| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Just in case you missed this news item: "Convention interfaith event announced," by Electa Draper for The Denver Post, August 8:
The Democratic National Convention Committee today announced the program for its first-ever interfaith gathering, which kicks off at 2 p.m. Aug. 24 at Wells Fargo Theater in the Colorado Convention Center.
That would be today.
Keynote speakers include Bishop Charles Blake, presiding prelate of Church of God in Christ Inc. and pastor at the West Angeles cathedral in Los Angeles; Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America; social activist Sister Helen Prejean, author of "Dead Man Walking"; and Rabbi Tzvi Weinreb, executive vice president of the Orthodox Union.
Who is Ingrid Mattson? She is the President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). And here, courtesy the Center for Security Policy is Ingrid Mattson in her own words.
1) Mattson places loyalty to Islam before loyalty to the United States of America:
If Muslim Americans are to participate in such a critique of American policy, however, they will only be effective if they do it, according to the Prophet’s words, in a “brotherly” fashion. This implies a high degree of loyalty and affection. This does not mean, however, that citizenship and religious community are identical commitments, nor that they demand the same kind of loyalty. People of faith have a certain kind of solidarity with others of their faith community that transcends the basic rights and duties of citizenship.
The first duty of Muslims in America, therefore, is to help shape American policies so they are in harmony with the essential values of this country. In the realm of foreign policy, this “idealistic” view has been out of fashion for some time. Indeed, the American Constitution, like foundational religious texts, can be read in many different ways. The true values of America are those which we decide to embrace as our own. There is no guarantee, therefore, that Americans will rise to the challenge of defining themselves as an ethical nation; nevertheless, given the success of domestic struggles for human dignity and rights in the twentieth century, we can be hopeful.
3) Mattson denies the existence of terrorist cells in the United States:
There’s a prejudgment, a collective judgment of Muslims, and a suspicion that well "you may appear nice, but we know there are sleeper cells of Americans," which of course is not true. There aren’t any sleeper cells.
CHAT PARTICIPANT: What can you tell us about the Wahhabi sect of Islam? Is it true that this is an extremely right wing sect founded and funded by the Saudi royal family, and led by Osama bin Ladin? What is the purpose of the Wahhabi?MATTSON: No it's not true to characterize 'Wahhabism' that way. This is not a sect. It is the name of a reform movement that began 200 years ago to rid Islamic societies of cultural practices and rigid interpretation that had acquired over the centuries. It really was analogous to the European protestant reformation. Because the Wahhabi scholars became integrated into the Saudi state, there has been some difficulty keeping that particular interpretation of religion from being enforced too broadly on the population as a whole. However, the Saudi scholars who are Wahhabi have denounced terrorism and denounced in particular the acts of September 11. Those statements are available publicly.
This question has arisen because last week there were a number of newspaper reports that were dealing with this. They raised the issue of the role of Saudi Arabia and the ideology there. Frankly, I think in a way it was a reaction to the attempts of many people to look for the roots of terrorism in misguided foreign policy. It's not helpful, I believe, to create another broad category that that becomes the scapegoat for terrorism.
5) Mattson on the negative effects of the end of the Islamic Caliphate:
CHAT PARTICIPANT: Osama bin Laden made a reference that Muslims have been living in humiliation for 80 years. Did he refer to the Treaty of Sevres in 1920 that dismantled caliphates and sultanates?MATTSON: Yes, he is referring to that, to the overthrowing of the caliphate, which was a plan of European powers for many years. This deprived the Muslim world of a stable and centralized authority, and much of the chaos that we're living in today is the result of that.
6) Mattson teaches the jihadists Sayyid Qutb and Syed Abu’l-`Ala Mawdudi in her course at Hartford Seminary – see the syllabus here.
7) Mattson praises the jihadist Mawdudi (aka Maududi):
In response to another question, "Please suggest any comprehensive work of Tafseer (Qur'anic commentary) for us Muslim youth," she said, "There are different kinds of Tafseers. For e.g. there are ones that contain detailed interpretations of grammatical aspects of Qur'anic language. And there are others that serve to explain the general message of Qur'an, coupled with the experiences and insights of the author of the Tafseer. However, there aren't really any Tafseers that combine the both aspects. So far, probably the best work of Tafseer in English is by Maulana Abul A'la Maududi.'"
