Who would have believed a moslem would be a speaker at any political gathering in the days following 9-11? How soon we return to sleep.
All the blood and treasure the men and women of the United States have invested, to be thrown away for the "feel good" politics of the 21st century.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 25, 2008 10:44 AM

BTW, terrible outfit...looks like she just came from a rummage sale.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 25, 2008 10:45 AM

I attended this event out of curiosity. The above report is accurate, but it should be noted that they were applauding and standing for pretty much every speaker, so a standing ovation had no real meaning.

I paid particular attention to Mattson obviously, and aside from her brief whining about Muslims being singled out, she was pretty non descript, ecumenical, kumbaya, and generic. She resisited the temptation to make any veiled references to the "plight" of the Palestinians or what not (perhaps because there were several Rabbis also speaking and did not want to start a confrontation that she might have lost). I couldn't help thinking that sucking it up and talking nice was little more that her "personal jihad" (read: taquiya) though.

It was unfortunate the the presence of 4 Muslims on the podium serves to legitimize them as a valid Abrahamic religion, as they always sell themselves to be. No one seems to question Islam's status as a valid religion, rather than what it is: a viral Mafia cult that has reached critical mass and whose false and self-asserted credentials as a valid religion are universally accepted.

Posted by: BunrattyBill at August 25, 2008 10:50 AM

Islam joins the harpies of the left
at the altar of marx and gramsci
to claim its crown of victimhood.

The ancient crocodile waits patiently
under the water of taqiyya and kitman
for its feast of the dhimmi democrat kafirs.

Posted by: the poetess at August 25, 2008 10:59 AM

Who would have believed a moslem would be a speaker at any political gathering in the days following 9-11? --interestinconundrum

Oh, it's UNBELIEVABLE. It's so rotten there's no adequate words to describe the rottenness.

That photo is puke-worthy, and revolting to behold.

Posted by: darcy at August 25, 2008 11:04 AM

Liberals are traitors to the U.S.A. Most of them are so caught up in loving the enemy of their enemies they applaud in silly hypocrisy of having a women speaking to them wearing the symbols of oppression they claim to fight against with conservatives.

Ignorant clueless dhimmis is even worse than informed ones.

Posted by: SoteriA at August 25, 2008 11:04 AM

That's it.

Posted by: Hugh at August 25, 2008 11:09 AM

what to do when your leaders, of both politically parties, are dhimmi's?

Posted by: theygottago at August 25, 2008 11:25 AM

theygottago , BOTH parties. That is the truth, the Republicans are just stealthier. It make me ill that we have very little choice in who we will vote into office.
1Obamanation
2McCain
3Sharp stick in the eye

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 25, 2008 11:29 AM

Who will represent the ummah at the Republican Convention?

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 25, 2008 11:31 AM

She looks like she'd be great fun at a party.

Posted by: MP at August 25, 2008 12:01 PM

I don't think she is that tall, it's the camera angle...

I knew a man, a flaming liberal if there once was one, who was also an expert on mingling and rubbing elbows. He rubbed the right elbow and got invited to a DNC national convention. There he met Hillary and other elite democrats.
He told me that the whole experience turned him 'off'. That the whole charade was about money and power and greed, not about whats best for America, but whats best for the money and power hook ups.
He dropped out...Became an Independent.
He's still a liberal, it's hard to shake liberalism once you are infected, but hates the dem party.
Or at least the greedy elitists that run it...

Posted by: duh_swami at August 25, 2008 12:02 PM

I don't think she is that tall, it's the camera angle...

I knew a man, a flaming liberal if there once was one, who was also an expert on mingling and rubbing elbows. He rubbed the right elbow and got invited to a DNC national convention. There he met Hillary and other elite democrats.
He told me that the whole experience turned him 'off'. That the whole charade was about money and power and greed, not about whats best for America, but whats best for the money and power hook ups.
He dropped out...Became an Independent.
He's still a liberal, it's hard to shake liberalism once you are infected, but hates the dem party.
Or at least the greedy elitists that run it...

Posted by: duh_swami at August 25, 2008 12:05 PM

Buck it up, people! This is only a fiducial point that gives us a valuable indication as to how effective words alone are in educating everyone about Islam. Time to consider additional measures that go beyond mere words.

Posted by: Eastview at August 25, 2008 12:07 PM

This is exactly why Obama should have remained 'not comfortable' with his inexperience:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gexyfVpFMU

147 days later he launched his presidential campaign.

He is either
1) an opportunistic, marxist, race baiting, dime-a-dozen black politician who rubbed shoulders too many times with Nation-of-Islam, and other radical mouthpieces; or
2) the first dual citizenship Islamic Manchurian candidate; or
3) a vacant storefront drafted for naked tele-prompted oratorial skills by a currupt, power-hungry, whoring convention that will do anything (or anybody) to win. Or any combination, they are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Some constituencies need to be shunned by ALL of the parties, even if it would mean a loss. Do the major parties court the KKK, Nazis, Skinheads, etc.? If not, why not, for what political view does Ms. Mattson hold that differentiates her from these detestable supremicist groups? Does Ms. Mattson know an Arabic word for someone of African/Negroid ethnicity that doesn't also mean slave? Does she not read with reverence where Islamic scriptures refer to blacks as "raison-heads"? Does she not revere the caliphs who said that black women made the best sex slaves? Do the 'holy' texts her fingers lovingly caress disagree materially with the KKK/Nazis/Skinheads writings on the appropriate disposition of the Jews? THEY HAVE INVITED A REPRESENTATIVE OF GENOCIDAL SUPREMICISTS TO THEIR PODIUM, AND GAVE A STANDING OVATION!!!

The DNC's invitation and fawning endurance of Ms. Mattson, this moral fraud, this obvious conscious imposter, removes all illusion that the DNC leadership have any intellectual concept of the true meaning of the word democracy, or that it even matters to them. In due time, our democratic republic will become nothing more significant than purple fingers if we continue on this path.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 25, 2008 12:18 PM

Be it further noted that the preacher Leah Daughtry, CEO of the Democrat convention, is a rabid proponent of black reparations whose church is festooned wih a banner reading, "They Owe Us."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/magazine/20minister-t.html

Keep the change, Obama.

Posted by: Papa Whiskey at August 25, 2008 12:21 PM

At this time these are the only noted and scheduled speakers at the Republican national Convention starting Sept. 2nd. in Minneapolis.--They are not in order of their appearance over the week.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty (Minn.)

Gov. Charlie Crist (Fla.)

U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback (Kan.)

U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez (Fla.)

U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman (Minn.)

