They won't debate when they know they have no leg to stand on.

If they have remotely objective audience, they know that they can't simply justify their violent behaviors with a "Allah wills it" song and dance.

Posted by: Grafted at April 25, 2008 9:51 AM

There's a mosque in The Hague?

Posted by: MontJoie at April 25, 2008 9:52 AM

>>Imam Fawaz Jneid from the As-Sunnah- mosque in The Hague demands that Wilders first remove his film from the internet and apologizes to all Muslims."

Hell is freezing over when?

Why don't we apologize to the Nazis, too, for all of those photos of the living skeletons in Dachau?

Posted by: darcy at April 25, 2008 10:03 AM

What a bunch of cowards these Dutch Muslims. Of course they will not debate it. I mean look the Muslim arrogance it show clearly that the Koran and the Islam texts and jurisprudence is perfect. Which we all know is not. But he asks for an apology. Geez.

Posted by: savsiv at April 25, 2008 10:08 AM

There's a mosque in The Hague?"
-- from a posting above

And all over Rotterdam, and Amsterdam, and in Paris and Marseilles and Lyons and Toulouse, in London and Manchester and Birmingham and Leeds,in Rome and in Milan, in Berlin and Hamburg and Frankfurt, and in thousands of other cities and even small towns all over Europe. The Saudis and other rich Arabs fund them, just as they pay for the land, and the construction, and the maintenance, of mosques all over this country, from Boston to sunny California. Most of the mosques in the Western world are not paid for by the locals, but by very rich foreign Muslims -- governments, institutions, individuals. After all, not all of that ten trillion dollars in oil revenues that Muslim states have received since 1973 alone goes for arms purchases, and palaces for the boys, and wages for those millions of non-Muslim wage-slaves who keep Saudi Arabia and the smaller sheikdoms going, and gambling in London and Monte Carlo, and call girls (the Arabs especially contemptuous of the West for allowing "their women" to be bought and used in such a way, by their sworn enemies, the Arab Muslims), and endless shopping in the funfair-cum-brothel of Europe,

Occasionally local opposition can stop the building of a mosque, but not because the mosque has been paid for by sinister foreigners, nor because mosques are far more than merely religious establishments but politico-religious outposts of the Army of Islam, and inevitably, unless subject to constant round-the-clock monitoring, will tend to have khutbas based on the almost-unavoidable subject with which the Qur'an and Hadith are full: to wit, the permaent state of war that exists between Believers and Infidels, and the need for Muslims to work to remove all obstacles to the spread, and dominance, of Islam.

Western governments simply will not stop to examine, will not dare even to discuss, the nature, the meaning, the menace of Islam. Those whose duty it is to protect us will continue to pretend that what goes on in mosques is as "religious" in nature as what goes on in churches or synagogues. But it isn't. Visits to mosques, or tapes of what goes on, or the testimony of those who have jettisoned Islam but can still recall what they heard (or if their faces are not recognized, enter mosques still) confirm that what goes on is dangerous to Infidels, to their legal and political institutions, to their physical security.

If the national governments of the Western world have failed those whom they are supposed to protect, have failed to exhibit any intelligent curiosity about Islam as a Total Belief-System, and the role of the mosques as a basis for Jihad -- that is, the "struggle" to promote Islam and remove all obstacles to its spread, and dominance -- local governments, or local officials, have been forced to change or cancel permits by aroused citizens, who have made their cases against this or that mosque on the basis of size -- the proposed mega-mosque in London appears to have been stopped -- rather than on the basis of the bristling and aggressive nature of these huge structures, their minarets rising like missiles (as Erdogan once famously said).

If more non-Muslims came to understand the texts and tenets and attitudes of Islam, they would not be so uninterested in the mosque-building that goes on, sometimes even with the aid of local governments (e.g., Mayor Menino encouraging the building of the Boston Mosque, and even agreeing to sell land far below the market price), but would move heaven and earth to stop as many such projects as possible, and what's more, to make sure that existing mosques and madrasas are monitored for the contents of what they preach (and what Muslims practice, when they are in a position to do so). The word "religion" keeps getting in the way, but greater knowledge would give Infidels the confidence not to be bamboozled or impressed by such a word, and determined not to be deterred in their opposition to mosques and madrasas, for the first is not simply, or mainly, a house of individual worship, but a center where a collectivist and aggressive Total Belief-System can more easily maintain or reinforce its hold over local Beleivers.

Posted by: Hugh at April 25, 2008 10:19 AM

demands that Wilders first remove his film from the internet and apologizes to all Muslims. Only if these conditions are met would Jneid consider a public debate with Wilders, the leader of the Dutch Freedom Party (PVV).
first the muslims should apologize for all the duck citizens taken in muslim slave raids

Posted by: crusader at April 25, 2008 10:28 AM

Dutch media reported that Imam Fawaz Jneid from the As-Sunnah- mosque in The Hague demands that Wilders first remove his film from the internet and apologizes to all Muslims.
.. from the report above.