Maududi on jihad (Jihad in Islam, page 9): “Islam wishes to destroy all States and Governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam regardless of the country or the Nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and programme, regardless of which Nation assumes the role of the standard bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State. It must be evident to you from this discussion that the objective of Islamic 'Jihad' is to eliminate the rule of an un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of State rule. Islam does not intend to confine this revolution to a single State or a few countries; the aim of Islam is to bring about a universal revolution.”
Maududi on denial of rights to non-Muslims (Jihad in Islam, page 28): “Islamic 'Jihad' does not recognize their right to administer State affairs according to a system which, in the view of Islam, is evil. Furthermore, Islamic 'Jihad' also refuses to admit their right to continue with such practices under an Islamic government which fatally affect the public interest from the viewpoint of Islam."
Maududi on Shariah Law’s precedence over any other legal system (Islamic Law and Its Introduction, p. 13): That if an Islamic society consciously resolves not to accept the Sharia, and decides to enact its own constitution and laws or borrow them from any other source in disregard of the Sharia, such a society breaks its contract with God and forfeits its right to be called 'Islamic.'"
8) Although she recommends and teaches Abdul ala Maududi, who advocates violent jihad against non-Muslims (see above), Mattson is highly critical of Christians who make the factual statement that texts by Muslims support violent jihad against non-Muslims -- and she equates Christian critics of violent jihad with Osama bin Laden, who wages violent jihad. Mattson on critical statements by Christians about Muslims:
“These kinds of statements are really irresponsible, because they can lead to violence against ordinary people.…..I don't see any difference between that and al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden [using] Islamic theology to justify violence against Americans. What's interesting is if you compare [their] statements about what Islam is and what Muslims believe, you'll find they are almost identical, and I reject both interpretations -- both the non-Muslims who are saying that Islam justifies violence against Christians and Jews, and the Muslims who are saying it. Certainly these statements have a very unnerving effect, especially when they continue, when more than one person says it."
9) Mattson is a traditionalist on Shariah law and the legitimacy of Shariah authorities:
“As a practicing Muslim, I believe that there is a core of fundamental beliefs and practices that distinguish authentic Islam from deviations. I also believe that apart from this essential core, the task of interpreting the application of Islamic norms to human society is an enormously complicated task, which inevitably leads to a broad range of opinion and practice. I agree with “ Sunni” Muslims, the majority of the Muslim community worldwide, that after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, no one has the right to claim infallibility in the interpretation of sacred law. At the same time, this does not mean that all opinions are equal, nor that everyone has the ability to interpret law. Without the intense study of Islamic texts and traditions under qualified scholars and without the presence of a stable Muslim community through which one can witness the wisdom of the living tradition, the chances of an ordinary believer arriving at a correct judgment about most legal issues are slim."
Ingrid Mattson, the first woman president of the Islamic Society of North America, said Friday at the opening of the group's 43rd annual convention that labeling terrorism as "Islamic" was not helpful to people of her faith."I'm convinced that it is not only inaccurate, but unhelpful. If our major concern is security, security of this country, this is a term that has very bad resonance in the Muslim majority world and makes us feel uncomfortable here," Mattson said.
Bush and other Republicans have been using the term "Islamic fascism" in recent speeches. White House aides and outside Republican strategists have said the term is an attempt to more clearly identify the ideology that motivates many organized terrorist groups.
Mattson said her group would argue for a change in rhetoric away from "Islamic fascism." U.S. officials are attending the meeting here, including Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England….
…..As an alternative to "Islamic fascism," Mattson suggested the words "terrorism, crime, violence," adding that she and other Muslims don't understand why the label "Islamic" is included when Bush and other leaders talk about terrorism.
"The products that are coming from the Muslim world are not being called 'Islamic products' or 'Islamic oil,'" she said.