Meg Whitman, National Co-Chair for McCain 2008 and former President and CEO of eBay

Carly Fiorina, Victory ‘08 Chairman for the Republican National Committee and former Chairman and CEO of Hewlett-Packard Co.

Mitt Romney (Mass.) Former Gov.(Mass.)

Mrs. Cindy McCain

Bobby Jindal,Gov (La.)

Rudolph W. Giuliani, Former New York City Mayor

Mike Huckabee, Former Gov.(Ark.)

Tom Ridge, Former Gov. (Pa.)

Gov Sarah Palin (Alaska)

Gov.Jon Huntsman (Utah)

Rosario Marin, California Secretary of the State and Consumer Services Agency and former Treasurer of the United States

Fred Thompson, Former U.S. Sen (Tenn.)

Gov. Linda Lingle (Hawaii)

Michael Steele, Former Lt. Gov.(Md.)

U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman (Conn.)

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (Calif.)

Vice President Richard B. Cheney

First Lady Laura Bush

President George W. Bush

Posted by: Mackie at August 25, 2008 12:23 PM

Told ya so.

The Demicrats love victims and pandering to any socio-ethnic group they can find.

As a party they are rotten to the core. Its not the party of FDR that fought the Nazis and Tojo. Its the party of petty special interests, institutionalized anti-Americanism, multiculturalism, suppression of free speech(political correctness).

The party needs to be put down.

So does GOP.

Both have outlived their usefulness to the American people.

Posted by: waltc at August 25, 2008 12:48 PM

Whenever I see pictures of these Western women all dolled-up in their Moslem uniforms, I always think of the "Stepford Wives". Or that anti-drug TV ad of several years ago, showing first an egg in its shell ("this is your brain") and then an egg frying in a pan("this is your brain on drugs"). Only now the drug is Islam.
And as for "Democrats are, have been, and will continue to be people of faith"; well, the followers of Huitzlopochtli, Baal, and the cult of Thuggee were all people of faith too. But I don't want any of them running even my town, much less my country.

Posted by: ebonystone at August 25, 2008 1:01 PM

"There is a tremendous intersection of faith and politics," Ritter said. "Politics at its deepest root is moral."

I've witnessed some of the 'morals' of our politicians, it's not something to be proud of.

Keep religion out of politics.

Posted by: Abu_Lahab at August 25, 2008 1:07 PM

"...they were applauding and standing for pretty much every speaker, so a standing ovation had no real meaning".

That is just dumb.

Why don't the Dems just invite OBL and be done with it! I bet he has plenty to say worth their applauding.

We in Britain have a programme on bbc called "Question Time" where a member from the audience, typically a muslima in full islamic monty is invariably selected from a sea of raised hands whence she will proceed to spew diatribe against US and Bush to a rapturous applause from the audiance.

And not one single soul from the panel of politicians, captains of industry or well heeled hacks would utter even a murmur.

Why doesn't anyone say something?

Are we so polite that when someone calls us a racist bastard that all we can do is applaud?

Posted by: Hermit at August 25, 2008 1:11 PM

Sick!!!

Posted by: Spot on at August 25, 2008 1:14 PM

Why do female former infidels, now converts to islam, always seem to wear those snotty, supremacist smirks on their faces?

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at August 25, 2008 1:34 PM

Another was reserved for Mattson, who said she tells Islamic leaders abroad that Muslims in the United States still face discrimination constantly.

If only it were true, since discrimination is the ability to see or make distinctions. But that would be too rational, too boring and harsh an approach to life and politics for those guided by the fuzzy logic of feelings. From that left field perspective the universe seems filled with random events, disconnected concepts, and equal footed ideas that are unified only by sensitivity to each other’s feelings and concern over their common enemies; capitalism, rationalism, and Western tradition.

From the hysteria over demonstrably false claims of consensus and certainty on global warming, to the broader claims of a Religion of Peace, to this childish celebration of ignorance and acquiescence, they make quite the parade of hapless fools. It's an affliction that doesn't wholly discriminate by party, but does seem to be wiping out reason on the left.

And what will their reaction be when they finally do understand that their sensitivity and lack of discrimination are not returned, but used as lever to pry their freedom, if not their lives, from them? Using the history and demographics of war around the globe as a guide, a blood bath of first order is a possibility.

Despite the difficulties, Mattson said she remains convinced that the United States "is still the best place in the world to practice our faith."

But she'll help fix that.

Posted by: RalphInfidel at August 25, 2008 1:44 PM

Time to consider additional measures that go beyond mere words.

Eastview

I would suggest to the people that feel double crossed by our government officials, vote them out. Also, I would point out that our government should get on the ball and defend this country from all perils, both inside and outside. Islam is a serious peril that is incubating in this country and will begin to manifest itself directly in future years. Our government, at the moment, seems to be taken in by the Islamic verbage and this scares a lot of thoughtful, serious thinking, family oriented, truthful, and future generation minded people.

Posted by: Spot on at August 25, 2008 2:02 PM

Another was reserved for Mattson, who said she tells Islamic leaders abroad that Muslims in the United States still face discrimination constantly.

Robert is right about the fact that Mohammedans are a pampered lot, but that notwithstanding, I do think that he is somewhat wrong in criticizing her for the above statement. Instead, she should be encouraged to make that statement not only to Islamic leaders, but to rank and file Mohammedans around the world - be it Egypt, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Bangladesh and even Mohammedans in Infidel countries. While it does involve attacking the US on foreign soil, the upside of that would be that fewer Mohammedans would want to come to the US, other than those who want to set up Jihad cells. As a result, the only Mohammedans (who believe her) wanting to come here would be jihadis, making profiling of Mohammedans easier, while reducing Mohammedan immigration drastically.

Despite the difficulties, Mattson said she remains convinced that the United States "is still the best place in the world to practice our faith."

Naah, Ingrid begum, you are almost beginning to sound like Michael Medved, and you sure want to avoid that. But that aside, this statement is patently and demonstrably false, all the pandering to Mohammedans in the US notwithstanding.

The best place in the world to practice Islam is Saudi Arabia. Just imagine - you are a Mohammedan employee in a company based in Saudi Arabia, everything Islamic you need to do is perfectly laid out for you - what time to pray, where to pray (better not miss it), the wudus and ghusls - in fact, you need not petition your employer for prayer time, if you are Mohammedan, your employer will petition you. There is no way you'll get the qibla wrong, toilets won't be facing the Ka'aba, while your beds and tombstones will. Eids are automatically holidays - you needn't even petition. And while in America you have to tolerate the insufferable fact that Christmas is a Holiday while Christians and Jews sometimes can have holidays in Easter and Passover, there would be no question of having to tolerate such infidel practices in your vicinity if you happen to be working in Dhahran or Jeddah. If you are working in supermarkets, not only will you not handle any pork products, but you won't be handling any other haram products either. If you are a taxi driver in Riyadh, forget about Infidels forcing their dogs into your taxi. No need to even practice taquiyya - just tell an Infidel in his face that he's a pig/rat (if he's a Christian), or whichever other beast your hadith tells you if he's a Mushrik. What's he going to do - complain to the Muttawa?

