense of belonging, why don't they just join a church group or attend synagogue more often? And I would think that individuals research a religion or cult group before they join since it can be a life-altering choice. But more importantly they meet practicing Muslims and see them in their towns and universities and realize that they are nice and normal people who are not violent.

If people become Muslim because they are so inclined to violence and power, why don't they just join the American military? Is there not a sense of brotherhood in the military, a sense of comradeship, a sense of belonging? They will send you to Iraq or Afghanistan where you could legally kill people.

Salaam.

Posted by: IssaHaqq at October 6, 2007 5:50 PM

If you haven't noticed, being Muslim isn't really a popular choice in America...

Posted by: IssaHaqq at October 6, 2007 4:10 PM

Have the decency or acknowledging that being a Muslim, is not punishable by death, in America.
To put in your own words... If you havn't noticed, IssaHaqq, being non-Muslim in Saudi Arabia, isn't a choice at all.... if you see the difference.

Posted by: Alert at October 6, 2007 5:55 PM

Hoho! I went to the MPAC site and just took at look at the titles posted on their page there. How about these:

Related Articles
*MPAC Exposes Steve Emerson's Self-Serving Distortions

Really, old Steve being exposed by the exposees?

*The Truth About Daniel Pipes

No need to read, I already know all I need to know, but I did anyway. A selection of half-sentence quotes with rants about him being anti-islam and anti-arab, a hatemonger and so on. Extensive quotes from hostile reviewers. Great "analysis", such as "Pipes constantly attacks 'islamism' but never defines what the term means" -- really? I would have said that the first couple of paragraphs on his Islamist Watch web page did a pretty good job of it, but who am I to say?

But my favourite part: extensive transcripts from two on-air debates in which Pipes objects to frontal attacks saying that he had agreed to the debates on the basis that there would be no ad hominem attacks. Then their comments: see how Pipes only stifles debate and how he is intolerant of dissenting opinions!

Got a good chuckle from that one.

*MPAC Executive Director Debates Controversial Author Irshad Manji

Someone should get their hands on a transcript.

MPAC Positions
*National Muslim Groups Offer Approach to Darfur Crisis

...Kill the Kuffar and blame the U.S. for the bloodshed?

*MPAC Rejects Bin Laden's Call for Global War

Well good for them. I can see why this was newsworthy for them. It's good to see they gave Bin Laden's call due consideration and weighed the alternatives. It's awfully christian (sorry all!) of them to decide not to wage outright war against their American benefactors, choosing to subvert by propaganda and political actions instead. Tip of the hat to these gentlemently Islamists.

Posted by: Archimedes2 at October 6, 2007 6:13 PM

IssaHaqq-

One thing that strikes a non-Muslim about Muslim countries (especially Arab countries) is the total lack of ethnic diversity in those countries, and where there are minority ethnic groups they are in great danger (Kurds, Armenians, Jews etc.). It appears to many non-Muslims that Islam is a religion of deception on everything.

When is Saudi Arabia going to allow a million Somalis to immigrate there (in the manner of countries like the USA)? Why doesn't that rich country (Saudi Arabia) take in large numbers of immigrants in the manner of the USA? Why don't they treat non-Arabs as equals? Why can't people practice Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism freely-(as in the USA) in Saudia Arbia? Why? Will you answer? Or will you lie-decieve or hide?

Posted by: Frank at October 6, 2007 6:27 PM

"Islamic ethics and restraint"-

Good one, that! Never heard of it.

You mean like here:

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/10/05/france-is-burning-again/

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at October 6, 2007 6:33 PM

Hmm.

I just realized from Dear Edna's Terrorist's Handbook:

The guide includes information about the need for student groups to:

demonstrate Islamic ethics and restraint

One either smites the uppity infidels' necks or one demonstrates restraint.

Which is it, sweetheart?

Posted by: PRCS at October 6, 2007 6:40 PM

Wow!

Half a world apart; two minds working in synchronicity.

Posted by: PRCS at October 6, 2007 6:43 PM

People, letting you know that the Emory "Wheel" does not publish comments that are against Islam, Mohammed, Koran. Also, they have a new Orwellian censorship software that tells you you said certain profane words, when in fact you did not.

The Emory "Wheel" is a huge enemy. Emory = Enemy. NO negative comments about Islam/Mohammed/Koran are published. Try it - you'll see. You'll be deleted if you say anything so benign (and truthful) that Ramadan is pagan.

Disgusting. When I think that at one time I was considering Emory for grad school. SO GLAD I did not attend that idiotic PC institution. Go to Hell, Emory, you stupid PC Nimrods.

Posted by: darcy at October 6, 2007 6:48 PM

Hello Frank. Thank you for your comments.

There are an enormous amount of ethnic groups within Muslim countries. But as an American most people would just look at them as only Indian, Pakistani, Egyptian, Moroccan. The reality is quite different. For example, look at the ethnic diversity in a country like Pakistan (Pathan, Pujabi, Urdu-speaking, Kashmiri, Memon, etc.)or the different tribes you might find in northern Africa. What does Islam being a deceptive religion have to do with any of that though?