11) Mattson denies the actual state of women’s rights under Shariah law:
a) http://www.videosift.com/video/Ingrid-Mattson-on-Community-in-Islam
[Transcribed: quote is in last few minutes]
“I believe that many Americans believe that Muslim women don’t have any rights in Islam. Perhaps they see images of Muslim women being oppressed in different parts of the Muslim world and believe that that is because of their religion. But in fact we know that Muslim women have the same rights as Muslim men and virtually all the same duties and obligations.”
b) http://www.beliefnet.com/story/198/story_19898_1.html
“One of the popular misconceptions about Islam is that women are seen as lesser figures, that they don’t have rights.”This perception that women in Islam are oppressed is based both on misinformation as well as am amplification of certain unfortunate tendencies in some parts of the Muslim world. It’s true that people have seen some Muslim authorities using Islam as a justification for the oppression or suppression of women. That’s a reality, we can’t deny it. But we have to balance those incidents with what’s going on in the rest of the Muslim world, in which most women are participating in their societies. We’ve seen that within recent times four Muslim-majority nations have had female heads of state. In most countries that I’ve traveled to, Muslim women are involved in all aspects of society.”
c) http://archives.cnn.com/2001/COMMUNITY/10/18/mattson.cnna/
“MATTSON: Muslim women have the same legal rights as Muslim men. The Prophet Mohammed's wife was a businesswoman. In fact, he met her working for her as her agent. The legal rights of women were enshrined in Islamic law. However, cultural practices in many societies have prevented those rights from being enforced.”
12) Mattson rationalizes the actions of the Taliban against women:
CHAT PARTICIPANT: Does the Taliban place blame upon women for the weakness of men in their society? Is that why they place such restriction upon them?MATTSON: The Taliban place restrictions on everyone in their society, men and women. They've extended their authority over individuals far beyond traditional government in Afghanistan. In their minds, they are protecting women from other men by placing these restrictions on them.
13) Like the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Mattson condemns terrorism in general but avoids criticizing Hamas or Hizballah:
”That can be frustrating. I want to also make sure people understand that although American Muslims do have a responsibility to clarify their views on terrorism and violence done in the name of Islam, we don’t have control over these situations. We don’t have some sort of magic power over all Muslims in the world.”
"‘Right-wing Christians are very risky allies for American Jews,’ Mattson said, ‘because they [the Christians] are really anti-Semitic. They do not like Jews’ and enter into the alliance on the basis of fundamentalist beliefs that it would be desirable for all Jews to return to Israel. She suggested that fundamentalist Christians might turn against Jews or that there could be backlash from ordinary Americans against Jewish and fundamentalist Christian supporters of Israel.”
15) Mattson is highly critical of Israel:
“The American government has not criticized sufficiently the brutality of the Israeli government, believing that it needs to be “supportive” of the Jewish state. The result is that oppression, left unchecked, can increase to immense proportions, until the oppressed are smothered with hopelessness and rage.”
”Thus, it is not permitted for a Muslim to maintain a close friendship with a highly intelligent person who engages him or her in stimulating conversation, if that person continuously derides the sacred (Qur’an 5:57-58). Indeed, since preserving faith is the highest priority, it is important that Muslims avoid demoralizing dependence on other faith communities for their protection and material needs….Clearly there are groups among American Christians and Jews who are so hostile to Muslims that we should not join with them even in shared concerns, lest we lend any credibility to their organizations. There are many other groups within those communities, however, who are eager to work respectfully with Muslims to further just causes.“
ISNA, which URJ has accepted, apparently uncritically, as a “partner,” has a long history of association with extremist trends in Islam. ISNA has served as a front group for Wahhabism, the official sect in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia; the jihadist ideologies originating in Pakistan with the writings of a certain Mawdudi and the Deoband schools in that country — the latter of which produced the Afghan Taliban, and the Ikhwan al-Muslimun, or Muslim Brotherhood.Ingrid Mattson, president of ISNA, revealed the style of radical rhetoric with which the organization is saturated when, in addressing the URJ’s recent convention, she declared that in the current U.S. presidential primaries, “we see candidates being asked to prove that they comply with an ever narrower definition of what it means to be a Christian — forget about being a Muslim or a Jew.”
This is an inexcusably irresponsible, inflammatory charge. Although Christian affiliations have been a topic among some presidential candidates, none has been compelled to “comply” with a Christian religious test and no such criterion is reasonably possible in the American electoral process.