In short, if you are a Mohammedan, Saudi Arabia is a paradise. To a lesser extent, same can be said of Kuwait, Qatar, Emirates and Oman - just imagine - $562 billion a year pouring in to the Gulf states alone - wouldn't you want to be part of that action? To Infidels who want a life, such an existance would not only be boring (all that cash and little to spend it on) but also torturous, particularly if they happen to be practicing Christians, Buddhists, Hindus or others, who can't freely practice their rituals for fear of discovery; however, for Mohammedans, you get all that cash, you pray however much you want, maybe go on your haj every weekend, and instead of getting wierd looks for your beards and skullcaps or your jilbabs, you get positive attention. What could be more perfect?

Yeah, Begum Ingrid, don't mislead the ummah. Instead, encourage all your Mohammedan brothers and sisters to apply for work visas to KSA, and go and settle there. Being Islamic there would mean never having to say you are sorry.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 25, 2008 2:18 PM

Time to consider additional measures that go beyond mere words.

Eastview

Might I suggest you clarify that statement. There are trolls here who will use an ambiguous statement such as this to cause trouble for our hosts.

Later
Albert

Posted by: GamblersChoice at August 25, 2008 2:48 PM

GamblersChoice

Well said.

Posted by: Spot on at August 25, 2008 2:57 PM

This topic/thread has so much gold running through it that it should be retitled 'The Comstock Lode'.

Kudos to
BunrattyBill
SoteriA
ebonystone
waltc
and Infidel Pride.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at August 25, 2008 3:06 PM

I always liked Sarah Good's curse as she went to her death as a Salem witch.

"God will give you blood to drink"

That's what I say to those who have destroyed the greatest country on earth and sold it out to its enemies. Fawning on those who despise them.

Posted by: poetcomic1 at August 25, 2008 3:14 PM

Plague

Thanks. After posting, I was half wondering whether I should have posted it in the previous thread on Saudi Arabia instead.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 25, 2008 3:32 PM

Oh, and one more thing - if you happen to be a Shia, the best place to do it is Bahrein, despite its Sunni rulers. That (aside from Ahmadiya and Bahai) is the only Mohammedan that would be unwelcome in Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states mentioned.

One major perk I forgot to mention (how could I) - not only can you legally have 4 wives, but if you're so inclined, they could be as young as 9, if not 6. Just don't go beyond the limit of 4. And if you don't like the local beauties, you can always fly off to the subcontinent or the East Indies and return with a Muslimah that satisfies you - no matter what her age.

Another correction - you Mohammedan could call Christians pigs/dogs, not pigs/rats.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 25, 2008 3:44 PM

Despite the difficulties, Mattson said she remains convinced that the United States "is still the best place in the world to practice our faith."

--

And we all know what that means.. the more they "practice", the more "kuffars" die.

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at August 25, 2008 5:29 PM

We in Britain have a programme on bbc called "Question Time" where a member from the audience, typically a muslima in full islamic monty is invariably selected from a sea of raised hands whence she will proceed to spew diatribe against US and Bush to a rapturous applause from the audiance.

And not one single soul from the panel of politicians, captains of industry or well heeled hacks would utter even a murmur.

Too bloody true.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at August 25, 2008 5:40 PM

Time to consider additional measures that go beyond mere words.

Eastview

Might I suggest you clarify that statement. There are trolls here who will use an ambiguous statement such as this to cause trouble for our hosts.
Posted by: GamblersChoice

Good point. I certainly did not mean anything sinister by this. Rather, that the strong consensus that exists here at JW, achieved primarily through discussions, does not seem to extend to the power structure in this country, and the Democrats in particular. The fact that it does not tells us something about the limits of blog power.

What I was refering to was that there are other things that need to be done besides just sitting at our keyboards and issuing bon mots. Spot on has suggested a few, like VOTE, but probably even more effective would be to become active in your local political organizations, joining the Lions Club or chapter of the Masons or any of a number of social organizations that in many places include as members the local movers and shakers in a community. These are the organizations who play key roles in spotting and developing new political talent and in selecting delegates to attend political conventions.

In other words, don't just talk. Take advantage of the fact that you're a citizen of a democracy and get involved in the political process.

Posted by: Eastview at August 25, 2008 6:14 PM

Word is she got a standing ovation...

...and some here actually postulate there is no difference between Democrat and Republican on Islam.

Republicans are certainly behind the curve, but they are in no way obsequious dhimmis like the Dems. During the campaign, Republican candidates actually used phrases like "Islamofascism", "radical Islam", etc. to identify the enemy. Democrats didn't dare go there.

If the choice is indeed a lessor of two evils, it is one of a helluva lot lessor.

Posted by: Cornelius at August 25, 2008 6:36 PM

Leader of Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization gets standing ovation at Democratic Convention.

She is a disgrace, not because she is a Muslim, but because she is so dishonest to our people.

Posted by: MusHuntCowboy at August 25, 2008 7:21 PM

I dare say not a single one of you has ever even spoken to Ingrid Mattson. I know her personally, and she is a very well educated moderate person with the best of intentions and motives that serve all of America, not just the Muslim demographic.

Your opinions are only such because everything you know about Muslims is through the dirty filter of lenses such as JW.

The whole page, every single entry, seems to be one big projection bias...all of you with your hang ups getting upset because of your bias.

The Muslims are one of the brightest, most productive, and healthy demographics we have.

The French even sent their leading Imam of all France here to Texas to ask us how we integrated so well and so peacefully.

I told him to raise his French Children to be French and teach them to love France and that France IS Home, and to abandon the "back home" mentality.

America is Home to us and we are not going to go anywhere.

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at August 25, 2008 9:03 PM

Abdullah,

It is fine to defend a friend. However, with the comments you've made, you have not done so. You've have impuned this site, its owners, readers, and contributors. Please show yourself to have some integrity and interact with the problems raised about Ms. Mattson's comments (click here). This is the bare minimum you can do to defend your friend and justify your comments. We are unconcerned with how you or she portray(s) her sincerity. We are concerned with her statements, the contents and intentions of the sacred texts to which she subscribes, and her affiliations, particularly international ones.