Secondly, your point on Saudi Arabia. I am an American Muslim who was born in the United States. I can't answer why the government of Saudi Arabia would not allow millions of Somalis or immigrants to enter their country. Why did Israel refuse to allow refugees from Darfur enter their country? I don't know. You should ask the policy makers of the respective countries or private citizens, they will give you a much better explanation. That's like a French person asking a German why do American police officers discriminate against black drivers? I know non-Muslims who are Christian that lived in Saudi Arabia and would attend church services at the Aramco facilities and others. Many Saudi's believe that their government is an oppressive force which tortures dissenters (who are also Muslim) and is extremely corrupt. Now with all this evidence of Saudi Arabia being oppressive and what not, I ask you why doesn't the American government take a firmer stance against it rather than continuing to buy crude?

Posted by: IssaHaqq at October 6, 2007 6:57 PM

An American Muslim!

Shazaam!

A member of a complete way of life at odds with, and incompatible with, the United States Constitution.

Which takes precedence for compliant, devout American Muslim? God's law, as God demands it? Or those man-made laws which conflict with God's law?

Where in the world do American Muslims believe a thief's hands can be amputated or an apostate be killed?

Thirteen percent of American Muslims believe that suicide bombings are 'sometimes acceptable' in defense of Islam. Just what do they believe Islam should be protected from? And from whom?

How flat is the earth, where does the Sun set, and in what part of the human body is sperm produced?

Posted by: PRCS at October 6, 2007 7:28 PM

"I am an American Muslim who was born in the United States. I can't answer why the government of Saudi Arabia would not allow millions of Somalis or immigrants to enter their country".

(I posted this on the wrong thread because I hit the wrong button.-LOL. Anyway I I'm posting it right now.)

IssaHaqq-

I think you are a bullsh*tter. Don't divert or deceive with me or pretend that because you were born in the US you don't know the truth about the racism and religious discrimination in Arab countries. (And don't divert the Issue to Israel or any other place. We are talking about Islam and Arab countries.)

You know the reason. They would never be permitted into Arab countries in large numbers (even rich Saudi Arabia) because they are African Negros. Arabs are very racist. Islam (especially in Arab countries) does not practice what it preaches. Arabs would never permit the kind of ethnic and religious diversity in Saudi Arabia or other Arab countries that exists in America-and you know it.

Posted by: Frank at October 6, 2007 7:32 PM

"I am an American Muslim who was born in the United States. I can't answer why the government of Saudi Arabia would not allow millions of Somalis or immigrants to enter their country".

Really. What bullsh*t.-LOL

Posted by: Frank at October 6, 2007 7:52 PM

IssaHaqq,

If what Mr. Spencer, Mr. Fitzgerald, and others have written on this site about Islam is false, could you please point out those falsehoods or inaccuracies? The argument that what sane people believe indicates any degree of flaw in that belief, is absurd. That sane people embrace flawed* beliefs (they do) says nothing about the flawed beliefs, other than perhaps creating a member directory.

The earth is not flat. Whether you are sane or not, or everybody on earth is sane or insane, earth's shape is stably holding in a mostly spherical state.

Consider these questions if you will; If Buddhism is flawed, then why are all those sane people signing up? If Hinduism is flawed, then why are all those people signing up? If Christianity is flawed, then why are all those sane people embracing it?

You see we could go one like this for a long while, adeptly employing our psychological acumen to ascertain the myriad of reasons people believe the things they do. Seriously though, it's an important endeavor and I'm half inclined to indulge the urge: but I am (and probably most everyone else here is) much more interested in what you think about Qur'anic abrogation, the doctrinally ingrained inequality of treatment of people under Islamic law, the definition of innocent in Islam, and many other things Mr. Spencer and Mr. Fitzgerald have written concerning Islam proper -- Islam The Belief System.

*Flawed in the case of Islam are this site's authors arguments on how certain aspects of Islam give rise to violence today.

Posted by: deesine at October 6, 2007 8:02 PM

Wow - Where's my comment?

Posted by: darcy at October 6, 2007 8:06 PM

Let's mind the vitriol levels.

Substance, not spleen. (Now there's a bumper sticker).

And if it applies to you, watch your language. I inserted some asterisks above. From now on, I'll just delete the comment.

Posted by: MarisolJW at October 6, 2007 8:14 PM

Darcy-

If you get deleted here don't take it personnel. It's not personnel. They have to careful of deceivers taking things out out context. I think one of your comments got sent to Davy Jones locker-or I think I saw a post of yours to Mr. Issa. Anyway, if it happens, it has happened to me too. Now you see it-now you don't. (I even got a reprimand from Robert once. He said basically in so many words: it's tough enough for me telling the truth, Frank-I don't your crap posts that can be taken out of context, Frank-LOL).

Don't take it personal, dear.

Posted by: Frank at October 6, 2007 8:19 PM

"Now with all this evidence of Saudi Arabia being oppressive and what not, I ask you why doesn't the American government take a firmer stance against it rather than continuing to buy crude?"
-- from a posting by Issa Haqq

I agree: why doesn't the American government expose the small army of American hirelings working for the Saudis, directly or indirectly? Why doesn't it demand an end to Saudi money coming into this country to pay for mosques and madrasas, and propaganda campaigns on behalf of Arab and Muslim causes? Why doesn't the American government put a large, and steadily increasing tax on gasoline, and other taxes on the use of oil? Why doesn't the American government withdraw any guarantees to the Al-Saud, and instead demand that if they want American support (in case of war or uprising, as in the Eastern Province where all the Shi'a live), they pay for it, pay a hundred billion or more for that guarantee? And finally, why should not the American government seize Saudi-owned assets -- what could the Saudis do in response, since they must continue to sell their oil on the world market if not to us -- to pay for all the expenses directly related to the Saudi financial support for the Jihad world-wide? Why continue to support the corrupt Al-Saud?