Square that against White House appeasement:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/ramadan/islam.html

You get the idea.........

Posted by: Alert at April 25, 2008 10:36 AM

To the highly respectable Islamic scholars, I propose this:

Prove Wilders wrong. Solidly, in a public debate.

They can't. We know it, and it's causing them trouble.

Posted by: Henrik at April 25, 2008 10:41 AM

quoting Hugh -

Occasionally local opposition can stop the building of a mosque, but not because the mosque has been paid for by sinister foreigners, nor because mosques are far more than merely religious establishments but politico-religious outposts of the Army of Islam

- hence the request for doubling Saudi student visas (visas doubled already in 2006) - to establish a visible presence where none existed requires facilities suitable for the slower jihad (i.e. footbaths, prayer rooms, segregated gyms/pools, halal meals, at tax payer/student fee expense).

Posted by: justamomof4 at April 25, 2008 10:53 AM

Yes, Mr Spencer,

but weren't you 'invited' to accept Islam, by none other than the illustrious Adam Gadahn, on behalf of the great headbanger himself, 'Bumpy' Al Zawahiri?

Richard Kerbaj, who writes for The Australian, is also regularly attacked by the soldiers of Allah: whenever he writes something critical of Islam, all the Islamo-spokesmen come out of the woodwork to disabuse him. You see, if only he asked them, they would have explained it to him much better, because only Muslims can understand Islam....

And just like sheik yer'mami and Robert Spencer Kerbaj also got his call to Islam, by none less than from the da'awa doctor Mohamed Abdalla, who is sitting pretty at Griffith universities 'Islamic Study Centre', financed by the Australian government for 8 million dollars, with hands out or more serious money from the Sowdi's...

Wouldn't it be good if our government stooges would smell the coffee and give us 8 million dollars for the counter-jihad instead?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at April 25, 2008 11:00 AM

"..Imam Fawaz Jneid ..... demands that Wilders first remove his film from the internet and apologizes to all Muslims"

Then he objects to what the Koran says I take it. No? Or, do Muslim leaders really object to the unveiling of Islam that is happening today? I'll bet on that.

Posted by: Sounder at April 25, 2008 11:17 AM

From justamomof4's link above Fraker said Saudi Arabia should bolster its English-language programs because it is generally required for Saudis seeking to pursue higher studies in the US.

This is only needed until the Sowdis convince Washington to make arabic the offical language of the U.S. /sarc

MP Wilders should demand that the koran be removed from existence and an apology made for the creation of islam from the top imam in mecca before considering withdrawing his film.

Posted by: walterc at April 25, 2008 11:57 AM

Islamic imperialists do not work by convincing but by either intimidating or undermining.

Both have worked wonderfully for them so far, thanks to the purblind ignorance of their intentions, their ideology and their vapid apologists (Bush, on down) in the camp of the West.

The dismal dogmas of the Koran (and the intolerance and misogynistic and terroristic supplements in the hateful Hadiths) need to be constantly brought to light.

Posted by: profitsbeard at April 25, 2008 12:07 PM

Imam Fawaz Jneid says " He will not debate him"-being right.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at April 25, 2008 12:27 PM

It is difficult to debate a position that is inherently flawed and thus, their unwillingness to do so is understandable.

The claim that "Islam is a religion of peace" can only be taken so far. Its texts are not classified and the continuous words and actions, uttered by and engaged in by its adherents, will not be muffled forever.

No amount or degree of demands or threats issued by the denizens of the "religion of peace" can offset that basic reality.

Posted by: awake at April 25, 2008 1:04 PM

Standard Muslim debating style. This has also happened to me when debating Muslims. It's just the way things are done in a cult - the members can never get themselves to challenge dogma. Wilders answer should just be, "your request has made my point."

If it's the "one, true religion" - how come defending it is so difficult?

Posted by: Silly Allah at April 25, 2008 1:10 PM

"but a center where a collectivist and aggressive Total Belief-System can more easily maintain or reinforce it's hold over local Believers."
-Hugh

The primary obstacle in enlightening many Infidels is their unwavering insistence,despite mountains of evidence to the contrary,that such a statement can be equally applied to the that very Judao/Christian foundation,which for many, has come to serve as a scapegoat for all that befalls them. These are the people that must be reached. Must be shown that there is more to see here than just another one of those "Eastern" transcendental faiths,"kinda like Buddhism right?" These are the types that,in the information age,considered it inappropriate to even read Koran,Hadith,Sira and what is contained within,yet make claims that this faith was "never spread by the sword."

Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at April 25, 2008 2:07 PM

group of imams from the town of Gouda...

This phrase is all you need to know about what's wrong with Europe.

Posted by: Seymour Paine at April 25, 2008 7:11 PM

group of imams from the town of Gouda...

This phrase is all you need to know about what's wrong with Europe.

Anyway, I thought one said a rasher of imans, not a group of imans. No?

Posted by: Seymour Paine at April 25, 2008 7:11 PM