Or if you are so inclined, you can also indulge my questions above:

Some constituencies need to be shunned by ALL of the parties, even if it would mean a loss. Do the major parties court the KKK, Nazis, Skinheads, etc.? If not, why not, for what political view does Ms. Mattson hold that differentiates her from these detestable supremicist groups? Does Ms. Mattson know an Arabic word for someone of African/Negroid ethnicity that doesn't also mean slave? Does she not read with reverence where Islamic scriptures refer to blacks as "raison-heads"? Does she not revere the caliphs who said that black women made the best sex slaves? Do the 'holy' texts her fingers lovingly caress disagree materially with the KKK/Nazis/Skinheads writings on the appropriate disposition of the Jews?

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 25, 2008 9:31 PM

The Muslims are one of the brightest, most productive, and healthy demographics we have.

Well if the cesspoolstans and iranstans, ME islamic countries are so wonderful why the hell do you chose to live among the dirty kaffirs? The only way muslims can learn and become educated is through a Western univ! islam is anti democracy, anti freedom of thought, freedom of speech. your cult is death and if were not for oil found under your camels and tents you would still be living with camels. so ABDULLAH MIkail, this stupid western women who is being paid by Sowdi money is a wretched person who can gain some recognition as a western women under the cloak of islamic death, otherwise who the hell would even look at her least alone talk to such sad sorry person!

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at August 25, 2008 9:34 PM

http://debate.org.uk/topics/books/poston-dawa.html
a) Islam in the U.S. must develope an indigenous leadership, or else it will retain a distinctly foreign character, which will inhibit its growth. (451)
b) New converts to Islam must stop adopting an Arabic name upon conversion.
c) Much seek to change the stereotypical image of Islam as consisting mainly of Iranian and Libyan terrorists, Black activists, and male chauvanists.
d) The anti-Christian polemic must cease, as such attacks serve to increase the interest of nominal Christians in the precepts of their faith.
e) Unity, as envisioned by Muslims, is a vain pursuit, and best abandoned. The diversity of the Muslim world will have to be accepted, much like HUP principle.
f) Khurram Murads low-church missiological approach must be expanded and continually developed. Muslim laymen must be mobilized.
Dr. Abdel-Halim Mahmoud: "We cannot deny that U.S. Muslims might one day try to replace the Constitution with Shari'a law." (Lovering,p.6)
Isma'il al-Faruqi: "The Islamic vision endows No.Am. with a new destiny worthy of it. For this renovation of itself, of its spirit, for its rediscovery of a God-given mission and self-dedication to its pursuit, the continent cannot but be grate- ful to the immigrant with Islamic vision. It cannot but interpret his advent on its shores except as a God-given gift, a timely divine favor & mercy." (Faruqi-p.270)
Musa Qutub: "The people of the West (U.S.) will assist (in spreading) the Truth when the Hour comes." (Sahih Muslim, Bab al-Imara 177). (455)

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 25, 2008 9:42 PM

Who will represent the ummah at the Republican Convention?
Posted by: interestinconundrum

---

W

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at August 25, 2008 9:44 PM

Abdullah,

While you're at it, since you say

America is Home to us....

perhaps you could explain what that means to you, as an American.

For example, do you wish to see the American government replaced with an Islamic one, for all Americans to be required to worship Allah, and for the American legal codes to be replaced with Shari'ah? Do you say the Pledge of Allegiance, sing the Anthem, and salute the Flag and teach your children to do the same? Do you always place your citizenship and fealty to American law over your participation in the Ummah as regards your personal behavior? Do you eschew all enemies of the United States, foreign and domestic? Do you give Zakhat to entities that you know will financially support Specifically Designated Terrorist organizations (as defined by the U.S. State Department), and how are you sure? Do you contribute financially to organizations who terrorize U.S. allies such as Israel? Do you recognize the state of Israel as the U.S. Government does?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 25, 2008 9:45 PM

The Muslims are one of the brightest, most productive, and healthy demographics we have.

--

ROFLMAO!!!!!

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at August 25, 2008 9:53 PM

ebonystone,

It goes like this:

This is your brain: (O)

This is your brain on islam: (.)

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at August 25, 2008 9:57 PM

America is Home to us and we are not going to go anywhere.
Posted by: Abdullah Mikail

--

Sounds like they're digging in..

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at August 25, 2008 9:59 PM

Oh, and are you the same "Abdullah Mikail" that wrote on a Washington Post/Newsweek thread:

On the subject of Sharia law and prescribed punishments, nothing is brutal about the deterrent when compared to the ultimate punishment for committing the crime despite the deterrent with no regret or remorse - in arrogance, and what follows that is the punishment from God. The punishment in this life is easier by far.

Just curious.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 25, 2008 10:03 PM

"The Muslims are one of the brightest, most productive, and healthy demographics we have." --Abdullah

LOL!

Let me tell you what the "dirty lens" is -- Islam.

Islam is racist, bigoted, and filled with hate. Islam orders it's followers to commit Jihad against the "Infidel," i.e. anyone not Islamic. Islam's got a pagan moon deity that a 2-year-old could figure out isn't real. So, no, you people are not "bright" - you're brainwashed by a 7th century barbarian Warlord who was never a prophet. Man, you people are dumb.

Somehow, you just can't live in your own Islamic country, can you? That's too bad for us Infidels. Especially as your Demographic Jihad is rolling slowly but surely along.

Posted by: darcy at August 25, 2008 10:19 PM

Interesting how your native Islamic country isn't good enough for you.

I wonder why Allah would fail you people so miserably concerning your various Crapistans.

Any ideas? Ever thought to ask the rock idol why?

Also, any ideas as to why Allah allowed the Jewish "Sons of Apes and Pigs" to win the 1967 Six-Day War? That Allah, he's such a capricious pagan deity, isn't he?!

Posted by: darcy at August 25, 2008 10:34 PM

In order for a Muslim to have their voice heard at the Democratic Convention they must first be a "married" homosexual Muslim :-) then be heard.

Posted by: ethoman at August 25, 2008 10:37 PM

America is Home to us and we are not going to go anywhere.
Posted by: Abdullah Mikail

--

Home to "us"...

As in Muslims who refuse to integrate into the "Great melting pot of the world"??

And dream of a day when this Constitutional Republic is replaced with a Sharia Capihate???

That is not immigration.

That is called occupation.

Posted by: SoteriA at August 25, 2008 10:46 PM

Another was reserved for Mattson, who said she tells Islamic leaders abroad that Muslims in the United States still face discrimination constantly.