Posted by: Hugh at October 6, 2007 8:26 PM

A muslim poster earlier in this thread asked why there are so many converts to islam in this country even after 9-11. The answer to that question may lie in the many other unanswered questions regarding human behavior in our society.
Why would a beautiful woman become a consort with a man who most certainly brutally murdered his former wife for seeing another man? Why do women flock to convicted mass murderers who are in prison for life..some on death row? Why do some people seek sexual pleasure with children..even their own children in many cases? Why do many people gravitate to charlatans who lead them to death by suicide because they are given to believe a spaceship is coming to take them away..hidden by an approaching comet? Many people in this country think that Elvis is still alive and that if you send him a letter he will receive it. There is a very important difference in most of the lunatics that I have touched on and muslims. If you tell a believer in Elvis that you don't subcribe to their belief, they don't normally want to murder you and if you once believed in Elvis but now do not you are free to go about your life. If you steer clear of Hale-Boppers and O.J. everything will be fine. I plan to give islam and most muslims as wide a berth as possible until self defense becomes an issue, in the meantime don't ask dumb questions!

Posted by: pismopal at October 6, 2007 8:33 PM

Thanks Frank - I know I can always count on you.

Uh Huh, "Issa" p***** me off. Well, Goodnight, Sweet Dreams. See you later (probably tomorrow!).

Posted by: darcy at October 6, 2007 8:35 PM

"I am an American Muslim who was born in the United States. I can't answer why the government of Saudi Arabia would not allow millions of Somalis or immigrants to enter their country". -by IssaHaqq-

I think you are a bullsh*tter. Don't divert or deceive with me or pretend that because you were born in the US you don't know the truth about the racism and religious discrimination in Arab countries. (And don't divert the Issue to Israel or any other place. We are talking about Islam and Arab countries.)

- by Frank

For a Muslim to refuse to comment on Saudi Arabia, Mecca, is like a Catholic unwilling to comment on the Vatican, Rome. However, most Catholics would be happy to answer questions on the Vatican, because they have nothing to hide. But the Slaves of Allah, that is different, because no one other than the slaves are allowed into Mecca. Anybody can visit the Vatican and watch the Pope give prayer from his window, and get blessings, but not so with visiting the Mecca. There, it is a world divided between believers and unbelievers, and the only way you can join is to shahadah your way in. Of course, you can't un-shahadah later, so it's a one way ticket, not only for you but also for your children, grandchildren, great great great grandchildren... no way out. Instead of a blessing from this ROP, if you try to leave, you geet RIP.

So this Issa guy can't answer your question, no matter if born here 0r there, a new convert or an old Mo'hand, he can't answer you. So he must find a way to divert the question, or somehow invalidate it so he does not have to answer. One way is to say that Saudi Arabia is not his country (wink wink), and the other is throw you off course by talking about Israel (hate hate), which is so much of Muslim attention they can't see straight. That nation makes them crazy. Don'tcha know? All the world's problems are Israel, those joose, as their imam no doubt drills into their heads after they had been properly softened up with deep bowing towards Mecca on Friday prayer. So it's no surprise he will deflect your questions. And even more interesting, he won't touch my comment with a hundred foot pole, because he knows he's a slave. Living in America under our Constitution and Bill of Rights to protect his freedoms means nothing to him, because he is a slave. Perhaps a nice smiling courteous solicitous slave, but a slave who is not to be trusted, because he is drilled to deceive. This is the same deceit used by their solicitous imams and 'open nights at the mosque' to bring in new meat, both men and women, the future procreators of more and more slaves, for their army of Allah... the perpetual Slaves of Allah.

Bravo for those who are speakers to confront this Islamo-fascist enslaving doctrine of Mohammed... BTW, who's been dead 14 centuries, and still he powers over his slaves.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at October 6, 2007 8:59 PM

IssaHaqq

"lets get this out of the way, I'm a Muslim.."
Well, wife, friends and I just got back from the "Taste of Missouri" in the world famous Missouri Botanical Gardens in St. Louis..dozens of thousands of people enjoying art imitating life (David Chahuli's Seattle glass blowing), African Chipunca stone art of humans and animals, Don Wiegan's metallic sculpture of young girls running, photos, flower arrangements of every description...my point, of the three of us over three hours, noticed only two people..surprise Issa..women (Hijabbed)..representing the Religion of Peace..notice the same negative logarithms of ROP attendees in the St. Louis Art Museum..why is that Issa? Haram? It was a beautiful day today! Where in St. Louis (or anywhere) with such venues happening are the adherents to Islam in St. Louis. I saw nothing in local papers about Islamic venues this weekend...well, IssaHaqq, I'm waiting for your reply

Posted by: nodak at October 6, 2007 9:57 PM

Why do some "white" Americans become Muslims. Well, first of all, what does color have to do with it. Are you a racist? Second, the answer is simple. For the same reason some Americans become communists or Nazis. They have a pathology of resentment towards their country.