Many Islamic mosque congregations, Sufi orders, and Muslim personalities have called for intelligent and sincere discussion with Jewish individuals and groups, to further interfaith civility and cooperation. This noble goal, to which we as Muslims are called by our revelation and our traditions, cannot be served by flattery toward groups like ISNA, in which radicals are camouflaged as moderates.
We therefore appeal to Rabbi Yoffie and other Jewish leaders to conduct a serious and thorough survey of the situation in Western Islam, identifying authentic moderates, and enabling them as interlocutors with Jews and other non-Muslims. We do not believe that ISNA qualifies for such a role. We fear that heedless acceptance of ISNA as an ally of URJ does harm to both our communities, by legitimizing a radicalism that, regardless of ISNA’s rhetorical claims, is fundamentally hostile to Jews and suppresses the intellectual and social development of Muslims.
Nawab Agha, president, American Muslim Congress
Omran Salman, director, Aafaq Foundation
Kemal Silay, president, Center for Islamic Pluralism
Stephen Suleyman Schwartz, executive director, Center for Islamic Pluralism
Salim Mansur, Canadian director, Center for Islamic Pluralism
Jalal Zuberi, Southern U.S. director, Center for Islamic Pluralism
Imaad Malik, fellow, Center for Islamic Pluralism
M. Zuhdi Jasser, president, American Islamic Forum for Democracy
Sheikh Ahmed Subhy Mansour, president, International Quranic Center
Posted by Robert at August 24, 2008 1:08 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
You've identified the problem, Robert, of ISNA being given undeserved positive national exposure during the Dem. convention. How would you propose to address it?
A post to JW isn't enough, since you're only preaching to the choir. How about a media blitz to flood the various message boards with a condensed version of your note above - before the convention?
Posted by: Eastview![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at August 24, 2008 2:49 AM
Robert,
A very enlightening post about Ingrid Mattson. Like Eastview said (above), you're preaching to the choir here, but the level of denial shown by this woman and ISNA is just maddening!
BTW, you had me convinced by Item 6. That syllabus or hers is nothing but pure indoctrination of mushy headed, leftist PC/MC seminary students.
(A Koran journal? Glossary of terms? A term paper on the Koran? Nothing but freaking garbage!)
This woman must be exposed as a paid agent of Saudi Arabia. Along with that other idiot, Ibby Hooper.
at August 24, 2008 3:14 AM
I fear that it will take a lot to prompt the ruling class in Washington to disrupt their "tranquility" which is the goal of globalism. This "tranquility" of which I speak is the same kind that Epicurus (270 BC) preached in his ancient religion. The persuit of tranquility was once an established movement and now it is back, with puppies.
Islam itself will eventually disrupt this tranquility but Islam will do at a time of their choosing.
We must somehow reach the American people with Robert's message.
Posted by: Spot on at August 24, 2008 6:03 AM
Robert,
This is absolutely frightening that ISNA gets such legitamacy.
Bottom Line, ya gotta get on Foxnews or some other channel today and sum up the basic and easiest to understand points (e.g.>the thing about mawdadi)
Posted by: Marc-or at August 24, 2008 6:22 AM
Interfaith?
Then where are the Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, and Baha'is — and why is it Mattson, not Jasser?
This is an appeasement move to get a headscarf on television. And if he were going to get that HEADSCARF on television, he had to include a VEILED Catholic and a Jew on there, too.
It couldn't be worse. It just couldn't be worse.
This is all about appeasing Muslims over the HEADSCARF issue, which was a set-up to begin with.
So, why aren't Buddhists and Hindus represented whne their numbers are comparable to that of Muslims?
* Christian: (78.5%)
o Protestant (51.3%)
o Roman Catholic (23.9%)
o Mormon (1.7%)
o other Christian (1.6%)
* unaffiliated (12.1%)
* none (4%)
* other or unspecified (2.5%)
* Jewish (1.7%)
* Buddhist (0.7%)
* Muslim (0.6%)
* Hindus (0.4%)
Because Obama wouldn't want to step out of the "Abrahamic Religions" mold, probably because Mattson wouldn't appear with a Hindu or a Buddhist, and CAN'T WAIT to get that religious Catholic headscarf on TV in an attempt to equate it with that political Muslim one.