Muslims invite discrimination, beg for it! I honestly believe they're insulted when normal people treat them like peers because they don't get the reverence and extra respect they think they deserve because they are superior muslims.

Muslims discriminate against kafirs; they want nothing to do with us beyond exploiting our generosity and kindness, neither of which they would ever reciprocate. We're not even worthy of their friendship but they aren't too proud to greedily partake of the fruits of our labor and enjoy the endless bounty produced by our superior civilization. I don't give a damn what she tells foreign islamic leaders; what are they going to do, come over here and demand more special privileges for the umma? I want to know when I can become a citizen of Saudi Arabia, dress in accordance with my culture, gain employment without discrimination, legally practice my religion, build a few churches, and pass out Bibles to interested parties.

If muslims don't want to be "discriminated" against, they should start behaving and dressing like mainstream Americans instead of medieval Arabs. The "discrimination" Ms. Mattson so vaguely mentions probably amounts to stares and finger pointing and that's not illegal. Muslims might think they're something special but to the average American, they're strange people who are hostile and arrogant, dress funny, and whose co-religionists around the globe engage in bellicose, violent, malevolent behavior and justify it as their religious duty. Since islam forbids friendships between holier-than-thou muslims and unbelievers in the heresy of islam, how will we ever get to know these wonderful folks? I think I know all I want to know about them, plus some.

Posted by: Susanp at August 25, 2008 10:59 PM

Susanp,

Great post. I would suggest we should "give a damn what she tells foreign islamic leaders", however (Obama probably would say "dang" after church").

When Mattson says what she claims to have said to those leaders, they hear

OPPRESSION

That, as you know, is the code word for attack in the "holy" Qur'an. Therefore, she is covertly inciting her coreligionists against us, and she knows it.

Care to address that, too, Abdullah?

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 25, 2008 11:10 PM

Abdullah Mikail

You state you are from Texas. I wonder, could you be Abdullah Mikhail McKay of Richardson, Texas? The same Abdullah Mikhail McKay who frequently posts on Islamic themes to various websites, and who featured in the documentary American Ramadan? (you are, if I’m not mistaken, the bearded white American convert who appears with his family in this trailer for the film?)

In American Ramadan, you are portrayed as the ideal American Muslim - integrated and peaceful, and most certainly not the stereotypical ranting extremist looking to chop off hands and persecute women.

Yet, as Concerned Citizen points out above, you posted this reply to an article in the Washington Post by Eboo Patel, in which he criticised those Muslims who refused to acknowledge what he described as the religion’s “dirty laundry” - anti-Semitism, bigotry and cruelty. In particular, he highlighted Saudi Arabia’s punishment of a rape victim, which he described as “appalling and brutal”, and called on moderate Muslims to loudly condemn such outrages.

Condemn them they did in their replies. All except one poster - you, Abdullah Mikail - who took exception to the “appalling and brutal” description, stating that:

“nothing is brutal about the deterrent [ public flogging ] when compared to the ultimate punishment for committing the crime”.

You then went on explain the reality of her “crime”:

“The obfuscation of the young woman’s case is a deplorable twist of the media taking focus away from what she was guilty of and making it seem as though she were being punished for being raped… No, that is not the case. She is being punished for violating the law which came to light when her case was revealed…she was given a lighter sentence for having been within the private company of a non family member male”.

Let me emphasise that you are an American-born citizen, a self-declared “supporter of the Constitutional right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness” who nevertheless agrees with the view that it is a “crime” worthy of punishment for a young woman to be in private with a man who is not her relation.

Indeed, lest any reader were in doubt about your views, you then sneer at the “moderates” (your quote marks) who “give a hue and cry” about such barbarity and therefore aid critics in their “efforts to smear Islam”. As with your above post, you declare the problem to be ignorance of Islam by non-Muslims and Muslims themselves

How interesting. Normally it is extremists such as yourself who we are led to belief are “misunderstanding their faith”. Yet here are you in that post declaring that it is “the moderates” - those who speak out against brutality and bigotry - who do not understand the true nature of their religion. It seems that you and Robert Spencer are in agreement on this matter at least.

By the way, don’t you also have links to Ghassan Elashi, former director of the Richardson, Texas-based Holy Land Foundation, who is currently serving time for helping to fund Hamas?

Matamoros (original one)

Posted by: Matamoros at August 25, 2008 11:14 PM

In light of the above, could you please clarify, Abdullah, exactly what is your relationship with Ms. Mattson?

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 25, 2008 11:19 PM

Abdullah Mikail
. . . I know her personally, and she is a very well educated moderate person with the best of intentions and motives that serve all of America, not just the Muslim demographic.

Based upon the comments after this unprovable one I question the truth of it as well. I would venture to say that she is just practicing taqiyya that you are.

As my God said "For you are the children of your father the Devil, and you love to do the evil things he does. He was a murderer from the beginning and has always hated the truth. There is no truth in him. When he lies, it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies."

يوحنا 8:44
انت لاطفال اباك الشيطان ، وتحب ان تفعل ما يفعله أمور الشر. وقال انه قاتل منذ البداية ودائما يكره الحقيقة. وليس هناك في الحقيقة له. عندما تقع ، وهو يتسق مع شخصيته ؛ لأنه هو الكذاب والأب من الاكاذي

Posted by: Im.mad.as.HELL! at August 25, 2008 11:30 PM

For a couple suggestions as to what one might "do" instead of just sitting at our keyboards.

Pass out the voter guide found at http://www.truthformuslims.com/guide/2008guide.pdf

Financially support Rep. Myrick and the other Congressional representatives on the Anti-terrorism caucus that she helped found. There are something like 67 members of the caucus though I can't seem to find a list of all the members anywhere.

See her recommended reading list at

http://www.suemyrick.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6139

Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at August 25, 2008 11:41 PM

eve_anne_gelical - Thanks! The Voter Leadership Guide is exactly what needs to be distributed in communities throughout the nation for use in town hall meetings and other venues where citizens are given the opportunity to question candidates. It will help smoke out those who, by their continued willful ignorance of Islam, are not fit to serve in an office where they must swear an oath to preserve and protect our political system against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The ten questions listed in the Guide should be posed over and over and over again, to every candidate, with no allowance provided for dodging the questions, and no acceptance given to smarmy or "politically correct" answers.

Posted by: Eastview at August 26, 2008 4:30 AM

She has the same facial expression as the most sadistic female SS camp guards exhibited anno 1940.
She looks good enough to induce vomiting

Posted by: hemoglobin at August 26, 2008 5:33 AM

eve_anne_gelical,

Thanks much for that guide!