Posted by: usapatriot at October 6, 2007 10:03 PM

IssaHaqq: Give it up. You're as pathetic as everyone else who posts here defending Islam. You wonder why a fraction of 1% of Americans would convert to Mohammedanism (don't like this term?----too bad) even after 9/11. The answer is simple. There are always confused folks out there, for instance women with low self-esteem and those who have a chip on their shoulder against America. These represent your converts. Congratulations.

No American in his or her right mind would convert to an ideology that puts Mohammed forth as the model man, the Koran as a font of wisdom and Islamic religious law as evidence of a sapient legal system. Methinks you doth protest too much. Methinks you are a fool.

Posted by: Wellington at October 6, 2007 10:48 PM

OT

Dispatches - Immigrants: The Inconvient Truth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muXEpSbyqo8

Posted by: Borg at October 6, 2007 11:00 PM

Hello Folks. Thank you for all the kind responses. I am glad to see that I am generating much debate.

I acknowledged in my previous post that the Saudi government was oppressive. The issue of racism never once crossed my mind when talking about the Somali refugees. You can call me a "bullsh*tter" as Frank has called me, but there is not much else I can say except that I never once saw that as the reason. There are a huge number of foreigners in Saudi Arabia, many Muslim, and non-Muslim. Both are discriminated against for not being Saudi. Unfortunately there is some intolerance in Arab countries, but the majority of minorities enjoy a peaceful life. Countries always refuse refugees. Why did European countries not take in the many stranded Rwandans? Is France intolerant and racist too for not allowing Muslim women (and others) the right to wear hijab? Why does the US refuse to help the thousands of Iraqis who put their life on the line for America? Why did Israel refuse thousands of refugees from Darfur?

To tgusa:

"A large percentage were raised as muslims and were severely affected by religious teachings, including sexism, subjugation of women, and repressions of sexuality."

Anybody reading that would say "wow, a lot of those people were raised Muslim. Good job tgusa!!" Unfortunately, tgusa deliberately changed the words from Catholics to Muslims and mislead everybody. Here is the original quote from the article (I capitalized some of the key words he intentionally changed):

"large percentage were raised as CATHOLICS and were severely affected by CHURCH teachings, including sexism, subjugation of women, and repressions of sexuality." She also writes that their fathers were often missing, withdrawn, or abusive, and the mothers might have been demanding. Many of these serial killer groupies also had poor relationships or marriages."

Posted by: IssaHaqq at October 6, 2007 11:10 PM

IssaHaqq:

I'm an Israeli. To be frank, I do not agree with Mr. Spencer's views entirely because about 1/3 of our loyal citizens here are Muslims. [Note: By defenition "Palestinians" are by choice non-citizens.] Specifically, Mr. Spencer adopts the purely Christian view that the West has a "Judeo-Christian" heritage which is a myth because Jewish culture is strongly non-Western [not anti-Western but our culture is different than Western] and also M. Spencer argues that the political character of Islam should exempt it from the usual protections of a religion. Frankly, Jewish law-- the basis of Jewish society within any country-- does not recognize a separation of religion and State either; his view therefore worries me because Judaism could be exempted from protection for the same reason. Yet we-- ALL Orthodox Jews-- reject completely the notion that religion should or can be imposed on anyone; our very religious law forbids one from trying to do so.

Yet that said, Islam does have a strongly dark violent side; the Rambam commented on it a millenium ago. Converts to any religion will seek out the good. In religions that encourage conversions-- in contrast to Judaism which strongly discourages them-- a convert is induced with all the "selling points" of the religion to convert and the dark side is only revealed to the potential convert later-- after conversion.

I will grant you are correct that Islam is not ABOUT tyranny and violence. The problem is that the orthodox imams, both Sunni and Shi'i, DO concur that Muslims have a duty to impose sharia law on others-- not merely to live by it themselves. Many Muslims effectively ignore this in practice but the theoretical obligation remains. This does lend itself to tyranny and violence, whatever good may also exist in Islam.

Posted by: MosheC at October 6, 2007 11:33 PM

Let the leftists and Muslim apologists at your University HOWL. Print the pamphlets and post them. If it is not sanctioned by the University, post them at night and in the toilet stalls.

If Islam was about truth they would not kill people who are critical of it. Lies need violence to protect them, that is the core truth of all totalitarian ideologies.

I bet at every American university library there is a whole wall of books critical of Christianity which I, a Christians am fine with. I also bet that you can only find a couple real critiques of Islam. If the librarians did order them, Muslims would destroy them.

Islam is not about truth, it is Arabic will to power wrapped up in a religion. If I am wrong, Muslims can start allowing free though in their countries.

Posted by: James Martel at October 6, 2007 11:36 PM

Does anyone know if there events at Canadian Universities?

Posted by: James Martel at October 6, 2007 11:37 PM

I hope the IFAW speakers are actually able to speak freely without being shouted down/bullied off the stage a la the Minutemen at Columbia. Unfortunately so-called open-minded liberal college students tend to be all too closed-minded when it comes to these kinds of presentations; their delicate multicultural sensibilities are easily offended.