ALL ABOUT A HEADSCARF.
at August 24, 2008 6:50 AM
Apologies ... Prejean doesn't wear veiling of any kind.
Posted by: Qai Gracen at August 24, 2008 7:18 AM
makes us feel uncomfortable here," Mattson said.
Perhaps we can make you feel even more uncomfortable and you will leave for a land of pure islam! This she devil needs to be exposed for what she really is a paid whore of the sauds.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at August 24, 2008 7:37 AM
And another point we should raise with her.. this whore insults those Christians who support Israel. We should let her know how dare she hurts our feelings and that she should not use term "Right wing" as it offends us. but l guess to her its okay to offend Christians, seems muslims like her are allowed to offend others, but we must not offend them! Let the Western gov't label these islamist terrorists as that is what they call themselves otherwise we will be have to use the "cone of silence" to discuss islam!
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at August 24, 2008 7:44 AM
If, after all that you have set out this morning, with a full day for the Democratic National Committee to read, digest, and circulate it, still goes ahead and helps to legitimize Ingrid Mattson by allowing this sweetly sinister lady to address their convention and be televised doing so around the world, that is reason enough not to vote for their candidates. Enough. More than enough.
Posted by: Hugh at August 24, 2008 8:50 AM
Ingrid Mattson, a muslim foreign national from Canada. Islam is the antithesis of American democracy. . . A foreign national with a Muslim brotherhood agenda are irrelevant to American politics.
". . .makes us feel uncomfortable here," Mattson said."
As it should be.
Posted by: miira at August 24, 2008 9:54 AM
“I believe that many Americans believe that Muslim women don’t have any rights in Islam. Perhaps they see images of Muslim women being oppressed in different parts of the Muslim world and believe that that is because of their religion. But in fact we know that Muslim women have the same rights as Muslim men and virtually all the same duties and obligations.”
So I suppose that when we see women being oppressed in Somalia, Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc; that's because they're Somalis, Arabs, Iranians, Afghans, or Pakis; and that Islam has nothing to do with it. It's a matter of ethnicity, not religion, eh? And it's just coincidence that these ethnicities are all Moslem? Sure.
at August 24, 2008 10:06 AM
"People of faith have a certain kind of solidarity with others of their faith community that transcends the basic rights and duties of citizenship."
Whoa! Is that to say that only Muslims are "people of faith", or are we to infer that unless we agree with this twit, none of us are people of faith?
"There aren’t any sleeper cells."
Sounds like a big, fat lie, to me--especially with the new handbook on how to be a one-man cell in Al-Qaida.
"there has been some difficulty keeping that particular interpretation of religion from being enforced too broadly on the population as a whole."
"There shall be no compulsion, in religion"?
"The Prophet Mohammed's wife was a businesswoman."
Yeah. His first wife. She wasn't a Muslim, though. I think she bit the sand before Mohammed became the seal of the prophets. I know she supported his insanity, but she missed the finale.
If I promise to say "Islamic products" (and easy promise, as there aren't many) and "Islamic oil" (to describe all oil that is discovered and produced by Muslims) may I then say "Islamic Jihad, and Islamic Terrorism?
Posted by: Abscedere at August 24, 2008 10:49 AM
http://www.americansagainsthate.org/ISNA_Statements_2.htm
A recent ISNA publication on their national website expounds on the following subjects using the Bukhari hadith:
Screen 1: ISNA: “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.’”
Screen 2: ISNA: “May Allah fight the jews and the christians. They took the graves of their Prophets as places of prostration. Two deens [religions] shall not co-exist in the land of the Arabs.”
Screen 3: ISNA: “We are those who have given a pledge of allegiance to Muhammad that we will carry on Jihad as long as we live.”
Screen 4: ISNA: “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.”
Screen 5: ISNA: “STONING TO DEATH OF JEWS AND OTHER DHIMMIS IN CASE OF ADULTERY”
Screen 6: ISNA: “Whoever takes them [Christian Arabs] as friends is from them.”
Screen 7: ISNA: “O Allah! I ask you for martyrdom in Your way and death in the city of Your Messenger!”
Screen 8: ISNA: “The Dajjal [Devil, Antichrist] would be followed by seventy thousand Jews of Isfahan wearing Persian shawls.”