Posted by: PRCS at August 26, 2008 7:31 AM

Democrat & faith: are they oxymorons?

Speaking of oxymorons, about a year ago, there was a scandal about an Episcopal priest(ess), Ann Holmes Redding, in Washington state who decided to be a moslem on Fridays and a Christian on Sundays. I am not kidding! Is that looney or what? And the local bishop thought it was really keen--even loonier (or is it more looney). The bishop who had actual authority over her, fortunately, told her she could not perform any clerical duties for a year so she could decide which way to go. I can't help but wonder--as with Ingrid Mattson--if she lived under sharia law, in some islamic hellhole, would she be singing a different tune? Probably not "Amazing Grace" or anything close. Hmm!

Posted by: MadAggie at August 26, 2008 8:51 AM

Matamoros,

It is unfortunate that you have chosen to pull out of context my comments and present them as such here as you have.

The comment on the article you pointed out, the article in the Washington Post, I made in respect to pointing out the obvious obfuscation in the article that was written to lead the reader into assuming that the victim was being punished for being raped. You have pulled out of context my comments and made them seem to say something altogether different than their intent, and painted it to support your opinion.

The purpose of that Washington Post article was to make it seem as though the victim were being punished by the “wicked” Saudis for being a victim of rape…the article sought only to demonize them as much as possible…I pointed this out. It was a matter of two separate crimes being committed, a violation of the law of that land, and she was very unfortunate in that situation.

A secondary crime, under the law of that land, was discovered once the details of the case were brought to court. It is the law there and citizens are aware of it, much the same as people here are aware of our laws, yet on our books we note that ignorance of the law is no excuse and violation will be prosecuted regardless, and I believe it is the same for the laws of Saudi Arabia.

The laws of that land contain many deterrents, which I pointed out, and the punishments are are seldom carried out as they do in fact deter the commission of those crimes.

If I am pulled over here in America for speeding, my obvious crime is that, yet if the officer determines I am not wearing a seatbelt after pulling me over, is he remiss in writing me up for that as well? And if he further discovers that the former owner of the car I just bought happened to leave a controlled substance in the trunk, then the state prosecutes me for it, the state takes my home, the state seizes all of my assets, all based upon the premise that I gained all these assets from the sale of that controlled substance that by the way wasn’t mine, but I was pulled over in “possession” of it…is that justice? No. But that it the law of this land.

In this hypothetical situation, this being America and we having the right here to defend ourselves in court, I would most surely fight tooth and nail to see that situation corrected, and the seizure of property and assets restored and my name cleared. But it wouldn’t matter would it? The damage would already have been inflicted to me for that associated charge of “possession of a controlled substance with the intent to distribute”. To half the populace who would read the news article would only believe in the negative spin the article painted, and never believe I were truly innocent. But that again is the law of this land, regardless of my opinion, regardless of what anyone else thinks, the charges would be made and I would have to fight that in court which is a right I have, and that right is also afforded to the unfortunate person in the Washington Post Article.

You think I am an extremist? Whatever, it is a free country.

I abide by the law of this land, and if that makes me “Extremist” then fine, state it all you want. “Extreme” in being a good citizen, count me in. “Extreme” in insisting on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, count me in. And since I was disabled in the service of this country, I guess that also make me “Extreme” in the sacrifices I have made for this country, count me in.

Any media personality shilling to cast about labels will usually do so with sound bite logic…taking a little snippet here, a little clip there….only those pieces that can be pasted together to support their warped views and then presented to the audience, who here are only too eager to believe it. The samples and examples they take out of context are destroyed by the reality of the whole.

Life isn’t a trial where the judge is allowed to discount all evidence except that which they want the prosecutor to use in order to focus the jury’s opinion on the predetermined outcome they want…life is a much bigger venue, and there is no tampering with the evidence herein.

I am a supporter and defender of the Constitution of the United States, yes, as you have pointed out, only you seem to forget that our Constitution does not cover the entire planet in its scope. Sovereign nations have their own laws and citizens must abide by them.

And by the way, Ghasan Elashi is not serving time for “helping to fund Hamas”. You have just lied. He was convicted for customs violations in that he shipped computers to Lybia that were legal to be sold and shipped there, only he marked “printers” on the customs label, and thus forged an official document, and not “computers” as he should have. The computers he shipped were legally able to be sold to Lybia.

But then again, this is your projection bias, you steer everything you say and do to support the agenda of demonizing Muslims.

Be glad to entertain any question you have.

Peace

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at August 26, 2008 11:04 AM

Abdullah Mikail,

You haven't addressed any of the questions posed to you by Concerned Citizen or darcy about Mattson, her comments, your relationship to her, and your feelings on America v. Sharia.

Furthermore, if you call JW a "dirty lens" simply because it quotes her, please point out some "moderate", "peaceful" and "pluralistic" quotes, or ones where she condemns the Muslim Brotherhood.

I'd be glad to hear your answers, especially after your defense of Mattson, with no evidence whatsoever.

Posted by: Mo Foe at August 26, 2008 12:29 PM

“Extreme” in insisting on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, count me in.

Abdullah complains he was quoted out of context, in "snippets". Here is his entire comment on the WashingtonPost/Newsweek article:

As salaamu alaikum wa rahmat allahu wa barakatu,

On the subject of Sharia law and prescribed punishments, nothing is brutal about the deterrent[Shari'ah] when compared to the ultimate punishment for committing the crime despite the deterrent with no regret or remorse - in arrogance, and what follows that is the punishment from God. The punishment in this life is easier by far.

The obfuscation of the young woman’s case is a deplorable twist of the media taking focus away from what she was guilty of and making it seem as though she were being punished for being raped. No, that is not the case. She is being punished for violating the law [Shari'ah] which came to light when her case was revealed. [S]he was given a lighter sentence for having been within the private company of a non family member male [Shari'ah], then despite her guilt she fought the courts judgment and lost again and was handed a more severe punishment. The other crime she is not being penalized for as it is her attackers that were tried and convicted for that.

Hirsi Ali and her ilk are only here to cause division and confusion among Muslims who are not well founded in their faith. When one understands the truth about Islam and what it dictates in the form of human behavior one realizes that despite what happened to Hirsi Ali in her youth it had no basis or foundation in Islam at all and is only a brutal tribal custom of the ignorant Africans she lived among. [Are modern Egyptians "brutal tribal Africans?] Her entire entry into the literary world is based upon the false premise that she suffered “because” of Islam…no, she didn’t…she suffered because of ignorance.