As for the MPAC encouragement of Muslim students to exercise Islamic "ethics and restraint", what a joke. After the ridiculous riots over the Muhammad cartoons, I have about as much faith in "Muslim restraint" as I have in the "Saudi Arabian Human Rights Commission".

Posted by: staff_of_magius at October 6, 2007 11:42 PM

I am a Muslim. Lets get that out of the way first. So, do you know what I still find amazing? The growth of Islam in America after 9-11. I personally know dozens of white Americans who embraced Islam post 9-11. Now ask yourself some questions. Why in the world would a sane, white American choose to become Muslim when the only things you hear and associate with Islam is violence and tyranny and women's oppression (btw, a fair number of white converts I know are women). If you haven't noticed, being Muslim isn't really a popular choice in America, so obviously they do it out of concrete conviction. Some of you on this forum may claim that they are not truly informed about Islam, so let me pose this question to you. If you were going to convert to a religion, and make a life altering choice, wouldn't you research absolutely everything about that religion? Wouldn't you look into claims of it being false, or violent? Salaam....

IssaHaqq,

Isn't it nice to be in a country where a person can convert to another religion without fear of being executed for it?

The only reason Muslims in the Islamic world aren't converting to other faiths is because Islamic societies are closed and nailed shut. No thoughts except Islamic thoughts are allowed to penetrate the spiritual darkness Muslims live in.

If ever Christianity is allowed to be freely preached to the Muslim world, there would be a stampede out of that dark world.

It is fear, not conviction, that keeps Muslims Muslims.

Islam is the only religion I know of that finds it necessary to kill people to keep them faithful.

Best of luck to your friends that converted. I just hope they get a chance to live in a country where their new found faith dominates the lives it's citizens. That should wake them up.

Happily for your friends, when they figure out what they got into, and decide to dump Islam, that they live in a country where no on can chop their heads off.

Posted by: rational at October 6, 2007 11:47 PM

IssaHaqq states, "If you were going to convert to a religion, and make a life altering choice, wouldn't you research absolutely everything about that religion? Wouldn't you look into claims of it being false, or violent?"

Yes! So why would anyone follow Muhammad? When you examine his life more closely, what you see is a violent man?

There have also been many who have turned away from Islam and have made it their lifes work to warn others about it; but when a Christian or a Jew turn their back on their faith, they do not go on campaigns to warn others about the religion that they've chosen to leave behing. They don't write books, or do interviews, or have websites where they are posting **WARNING** upon **WARNING** against Islam.

No. You only have ex-Muslims passionately pursuing ways to warn people of this evil threat; and you would be wise to listen to them, just as we have.

Posted by: champ at October 7, 2007 12:11 AM

MosheC: Judaic law does not recognize a separation of spiritual and secular authority, BUT only for religious Jews----or at the most for the state of Israel alone. One of the many damn problems with Islam is that Islamic law DEMANDS that its legal system eventually be imposed on everyone and every nation. That's why Muslims worldwide want to replace all constitutional and legal systems with sharia. Are there any Jews out there demanding that Judaic law replace the Constitution of the United States? Surely you can see the huge difference here.

Also, I think you miss something very important when you aver that Judaism is not as Western as Robert Spencer and others maintain. It is very Western in the most important area of all-----emphasizing the dignity and worth of the individual, thus complementing the Greek intellectual experiment which produced democracy, something foreign to the Islamic world but fully at ease with the Christian and Jewish conception of what it means to be human.

P.S. I would additionally disagree with you that Islam is not about tyranny and violence. I think it most definitely is whenever it does not get its way. Finally, do you really think that Israeli Arabs who are Muslim are loyal citizens to Israel? Your optimism here strikes me as Polyannish.

Posted by: Wellington at October 7, 2007 12:44 AM

Here’s an interesting case, as the Howard Government gets berated for suggesting some immigrant groups are harder to assimilate than others.

Taxpayers provide Lebanese immigrants Mohamed (54) and Hanna El Husseini (45) with a house, pensions and a $783-a-fortnight parenting allowance because the couple is allegedly so poor and needing of charity.

As it happens, El Husseini, a convicted criminal who was jailed in the 1980s, doesn’t always live in this house he’s been given for a minimal rent and isn’t too poor for international travel, either:

The Scum Of The Earth

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/10/07/the-scum-of-the-earth/

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at October 7, 2007 1:12 AM

Best of luck Robert. Hope you reach some young minds and undo some of the white-wash being pushed as education in our universities regarding all things Islamic.

Posted by: Cornelius at October 7, 2007 1:40 AM

Wow! Zeroing in with lazerlike sharpness tonite.

This is making a difference. Deflection no longer works. The collective consciousness is almost imperceptivly turning, but turning none the less.

The rudder turns on the giant battlewagon, or oil tanker, if you will, and soon you see a slight turning of the bow in response to an action taken some time ago. The battleship eventually comes about to bear full guns on the approaching menace.

Mighty salvos begin! Other ships join in and soon RIGHT prevails and this Nazi "Bismark" like juggernaut of Islam is sent to the bottom!