Screen 9: ISNA: “You will fight against the Jews and you will kill them until even a stone would say: ‘Come here, Muslim, there is a Jew (hiding himself behind me); kill him.’”
At a CNN-sponsored "town hall" forum in October 2001, Mattson - with a straight face - claimed that the radical, Saudi-sponsored form of Islam known as Wahhabism was akin to the Protestant movement in Christianity. Wahhabism "really was analogous to the European protestant reformation," she explained.
At a November 2003 roundtable sponsored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Mattson said the Wahhabist movement in Islam is "a very old struggle...between the more theologically austere Muslims who like Protestant Christianity believe that there should be no saints there should be no intervention between you and G-d."
Mattson takes a similar "see no evil" approach to the idea of Islamic terrorism. Mattson was one of several Muslim "scholars" quoted in a Washington Times article shortly after 9/11 who claimed that the media should not use the term "Islamic terrorism." Mattson took this stance despite the fact, as the Times paraphrased her, that "Islamic terrorists themselves use this term."
The ISNA board of directors lists Bassam Osman as a member of NAIT which is the North American Islamic Trust . The NAIT is a Saudi government organisation specifically for funding of Islamist enterprises in North America and is reported to own nearly 20% of all mosques and Islamic centers in North America. Both are offshoots of the Muslim Students Association, established by the Muslim Brotherhood in 1963.
Members of ISNA's board include controversial New York imam Siraj Wahaj, named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the federal case last decade against terrorist Omar Abdel Rahman, a.k.a. the Blind Sheikh. ISNA's secretary-general, Sayyid M. Syeed, is the former director of academic outreach at the International Institute of Islamic Thought, a Northern Virginia think tank raided in 2002 by federal authorities on suspicion of terror-financing. ISNA board member Bassam Osman is also president of an organization that owns the Islamic Academy of Florida. This group has been described as a criminal enterprise in a federal indictment handed down by government after the school founder, Sami Al-Arian, was arrested for ties to terrorism.
at August 24, 2008 11:37 AM
Robert has laid it all out. There is no getting around. The Democratic National Committee has a full day to be alerted, and to realize what Ingrid Mattson is all about. They can avoid this disaster, or they can continue with it. They can have an admirer of Maududi stand up, before America and before the world, with all that such a presumably vetted appearance implies, and what it will say to Hindus and Christians in Pakistan and Bangladesh and the Philippines, to Buddhists in Thailand, to Christians in southern Sudan, southern Nigeria, to Assyrians and Chaldeans in Iraq and Maronites and Greek Orthodox in Lebanon, to Copts in Egypt, and to what it will say to those in Western Europe who are so alarmed about Muslim behavior, and now the texts and tenets that they have discovered, are studying, realize cannot be ignored, must be confronted -- yes, they can do that. But at such great cost to so many, and to themselves.
They still have time to change the personnel.
They still have time to take into account what Ingrid Mattson is all about, as so devastatingly set out here.
Whether they act on it or not, will be telling.
They have been warned.
Banal it may be to use it yet again, but here it fits, so here it goes: After such knowledge, what forgiveness?
Posted by: Hugh at August 24, 2008 1:27 PM
Wonder why they didn't invite the Archbishop Chaput of Denver?
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/009447.php
methinks he knows too much
at August 24, 2008 1:59 PM
Alerting the DNC will get you nowhere.
The problem is the Democrats do not take jihad seriously! nor do they take the persecution of non-Muslims and women in Islamic countries seriously.
Furthermore just look at the DNC's choice for prez. A man steeped in Black liberation theology, friends with Farrakhan, Wright, Meeks, American terrorists Ayers, Dorn, PLO representatives, endorsed by Castro, lil Kim of North Korea and Hamas.
If this doesn't scare the bright green piss out of Democrats, a shariah and jihad lover like Mattson wouldn't even raise a eye-brow.
In addition, the Democrats are steeped in political correctness and multiculturalism which prevents them from saying or doing anything that may offend Muslims.
About the only way Mattson will get ejected if she were to endorse David Duke or promote food with trans fats.
at August 24, 2008 4:18 PM
I hope any JW readers in the Denver area will go out and demonstrate at the convention.
Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at August 24, 2008 4:40 PM
I am ashamed that this woman is a Canadian.