There are many among [WAKE UP, THIS IS IMPORTANT] OUR [emphasis added] Muslim populations that give lip service to their faith, “Oh, yeah, I’m a Muslim.” But then they neither obey what they are ordered by God to do nor avoid what He has ordered them to avoid. Often these who give lip service only are the useful pawns of people like Hirsi Ali and others of her ilk, pointing to things that are not from Islam and smearing and obfuscating then throwing that negative pall over all of the Muslims. Then the “moderates” rise to give a hue and cry and basically get behind them in their efforts to smear Islam, unwittingly. If they would educate themselves and enforce the Quran and Sunnah upon themselves [Shari'ah, taqlid] they would easily identify what the problem is.

The problem is Ignorance of Islam by non Muslims and Muslims themselves. [Agreed on that one!]

Surat Al Nisa 4: 136

“Oh, you who believe! Believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book which He has revealed to His Messenger and the Book which He revealed before; and whoever disbelieves in Allah and His angels and His messengers and the last day, he indeed strays off into a remote error.“ [Baddala deenahu, faqtuluhu -- if anyone changes his religion, kill him (cf. Bukhari vol. 9, bk. 84, no. 57)]

Surat Al Tauba 9:119

“Oh! you who believe be careful of (your duty to) Allah and be with the true ones.”

Understand what the truth is and have proper knowledge BEFORE one speaks for or against a subject…understand the illa, the issue, that is at hand…because 99% of the time what the detractors and enemies of Islam forward as they scream injustice is not a result “of” Islam, but the negative outcome for disobeying the dictates of Islam[ed.- like not beating your wife for disobedience].

Know your enemy because he, Iblis, Saytan, the Devil, knows you, the human being. He will pick out your weakness and exploit it…so do not refer to any negative human quality as “Muslim (insert whatever)-Ism” [Remember: wartime rape and slavery are not to be called negative human qualities] this in itself has become the hue and cry of the Saytan and their helpers even among the “moderate” Muslims.

Knowledge must precede action, and not the other way around.

There is no need to “defend” our faith against false accusations by those like Hirsi Ali…we who understand and have knowledge, Insha Allah, understand that her issue is with human beings disobeying Allah Sobhannah W’TAllah. Her issue is not with the Mummin, the true believers, because we study, and we learn, and we gain knowledge, and then we act on the order of Allah Who has forbidden oppression [against Muslims, not kafir, of course] to the extent that He has even forbidden opression by Himself on any of his creation.[Bullshit alert! That ayeh must be on the al-nasikh wa al-mansukh list: Reference please.]

Peace [?]
Abdullah Mikail

All comments in brackets are editorial, and are mine alone (Concerned Citizen). Minor spelling, punctuation, and case corrections performed which do not change the content or context. All emphasis (e.g. bolding, italics, anchor font) was added.

Abdullah, it appears that you define yourself by your statements as a Shari'ah advocate. A real American sees the fight for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" to be self-evident, inalienable human rights to be afforded to all of humanity, and the absence of same to be injustice. You would not appear by that definition a true American, but merely a squatter here.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 26, 2008 1:54 PM

Answering Concerned Citizen, at the request of Moe Foe

[BTW: I like that handle, first name "Bad?" :) ]

First of all, your second sentence is an obvious insult, and an equivalence statement that is both negative associative and incorrect entirely, so past that presumption you have made what makes you feel your inquiry is even worthy of a response?

An interesting negative spin you try to put on something noble. The Prophet commanded Muslims not to be discriminatory in following qualified leadership. He ordered them not to make negative distinctions and refuse to follow leadership just because of physical differences and personal prejudices one may have.

You refer to a hadith that discusses following the leadership of the Caliphate of the Islamic State “even if he is an ‘Ethiopian with a head like a raisin”. It was a physical description of Ethiopians common among Arabs perhaps communicating a common prejudice, and a caution and warning that no matter what you feel about the qualified leader you must follow him. We have a very similar common prejudice in this country today, and EOE initiatives similar to this order.

This makes me wonder what your reaction would be to a possible Obama presidency?

I am Conservative, and I will vote for McCain, yet if Obama is elected I won’t base my opinion on his race, primarily because I am not a prejudicial person, but in secondary I have reinforcement from this hadith not to base decisions on personal prejudices. My opinion will be based upon his qualifications.

I wonder what your true private thoughts are on that subject?

Do you really think you have the high moral ground in bringing slavery up?

Historical incidences are often brought up in a negative way in an attempt to frame current demographics in a negative light by that association, so I remind you, Thomas Jefferson kept slaves, and among them he had a African paramour that produced children, and George Washington held slaves as well, and the practice was frequently engaged in by people of their day and age. Do you have respect for these men and all the great things they did for America?

Thoughts and attitudes may change among peoples when they become enlightened, and yet the progression of other people towards enlightened states is affected by orders based in their faith. The Islamic orders surrounding the taking and keeping of slaves is a mechanism that, when abided by, has all but eliminated slavery. Yet in America it took a Civil war and 620,000 dead for the US to give up Industrial slavery. Remember that moral high ground you thought you were on? Not so lofty are you?

There are many verses in the Quran that speak highly of Jews, Christians, and Muslims, (among many others) as well as those that speak in derision of Jews, Christians, and Muslims, (among many others) all based upon how these people responded to their respective Prophets.

There are some people that only want to hear the good about themselves and do not like to hear the negative mentioned. Have you ever read any verses of the Quran and focuses on how many negative statements were made about Muslims? I doubt it. I read those and learn from them, I don’t get upset because the verse has pointed out a negative trait that I myself have identified in myself. I correct my faults as best I can, I don’t whine about the fact that they are pointed out…it is to my benefit that this is such.

Many people come here and point out the minutiae of the evil among the Muslims, and it pains me to hear their negative association, as if they think that the evil arose from these criminals’ adherence to Islam, when in fact it is almost always a crime that the person has committed and then tries to use the faith as an excuse. Their ignorance and the ignorance of on lookers is a sad fact. I attempt to point out the rule of Islam and the violation, only to the anger of others. Once again, it is not my problem how people receive the truth, it is only my burden to tell it.

Thanks for asking,
Peace

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at August 26, 2008 2:16 PM

In other words, don't just talk. Take advantage of the fact that you're a citizen of a democracy and get involved in the political process.

Eastview

I've been out for a few days.