We are not playing around with these postings. These are mighty salvos across the bow. Keep it up boys and girls and pass the ammo. (Lets go to the shores of Tripoli, again)

Posted by: guide inside at October 7, 2007 1:51 AM

IssaHaqq --

"Be liberated from the slavery of the imaginary Allah and the false Prophet Mohammed. Leave Islam today!"

http://www.apostatesofislam.com/index.htm

Posted by: champ at October 7, 2007 2:01 AM

Isn't "islamo-fascism" really just a cacophemism?

Posted by: Marvin at October 7, 2007 2:44 AM

Isn't the term "Muslim-American" an oxymoron? A man cannot have two masters - he will love one and hate the other (Hmmm. Who said that?). It is either Sharia Law or the Constitution. It is either slavery or freedom. It is either fanaticism or reason.

You cannot have it both ways.

If you want to be a Muslim, you should go to a Muslim country. Your culture is diametrically opposite to ours. America is Dar al Harb for you. Go to Dar al Islam, where you will be at peace with yourself and among others who think like you.

Posted by: Jimmy Bones at October 7, 2007 3:28 AM

Robert, bring bullhorns for when they cut off the power!

Posted by: Jimmy Bones at October 7, 2007 3:32 AM

....Yet in the global south nations there is a boom in the growth of the Christian faith going on, in sub-Saharia Africa, Asia, and in Latin America. Even now they are now sending missonaries to the west to plant the seeds of Christian faith once again.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at October 7, 2007 6:14 AM

I have been working on planning efforts for Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week, which will hit campuses all over the country October 22-26.

Why is this event named "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week"? After all, there is no "Islamo-Fascism" as distinct from Islam, and the use of misleading terminology in the title of the event is likely to have the opposite effect of creating awareness, as it suggests that such a distinction actually exists.

The event of course should simply be named "Islam Awareness Week", or at the very least it should be made sufficiently clear during the event that despite the misleading title, there is in fact no "Islamo-fascism" as distinct from Islam. After all, if awareness is the goal, then there is absolutely no excuse for not getting the basic facts right.

Posted by: anonymous at October 7, 2007 6:47 AM

The problem would be, anonymous, that Muslims' at universities call their's "Islam Awareness Week."

So, how to distinguish between the two?

Posted by: darcy at October 7, 2007 7:37 AM

"It is Ann Coulter, David Horowitz, Wafa Sultan and I, all of whom have received many death threats, who will be going to campuses during the Week accompanied by guards." --Robert Spencer

Yeah, and we're the "hateful" ones.

I'm very ashamed of America these days.

Posted by: darcy at October 7, 2007 7:42 AM

Robert,
Hopefully this coming event will be the first of many more. My current tour here in Iraq is up after this years events.

I'sa Hack,
Be comfortable there living under a Constitution where you can freely express dissent with another's opinion, religion or views on a religion without fear of being visited by murdering Islamic thugs. You may sleep soundly knowing that your head will still be attached in the morning. Because I can witness what happens here if you hold a view that goes against Islamic teachings or are Christian. Submit, pay or die. There is no tolerance of anything else.
There is no substance to your question on why would any sane person embrace Islam after 9/11. The question answers itself. Throughout history mankind has embraced ideologies that were proven by its followers actions to be barbaric, horrific and repugnant to public conscious. Those views surfaced mainly after they were exposed and defined for what they truely were.
While I do believe that there are Muslims who want only to live in peace and do not precribe to the violent teachings taught in mosques all over the world, unfortunately they will not and cannot openly oppose this doctrine. They know full well the penalty for doing so.
Finally if it were not for the documented fact that islam teaches that lying and deceiving to non-mulsims is acceptable there might be avenues for dialogue. Until modern islamic scholars are willing to change this, among other things, than there is no way to accept anything a muslim says as anything but a possible lie.

Posted by: FiveOAdviser at October 7, 2007 8:41 AM

http://www.thesouthendnews.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticleComments&ustory_id=bcaac698-26ea-4246-87f5-43519ac2fabc

Since Mr. Spencer mentioned Daniel Pipes speaking at Wayne State U (Detroit) tomorrow, check out the comments to this "Ramadan" article. Esp. the last one.

Posted by: darcy at October 7, 2007 8:41 AM

Battle_of_Tours-

Your comment enabled me to put my own thoughts on the matter into clearer focus. Thank you.

Posted by: Frank at October 7, 2007 8:46 AM

Someone needs to inform MPAC that "Islamic ethics and restraint" is an oxymoron.

Why are these people in our country?

Posted by: darcy at October 7, 2007 9:00 AM

Frank - you can see that MPAC (as per Mr. Spencer's comments above) is using Goebbel's propaganda tactics - "Hey, WE'RE the victims."

Not.

Posted by: darcy at October 7, 2007 9:04 AM

The problem would be, anonymous, that Muslims' at universities call their's "Islam Awareness Week." So, how to distinguish between the two?

I think that misleading terminology should not be used in any case, not even for the sake of brevity, and especially not about something which has awareness as its main purpose. So the title should be brief and clear, but sufficiently different from "Islam Awareness Week" (which is apparently already in use by Muslims according to darcy) to avoid confusion.

For example, instead of using the title "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week", which suggests that there exists a type of fascism related to, but different from, Islam itself, one could use a title such as "The Fascist Nature Of Islam Awareness Week", which is better because it suggests that there are fascist traits inherent in Islam (but on the downside, is longer and more awkward to pronounce and remember).