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at August 24, 2008 5:02 PM
For Godsake, kick her out of the USA!!!
Posted by: jewcat at August 24, 2008 6:56 PM
Or Canada! Or anywhere civilised and let her live under the sharia she denies
Posted by: jewcat at August 24, 2008 7:00 PM
I disagree with Zenas typification of Mattson. She may be getting millions of dollars to broadcast her lies, but she is a media prostitute not a whore, if she were to prove that she is not having her nest feathered by her lying I would agree that she is a whore not a prostitute.
Posted by: stickman at August 24, 2008 7:37 PM
It is debatable wether a whore outranks a prostitute, but in my opinion at least a whore has an honest relish for her occupation.
Posted by: stickman at August 24, 2008 7:38 PM
Here is a story that should be taken up by jihadwatch, 5 women buried alive to support the religion of peace.
http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2008/2969/
Posted by: stickman at August 24, 2008 7:44 PM
Regarding Point 11b: today, in the heat of a summer afternoon, I witnessed a hijabed woman (and the remaineder of her body fully covered, some with multiple layers) weilding a pickaxe in her front yard, cleaning out a dirt flower bed.
Her man stood idly by her, cool as a cucumber in shorts & a sleeveless tee.
Yup. Women are obviously not seen as lesser figures in Islam.
Posted by: Vee at August 24, 2008 8:03 PM
What Hugh said.
I read through each of Mattson's statements in the posted article. Brrrr. They make my skin crawl.
A few thoughts on items 14, 15 and 16.
No 14 is a classic Muslim attempt to 'split the camp' by separating Jews from the one major body of Christians that has consistently supported Israel.
Mattson is wrong about the motives of many of those Christians.
On a humble level, there are many Christians - steeped in the Old Testament as well as the Gospels - whose motives as are simple as those of Corrie ten Boom who, standing in Nazi-occupied Holland, just after the full horror of Nazi plans for the Jews had dawned upon her, prayed: "Lord Jesus, I offer myself for your people [that is, for the Jews] - any time, any thing".
Two of the greatest philojudaic Christians of the 20th century - and supporters of the Jewish state of Israel - were Jacques Ellul and James Parkes. Ellul could never in a million years be described as 'right wing', he was sui generis, and far too intelligent to indulge in fantastic End Times speculations; his reasons for supporting Israel and condemning all forms of antisemitism are very clearly set out and do not fit Mattson's supposed paradigm at all.
Parkes was a scholar, a historian, who unflinchingly documented, named and shamed the historic antisemitism of 'christendom'.
It is Parkes and Ellul whom I would advise Christians to study and try to emulate, if they want to know how best to stand friend to the House of Israel.
And I would say to Jews: if you have Christian friends and neighbours, tell them to read any and all of Parkes' books; and (if they read French) to read Ellul's 'Un Chretien Pour Israel' and 'Ce Dieu Injuste?'.
Conclusion? - the more vociferously and persistently Muslims try to stir up trouble between Jews and Christians, the more tightly we Christians and Jews should cling to each other. Sure there's lots we don't agree about. Sure, we Christians have done awful things to Jews - of which many of us have publicly repented, and over which we feel immense grief (how could our forebears have been so stupid? so wicked? so cruel? how could they have so blasphemed and dishonoured the Holy Name?).
But wise Christians and Jews in the non-Muslim world are completely agreed that neither of our communities wants to inhabit the bottomless pit of oppression which is dhimmitude. So: if you live next to a synagogue or a Jewish family or business, school or cemetery, and you're a Christian, or any kind of non-Muslim...keep a weather eye open for slinking Mohammedans bent on doing harm to Jewish persons and property.
Of course, those of us who have read Andrew Bostom's "Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism" know that a poisonous hatred of, and contempt for, Jews is hardwired into the sacred texts of Islam and all their standard interpretations. Item no. 15, Mattson's virulent condemnation of Israel, is evidence that she herself shares fully in that orthodox Islamic Judenhass.
Someone needs to find a way of publicly 'calling' Mattson on the hideous reality of Islamic antisemitism. Rip off her smiling mask and watch the demon come snarling out.
