A snippet from Front Page:

". . . the forces that have hijacked their religion . . ."

Did George Bush edit this? Is Horowitz kowtowing to PC requirements? Perhaps he feels compelled to add this to avoid the -phobia suffix.

I guess I took out of context.

Posted by: Pelayo at October 10, 2007 6:59 AM

I personally fail to see how ISlam has been hijacked

Posted by: GrennBeck at October 10, 2007 7:04 AM

"The term 'Islamo-Fascism' was coined by Muslims in Algeria who were attacked by religious fanatics who now call themselves the al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb. They slaughtered nearly 200,000 Muslims in the years 1990-2002. In fact, Islamo-fascists have killed more Muslims than any other group." -- from the article

So that's where the term came from: Muslims themselves. Interesting.

Posted by: Josephine at October 10, 2007 7:25 AM

Islam is the religion of hijackers, not the other way around.

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at October 10, 2007 7:55 AM

"Our purpose remains unchanged: to condemn the outrages committed by the Islamo-Fascists against women, gays, Christians, Jews and moderate Muslims.."

Many of us may not fit into any of those categories, but are convinced that the further spread of Islam, or of Muslim influence around the world, or even the slow chipping away at the Western alliance, with a possible takeover, through demographic conquest, of the historic heart of the West and of Western culture, is a mortal threat.

The text above did not add -- perhaps it was deemed at this point impolitic -- that to the "outrages committed by etc....." a further alarm about "the clear inculcation by a Total System to prohibit freedom of artistic expression, prohibiting most music and painting, and all sculpture, and further encourages a habit of mental submission and discourages, even punishes, the kind of free and skeptical inquiry without which the enterprise of science, and the furtherance of human thought in many spheres outside of science, cannot take place."

On the other hand, I see that the addendum I have just offered is unlikely to be read by the campus young, who tend to accept their flyers on the fly. And isn't Keep It Simple a principle to keep in mind? Yes, I suppose it is.

So at a later date, once a ray of reality about Islam has been allowed to enter those darkened classrooms and common rooms those more elaborate points can be made. Not everything at once. In un secondo momento.

Posted by: Hugh at October 10, 2007 8:14 AM

"I personally fail to see how ISlam has been hijacked

Posted by: GrennBeck"

...in fact just the opposite has occurred: the opposite of hijack could be bequeath, bestow, give ,free, liberate, released...

....I like released....Islam has been released upon the world, not hijacked....

Now we see Islam where before, we did not....now we know...Ban Muslim Immigration...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at October 10, 2007 8:57 AM

People, here is the article in the GW "Hatchet" admitting that the posters were hung by GW students, one a Muslim. Oh, their actions were "misinterpreted," by the way!

http://media.www.gwhatchet.com/media/storage/paper332/news/2007/10/08/News/Seven.Gw.Students.Admit.To.Hanging.Controversial.Posters-3022092.shtml

Can you believe this student newspaper doesn't have Comments after articles? What are they so afraid of?

Posted by: darcy at October 10, 2007 9:04 AM

"Frontpage" article:

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=AE350496-96B7-4F95-8357-831F7BA4414C

Yeah, I'm confused as to why Horowitz used the "hijacked" word, too.

Posted by: darcy at October 10, 2007 9:11 AM

Melanie Phillips in Londonistan describes a distinction between moderate Islam and Islamism and so does Daniel Pipes I believe. Disapointing to see Horowitz also buys that crap.

Posted by: savitch at October 10, 2007 9:37 AM

Horowitz is quite different from Phillips or Pipes, and indeed the latter two differ from each other. Horowitz is a practical man and organizer and divulgator, and he is trying to stir things up, and to bring to the attention of students, not merely so-called campus conservatives, the matter of Islam in a way that will attract their attention, get them to come and give those speakers a respectful hearing.

Horowitz is, one suspects, keenly aware of his audience, I presume, and he thinks it most sensible not attempt to present such a campus audience with everything at once. In making my comment above, I offered a reminder or aide-memoire of a purist addressing, and not in haste, an already self-selected audience of the already well-informed, and had no need to trim things to fit on a poster or a flyer, or in an ad in a campus newspaper. I could have also discussed the use of the word "Islamo-Fascism" but I also know that one has to deal with the audience one has, or wishes to have, and then, by degrees, lead them to the broad sunny uplands of enlightenment, but at a careful pace, not running uphill all the way, taking time to view the Swiss scenery, including that folkloristic shepherd with his dog, and the flock of sheep he is tending, some of them munching, some of them bleating, some of them nearly asleep.

Posted by: Hugh at October 10, 2007 10:04 AM

Certainly no one wants to belittle David Horowitz noble and determined efforts to bring more awareness to university, and college students on the fundamentals of this aggressive ideology.

Hopefully Robert Spencer can inquirer as to why Horowitz chose to use the term "hijack" in his article.