Posted by: anonymous at October 7, 2007 11:45 AM

anonymous:

I think your suggested title lacks brevity.

Islamofascism works fine.

Posted by: atheling at October 7, 2007 12:19 PM

I think your suggested title lacks brevity.

I agree that my suggestion lacks brevity, but it was made primarily for illustrating the considerations that should be taken in creating a title rather than as an attempt at creating a final title.

Islamofascism works fine.

No, it doesn't, because there is no "Islamofascism" as distinct from Islam, and an event that is arranged to create awareness should not adopt in its title a term that prevents awareness, as the term, in the contexts it is normally used, suggests that there exists something called "Islamofascism" that is distinct from Islam.

Posted by: anonymous at October 7, 2007 12:48 PM

MosheC:

I find your message even more disturbing and wrong-headed than Issa's.

"I will grant you are correct that Islam is not ABOUT tyranny and violence. The problem is that the orthodox imams, both Sunni and Shi'i, DO concur that Muslims have a duty to impose sharia law on others-- not merely to live by it themselves. Many Muslims effectively ignore this in practice but the theoretical obligation remains. This does lend itself to tyranny and violence, whatever good may also exist in Islam."

You say Islam is not about tyranny and violence. How you can maintain this notion with a straight face is beyond me.
Besides, your reasoning skills are poor too, since you talk about a "theoretical obligation" maintained by "orthodox imams" to impose Islam/Sharia on others. Where does that obligation come from??? Did the imams invent it?
Islam came into being through Mohammed's terrorizing and killing those who did not submit to his "revelations," and it made a huge career through similarly terrorist means, plus all kinds of economic deprivations and second-class citizenship laws meant for the non-Muslim populations, over the following 9-10 centuries or so.

Your orthodox Judaism leads you to trust a similarly orthodox, dogmatic and allergic to free-thought system of ideas, even though that belief, Islam, is at its very foundation the enemy of your own belief and of your own people, a hatred proclaimed over and over again in its sacred books and tradition, and openly dedicated to yours and your people's destruction.
Nothing is scarrier for a dogmatic, totalitarian tribalist and/or honest party member than independent, freedom-seeking thought.

Posted by: ovidius_naso at October 7, 2007 3:15 PM

All the power to you, folks!

It is about time to stand up to the Islamo-Nazi storm-troopers and their rabid local hard-left Quislings who are having the run of our campuses. American Resistance!
The next step I favor is a freedom march into the Pace University campus and screening of the documentary "Obsession" that the dhimmi administration there banned, in a totalitarian way.

Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.

Posted by: Enragedsince1999 at October 7, 2007 6:42 PM

I'm sure the loons will attempt somethimg to cause a ruckus to get you removed from the area and stop telling the truth.Thats all they have working for them.well that and the demorats.

Posted by: Dar al-harb at October 7, 2007 8:08 PM

I'm sure the loons will attempt somethimg to cause a ruckus to get you removed from the area and stop telling the truth.Thats all they have working for them.well that and the demorats.

Posted by: Dar al-harb at October 7, 2007 8:09 PM

Wellington posted:

"MosheC: Judaic law does not recognize a separation of spiritual and secular authority, BUT only for religious Jews----or at the most for the state of Israel alone. One of the many damn problems with Islam is that Islamic law DEMANDS that its legal system eventually be imposed on everyone and every nation. That's why Muslims worldwide want to replace all constitutional and legal systems with sharia. Are there any Jews out there demanding that Judaic law replace the Constitution of the United States? Surely you can see the huge difference here.

Also, I think you miss something very important when you aver that Judaism is not as Western as Robert Spencer and others maintain. It is very Western in the most important area of all-----emphasizing the dignity and worth of the individual, thus complementing the Greek intellectual experiment which produced democracy, something foreign to the Islamic world but fully at ease with the Christian and Jewish conception of what it means to be human.

P.S. I would additionally disagree with you that Islam is not about tyranny and violence. I think it most definitely is whenever it does not get its way. Finally, do you really think that Israeli Arabs who are Muslim are loyal citizens to Israel? Your optimism here strikes me as Polyannish"

I made quite clear that I see the differences between Judaism and Islam. My issue is with Mr. Spencer's proposed means, not his ends. History shows that any power which can be abused will be-- especially by government. Therefore to revoke Islam's pretected status of religion because it does not recognize a separation of State and religion and/or because it can be viewed as a political system is troubling. Judaism can be viewed indentically the same way. Yes, we do not seek to impose Jewish law on anyone and Jewish law actually forbids trying to do so but this merely more correctly identifies the problem with Islam: the duty which itimposes on its adherents to impose sharia law on others. Whenever one establishes a legal precedent, one must be extremely careful exactly what precedent is set; it needs to relate specifically to the problem.

As for being Pollyannish for thinking Israeli Arabs loyal citizens, I must say hardly. Every night going home from work, I ride in a cab driven by various Israeli Arabs. People talk politics here like Americans talk about the weather or sports. Most display an orange ribbon; in case you don't know, an orange ribbon here is a political symbol meaning "Do not give away any land for any reason". Those and other Israeli Arabs I know-- like the ones in our military-- advocate swift decisive military action against the "Palestinians" as the ONLY solution. They are more strongly for a strong independent Israel thanmost Jews here are. Why? Because they know what will happen to them if this country succumbs; they will be treated as "collaborators".