Item no 16 is - for me - clear proof that Mattson fully subscribes to the Quranic doctrine that Muslims cannot and must not genuinely make friends or alliances with non-Muslims; that she agrees with the principle of 'al-wala wa al-baraa', that she must love and be loyal ONLY to Muslims, and that she must actively hate despise and seek to subjugate, hurt and harm non-Muslims. I am quite, quite sure that - for tactical purposes - she is complying with the Muslim dictum "We smile at some people, though our hearts hate them".
That final line from item 16 says it all:
"There are many other groups within those communities [Jews and Christians], however, who are eager to work respectfully with Muslims to further just causes.“
Let's translate that: "there are those who can be conned into acting like good dhimmis to serve and flatter Muslims and can be used to further the Muslim agenda of imposing Muslim domination".
Final thought: this...creature, this traitor, Mattson, was one of the signatories to that 'A Common Word' letter from the Muslims to the Christians. After reading the posted article which sufficiently exposes Mattson's agenda, I am more than ever convinced that NO Christian leader should ever have dignified that letter with a reply. The mere fact that Mattson signed off on it - not to mention the presence among the signatories of a selection of other jihad-minded virulent antisemites, such as Ikrima Sabri, and Shariatmadari of Iran - is enough to render it beneath contempt.
at August 24, 2008 8:42 PM
Some basics on Mattson...
In 2008, she is 49. She came from a family of 7 kids.
She definitely is a Muslim, but she is not a convert.
It is recorded that she went to St. Mary's Roman Catholic High School in Kitchener Ontario. She abandoned her RC beliefs long before she started to explore Islam.
From high school, she initially began to study engineering at Queens University in Kingston Ontario. (This is a high-quality school.)
It is not known if she flunked-out or voluntarily left, but she then began to study philosophy and fine arts at University of Waterloo. There she met Mohamed Elmasry, who is now the head of the Canadian Islamic Congress.
Now you know the end of the story.
at August 24, 2008 9:14 PM
Some basics on Mattson...
In 2008, she is 49. She came from a family of 7 kids. She definitely is a Muslim, but she is not a convert.It is recorded that she went to St. Mary's Roman Catholic High School in Kitchener Ontario. She abandoned her RC beliefs long before she started to explore Islam. From high school, she initially began to study engineering at Queens University in Kingston Ontario. (This is a high-quality school.) It is not known if she flunked-out or voluntarily left, but she then began to study philosophy and fine arts at University of Waterloo. There she met Mohamed Elmasry, who is now the head of the Canadian Islamic Congress. Now you know the end of the story.
Posted by: DhimmiNot
Thank you for this important information. The very fact that she is married to the head of the CIC ought to be enough to automatically disqualify her from speaking at any national gathering involved in choosing political leaders in this country.
The picture being painted of the Democrats keeps getting uglier and uglier with each passing day as new pieces of information come to light.
Posted by: Eastview at August 25, 2008 1:07 AM
Married to Mohamed Elmasry? NO.
He must have been a huge influence though.
I didn't mean to imply that.
I believe she met her husband in France while she was exploring museums. His name is a missing piece of the puzzle.
at August 25, 2008 9:41 AM
It is nice to see that she has been so easily exposed as an extremist. One may quibble about sleeper cells (they may not really be sleepers in the traditional sense), but the idea the the West planned the end of the Caliphate is positively looney. A rare public gaffe for such a well trained mouthpiece.
at August 25, 2008 11:23 AM
Interfaith? My foot! I smell a conspiracy to sell America to the Muslims. It is a sad sad day.
It is very ironic that Obama picked Biden as his running mate. Bidon credits himself with the Clinton-Kosovo war in 1998-99. During the Kosovo war the US troops were fighting side by side with Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qaeda troops who were brought in from all over Middle East and Africa to fight a Jihad war against the Christians of Kosovo - we were paying, feeding, supporting and supplying Al Qaeda with weapons and ammunitions. The Kosovo war pissed off the helpless Russians then and contributed to the return of the Evil Empire of Russia. Russia recently punished the Americans and the West by devastating the Republic of Georgia as a revenge for the Kosovo War - Thanks to Senator Biden's contribution to history - Russia will only get stronger, angrier and more evil instead of the friendly path Russia was heading towards.
at August 25, 2008 12:15 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)