The next 12 days is going to be tough and even possibly a dangerous road to go before they try to bring this effort to numerous campuses as Muslim groups and leftwing ideologs attempt to disrupt, and discredit these efforts.

Posted by: Mackie at October 10, 2007 10:12 AM

Mackie:

Gotta go into the lion's den at some point. Personally I think it will go much better than we could anticipate, and will pave the way for an annual event that will only get bigger. Believe me, there are a lot of "closet" Jihad Watchers, many of them liberals, who are waiting for courageous men and women like Horowitz, Spencer, and Ayaan Ali Hirsi to break down the ramparts for an issue that has been ignored far too long.

As to Horowitz's terminology, read Hugh's excellent post above re a measured language of diplomacy that will ensure the widest possible audience--many of whom will be awakened by these events.

Actually, the GWU Seven should be thanked. This is tremendous PR for IFAW.

Posted by: JohnAdams at October 10, 2007 10:34 AM

I'll tell you why they are so afraid of an open discussion, it's because Islam does not stand up to scrutiny.

We see it time and time again. It's time Islam had its own reformation and brought itself into the 21st century.

Time for a good long, open, and honest look at the creator of this religion. The only possible reason that they would not want this open debate is that they know, deep down (or not so deept down), that it would not stand up to any scrutiny for long and then they would have to face many extremely unpalatable truths.

There are muslims who are prepared to speak honestly and openly, such as Ayan Hirsi Ali, who is under threat of death for daring to speak the truth.

Says it all really.

Posted by: DaveMate at October 10, 2007 10:38 AM

JohnAdams:

I agree with Hugh's assessment of not throwing to much out there to soon in an effort to bring the audience along slowly. The concerns can be that there are still those students out there who are surface readers of such shallow information as the GW flyer that was put out.

I think a diplomatic approach is a wise way to go.

Posted by: Mackie at October 10, 2007 10:45 AM

One pitfall I foresee is the incessant use of the word "hate crime" by the anti-Jihad to describe those acts of war by Muslims to squelch our free speech. This descriptor is used to label such wide ranging things as the infamous forged poster to Muslims shouting down and intimidating critics and detractors.

"Thought crime" comes awfully close in my mind to "thought crime" -- so close that between the two I see no sunlight whatsoever. I suggest that such a Stalinist or Orwellian label does us no service whatsover. It's very easy for the Muslim side to simply draw parallels between their efforts to squelch us, and our efforts to depose their Jihad. The two are hardly similar -- they are aggressors -- they are here on our soil waging a broad spectrum war to subvert our pluralistic society and impose their monotonous idiocy onto us, by force, intimidation, deception, and terror.

I also decry the moralistic sounding and constant refrains condemning the hatred the Muslims bear us. Again -- this runs the risk of equating their deliberate and ingrained inculcation against all things "non-Islamic", and our righteous revulsion, and hatred even, of all such totalitarian and nightmarish ideologies such as Islam. The two revulsions or hatreds, theirs for us, and ours for them, are hardly equal.

Very often critics in the West are reduced to referencing things familiar to us to encapsulate Islam -- this is done, no doubt, because we have not yet metabolized the true meanings of words such as "Jihad", and "da'wa", and can't quite figure out what Muslims mean when they say things like "Islam forbids the murder of innocents"... We constantly reference, therefore, terms such as "Nazi" and "fascist" -- even though those words are exemplified in terms like "jihad" and even "Islam" itself.

There is still much to do to refine the arguments, to inform the unknowing, and to largely impress upon the Western mind the notion that "Islam" itself contains all one needs to know about hatred, slaughter for the sake of a barbaric primitive godhead, terror in the name of "religion", and all the rest.

Posted by: jsla at October 10, 2007 10:47 AM

oops -- "hate crime" comes awfully close to "thought crime"...

Posted by: jsla at October 10, 2007 10:49 AM

Apologies for butchering the name of Ayan Hirsi Ali above...

Interesting to see how much play this gets in the MSM, particularly from today forward, now that the GWU seven had admitted to their vicious hoax.

I noticed the Washington Post ran a story yesterday, when the perpetrators were still unknown. Obviously, many readers at that time would have concluded that "Islamophobes" were behind the posters.

Now that the WP knows the truth (and one could argue that the hoax makes this story much more sinister), will they follow up and get the full story in today's edition?

Here's the link from yesterday.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/08/AR2007100801442.html?tid=informbox

Anyone with a few moments, by clicking the reporter's byline you can send her an email encouraging her to do so.

Posted by: JohnAdams at October 10, 2007 10:57 AM

I've been keeping an eye on local media here in Madison, including the UW newspaper, to see if I could spot any hysteria surrounding the upcoming lecture by Horowitz on the 22nd. So far, the only controversy I've found was on a blogspot, SugarPearl, I think it was, where the owner was crowing over the fact that Horowitz was using the image of the teenage girl buried in the sand being stoned to death. Of course, she jumped on that right away as being an example of the bias being used by Horowitz as it's actually a still from a movie. She crows that Horowitz then removed that image from his literature, blah, blah, blah. Too bad someone didn't warn him about that image's provenance before the other side caught it out.