Posted by: MosheC at October 7, 2007 9:19 PM

I should add that unfortunately since Olmert and company seem hell-bent on surrender, some Israeli arabs are trying to align themselves with the "Palestinians". One may note the Arab MK caught spying in the last war. Yet happily he is not staying out of the country only to avoid prosecution. Israeli Arabs and "Palestinians" generally passionately hate each other. Such traitors have much to fear from their fellow Israeli Arabs.

Why? Arabs here have a higher standard of living, more political freedoms, etc., than any surroundign country.There are five "Arab" parties in Knesset-- four more than any surrounding country-- and yet demographics show that most Arabs consistently vote for "Jewish" parties-- especially the ones strong on security. I believe what I see.

Posted by: MosheC at October 7, 2007 9:27 PM

ovidius_naso:

Re-read what I said and try thinkign with your brain. Your prejudices against Orthodox Judaism are irrelevant but the knee-jerk assumption that I cannot think is telling. I said very precisely that Islam may not be ABOUT tyranny and violence but that it SUPPORTS these nonetheless. In other wods, a potential convert to Islam can happily paint himself a rosey picture of what Islam is. He may even be right that the intent and focus is neither tyranny nor violence but these aspects come along with the good. If there were no appealing qualities to Islam, no one would adopt the creed; the existence of one does not negate the existence of another. A fish bites because it wants to get the worm, not the hook, but still it does get the hook. THAT is my point.

Posted by: MosheC at October 7, 2007 9:37 PM

So the Muslims in America are talking about "Muslim ethics and restraint."

Well, how 'educational' of them!

Would these peoples' version of "Muslim ethics and restraint" by any chance include al-Qaeda's plan for an "AMERICAN HIROSHIMA"??? Or the Kuran's call for Muslims to eliminate the Jews (and its labeling them 'descendants of apes and pigs')?

When will our "Muslim ethics and restraint" educators teach to our little kiddies those "ethical" and "restrained" Kuran verses about Muslims "slaying the unbelievers everywhere they are found" (in Suran 9.5)?

If these people won't bring these Islamic items up, does that mean we are being 'educated' about (and BY) Islam by NOT being told about such things?

And, where exactly do Ayman al-Zawahri or Khalid Sheikh Muhammad fit in with "Muslim ethics and restraint"???

Just asking.

Posted by: pythagoras at October 8, 2007 1:27 PM

"Gee, you don't think free speech could be misinterpreted as a hate incident, do you?

11B40,

It's only a matter of time. So long as the American public sits on its rump, and allows so-called "hate crime" laws to sail through congress, they'll wake up some unhappy day and find that honest speech is the real target of these sinister laws.

Posted by: rational at October 8, 2007 4:16 PM

MosheC: Thanks for your response. I would ask you if you are not for revoking the right of a religion to exist in a particular society because it does not want a separation of church and state, a hallmark of Jeffersonian democracy I might add, or becaues it is also a political ideology, is there then any reason why you would desist from granting a religion protected status? Or would you maintain that any faith must be accorded the right to function openly in a society? Islam is so troubling, in so many ways, and has a theological blueprint which condones violence for the slightest of reasons ("persecution" of Islam can be virtually anything, including some harmless cartoons it seems) that I think it arguable that continuing to permit the Islamic faith to grow in a Western democracy may prove to be suicidal.

I would also add here that I think in the long run, and if push comes to shove (e.g., Arab armies start actually beating the IDF), you'll find that Israeli Arab Christians will almost certainly remain loyal to Israel, but I rather doubt you would see the same kind of devotion to the Israeli state by at least a simple majority of Israeli Arab Muslims. Islam trumps all, you know, for the Mohammedans. Be careful trusting any Muslim with the future of Israel. My best to you.

Posted by: Wellington at October 8, 2007 5:40 PM

Ten years ago I used to participate in an early version of "blog" type communities. I was curious about cultures and religions.

The islamic boards were was so rosy that Islam impressed me very much. The only view presented was a moderate one. ( I am a devout christian and a female.)

Like most westerners, I didn't know about death penalties for apostates, dhimmitude, etc. and I assumed that status of women was just a cultural issue.

Moreover, I had a couple of good friends who were Muslims. They could have used Da'wa but they never tried to convert me. I really don't think they were supremacists about their faith.

Still, I have joined the anti-jihad movement and I strive to inform people, much like others here.

Why? Because islamic radicals have announced their desire and intentions to subvert my society, my liberty and my way of life, etc. They have attacked us in the USA and attacked others as well. They abhor our beloved Western society and want to subjugate us.

Germans were a part of our western heritage, but we fought them during WWII. Russia contributed Tolstoy, Tchaikovsky, and others, but we had our Cold War.

There are many genuinely fine moderate muslims out there, but my loyalty is to my nation and my liberty.

That is what matters.

Posted by: LurkNoMore at October 8, 2007 10:30 PM

LurkNoMore:

Welcome. We need more Americans to wake up.

Good to have you with us.

Posted by: atheling at October 8, 2007 10:56 PM