Posted by: mepeteart at October 10, 2007 11:05 AM

I think "hijacked" would have been more appropriate than hijacked. But I understand, like taking about Hillary and the libs by starting out saying their a bunch of fascist , even though it is true you have to break it to them slowly

Posted by: GrennBeck at October 10, 2007 11:16 AM

@ topic

The truth hurts, doesn't it.
;-)

Posted by: jcom972 at October 10, 2007 11:45 AM

"...lead them to the broad sunny uplands of enlightenment, but at a careful pace, not running uphill all the way, taking time to view the Swiss scenery, including that folkloristic shepherd with his dog, and the flock of sheep he is tending, some of them munching, some of them bleating, some of them nearly asleep." Posted by: Hugh

LOL.

Posted by: Josephine at October 10, 2007 12:57 PM

I'd like to attend some of the campus festivities. Is there a list of what's on offer?

Posted by: MP at October 10, 2007 1:30 PM

Hijacked? Moderate muslims?

I guess the line was drawn before calling islam a religion of peace, that would have been too much P.C.

I think it could have been said without the misleading comments, and still not turned away those who are interested in knowing the truth.

Speak the truth, it will give more to the people who are looking for all, to be , telling it as it is.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at October 10, 2007 1:35 PM

The Slow Jihad is being Hijacked by the Fast Jihad. So I would think the term is correct.

The Goal seems to be one where Progressively Brainwashed Automons may be inclined to come and have their Roots trimmed.

Mr. Horowitz and Co., Discussing Islam and its message, is sure to strumm the chords that Harmonize the two Jihads.

If the Attendees come with Sand rubbed from their Eyes, they should see for themselfs the lack of any meaningfull gaps between the Two.

So what if they feel a little mislead by the term "hijacked". The message was free as compaired to the Ransom they are paying to have their Brain Hijacked by Professionals on Campus.

Johnny Jihad and his Infidelophibic ways.

I bet they all crawl out from under their Rocks, Smelling like Stones, and yelling how peaceful they are.

Rage Boy- So many places, so many Cameras, so little Travel time.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at October 10, 2007 3:42 PM

"So what if they feel a little mislead by the term "hijacked". The message was free as compaired to the Ransom they are paying to have their Brain Hijacked by Professionals on Campus."
posted by flowerknife_us..

If they find the truth is with what you say, you will win a convert. If they find you fudge it, even a little bit to present a colored view, they can (again, can) walk away and never look back.

If one thinks they see clearly, then state it as such, let others try to shoot holes in it. If you shoot a few yourself knowing it will take on water, it may end up sinking the whole ship.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at October 10, 2007 4:01 PM

"The term 'Islamo-Fascism' was coined by Muslims in Algeria who were attacked by religious fanatics who now call themselves the al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb. They slaughtered nearly 200,000 Muslims in the years 1990-2002. In fact, Islamo-fascists have killed more Muslims than any other group." -- from the article

So that's where the term came from: Muslims themselves. Interesting.

Posted by: Josephine

'Islamo-Fascism'

Michael Savage claims everyone ripped that term from him. He claims to have coined it.

Posted by: TexasInfidel at October 10, 2007 7:06 PM

CNS trots out the first statement by unindicted co-conspirator CAIR via Ibrahim Hooper:

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/11556418/

However, Ibrahim Hooper, communications director for the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), told Cybercast News Service that the Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week "is a campaign of anti-Muslim smears to promote Islamophobia and hostility toward the faith of Islam and Muslims."

"Every person involved in this is well known as being in the 'Who's Who' of Muslim-bashers and Islamophobes," he said, while "the Muslim Student Association of the USA and Canada has a 'Peace, Not Prejudice' campaign going on at the same time."

"On the one hand, you've got Muslims promoting peace and mutual understanding, and then you've got these people promoting division, mistrust and hostility," Hooper added.

Posted by: heroyalwhyness at October 10, 2007 7:35 PM

"Hate Crime" is rank silliness and p.c.

As jsla notes, it is the covert form of "thoughtcrime".

Doubleplusungood.

Same with the "hijacked Islam" cliche.

Islam wasn't hijacked.

The Bin laden wing just turned off the autopilot (which switched on autmoatically after the fall of the Turkish Caliphate in the early 1920's) and the miltant jihadists just restored Islam to its original course.

Mohammad's flight path to terror, tyranny and darkness.

P.C. is a narcotic and a poison that must be avoided before it rots the mind to the point where all critical thinking is lost.

Posted by: profitsbeard at October 10, 2007 8:11 PM