Here's what I plan to do. ...Today I was reading the weekly edition of the Washington Times. I couldn't have been more surprised. Get this! There were two featured articles on a "New Kind of Bomb" called the nuke EMP. The articles were written by very knowledgeable authorities. The articles explained very precisely that America WOULD be defeated by terrorists if one of these bombs were successfully detonated in our central USA atmosphere. It went on to say that only a fraction of citizens would live through this calamity. It further stated that we could not stop a cruise type missile of this type launched against us and Pakistan had such weapons. It went further to say that the federal government has done absolutely nothing to get prepared for this threat....

I am going to call on every mayor of every town in my vicinity and bring them up to date on this real threat of our continued existance. These mayors are part time and family people. I will give them copies of the articles and other information on the subject. I will offer to appear before their committee's and such. I will also have the great opportunity to explain how Islamic terrorists and Islam itself are the real threats. And that the federal government is doing nothing on this after all this time.

My reasoning is that if people really understand that their lives and the lives of their children & grandchildren are ACTUALLY being threatened by the lack of proper judgement in Washingon, that they will do at least two things. 1. Attempt to figure out what is needed for survival of this type attack. 2. Complain bloody murder to their Representatives and Senators and other well connected people.

The public is asleep about Islam. We need to wake them up on the basis of fear for their lives, which is very real. We must not be perceived as having racial hatred or anti-immigration tendencies.

Posted by: Spot on at August 26, 2008 2:17 PM

BTW: I like that handle, first name "Bad?" :)

I didn't write that, nor do I find it on this page, so your response makes no sense. Multitasking too much, perhaps?

This makes me wonder what your reaction would be to a possible Obama presidency?

I point out the inherent prejudices in Islamic "sacred" writings, and you try to paint me as the racist? How pathetic.

Do you really think you have the high moral ground in bringing slavery up?

Why, yes. My religion does not condone or command it. It taught how to suffer under it, and challenged owners to free their slaves. Your religion eternally institutionalizes and sacralizes it, including sex slaves.

Do you have respect for these men and all the great things they did for America?

Respect for the good, disdain for the bad. Crude tu quoque, Abdullah. How do you feel about Mohammad?

The Islamic orders surrounding the taking and keeping of slaves is a mechanism that, when abided by, has all but eliminated slavery.

Ironic that conversion decreased Mohammad's and the Caliphs' revenue stream. Which is why the jihad spread so far and so rapidly.

Remember that moral high ground you thought you were on?

Yes, very fond of it. Can't take the credit, though, got to give that to Jesus (not the same as Isa).

You quote history of which neither I nor my religion was party. You've deliberately avoided exploring your thoughts on the sacralized, continuing slavery in Islam, which is the topic. Islam is supposed to be the moral superior by your judgement, so stop looking to judge it by the standard of others. Quite disingenuous sophistry and circumlocution.

There are many verses in the Quran that speak highly of Jews, Christians, and Muslims, (among many others) as well as those that speak in derision of Jews, Christians, and Muslims, (among many others) all based upon how these people responded to their respective Prophets.

Nonsense, it was how they responded to your "prophet". Meccan vs. Medinan, no power vs. in power. It was all relative to Mohammad's circumstances and his reception. Do you think we are unaware of Qur'anic abrogation, al-nasikh wa mansukh? Taqiyya? Kitman?

I don’t whine about the fact that they are pointed out

I don't whine about legitimate faults being raised either. I complain about having a genocidal pogrom prescribed against me by a dead, illiterate, Bedouin false prophet for not lauding his pretensions and involutarily following his invented religion.

point out the minutiae of the evil among the Muslims

Is that how you see it? Minutia? My God!

they think that the evil arose from these criminals’ adherence to Islam, when in fact it is almost always a crime that the person has committed and then tries to use the faith as an excuse

Well, "almost always" would not be good enough to vindicate Islam, now, would it? Thanks for the admission.

So, what exactly is your relationship with Ms. Mattson?

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 26, 2008 2:55 PM

Abdullah,

Your droll, patronizing soliloquy sedated me to the point I nearly forgot you skipped some questions.

You are fond of the following:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Since, as an American, you accept and agree with the above, how does the Declaration passage color your perception of a) institutionalized Shari'ah enshrined in the legal code of Islamic countries, b) the potential for and appropriateness of Shari'ah implementation in the United States, and c) dualistic ethics in Islam (treatment of Muslim vs. "People of the Book" and other kafir)?

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 26, 2008 3:11 PM

Concerned Citizen,

I'll follow your style on this one:

BTW: I like that handle, first name "Bad?" :)

CC ( Concerned Citizen):I didn't write that, nor do I find it on this page, so your response makes no sense. Multitasking too much, perhaps?

AM: Sorry, I see you have trouble with abstract thought and making associations between simple concepts that are separated by more than a few words. [I am sure “Moe Foe” got it right away.]

This makes me wonder what your reaction would be to a possible Obama presidency?

CC:I point out the inherent prejudices in Islamic "sacred" writings, and you try to paint me as the racist? How pathetic.

AM: No implication was made. It was a simple question, and you “outed” yourself…a child could infer that from your response.

Do you really think you have the high moral ground in bringing slavery up?

CC: Why, yes. My religion does not condone or command it. It taught how to suffer under it, and challenged owners to free their slaves. Your religion eternally institutionalizes and sacralizes it, including sex slaves.

AM: Christianity (nor Jesus himself) does not forbid slavery or order it to be ended. Prove where the Jesus said it, since he is the fountainhead of your religious doctine.

Do you have respect for these men and all the great things they did for America?

CC: Respect for the good, disdain for the bad. Crude tu quoque, [ But effective at making the point…] Abdullah. How do you feel about Mohammad?

AM: What do you think?

The Islamic orders surrounding the taking and keeping of slaves is a mechanism that, when abided by, has all but eliminated slavery.

CC: Ironic that conversion decreased Mohammad's and the Caliphs' revenue stream. Which is why the jihad spread so far and so rapidly.

AM: Odd logical connection to make in respect to the topic. Stay on topic, don’t divert.
Remember that moral high ground you thought you were on?

CC: Yes, very fond of it. Can't take the credit, though, got to give that to Jesus (not the same as Isa).

You quote history of which neither I nor my religion was party. You've deliberately avoided exploring your thoughts on the sacralized, continuing slavery in Islam, which is the topic.

Islam is supposed to be the moral superior by
your judgement, so stop looking to judge it by the standard of others. Quite disingenuous sophistry and circumlocution.

AM: Yes, you and your faith ARE beneficiary and party to industrialized slave trade in the Americas. Period.

There is no sacrilized continuing slavery in Islam, if you understand Islam.

Shafii Jurisprudence, Reliance of the Traveller, Nuah Ha Mim Keller, did not even translate the old laws legislating slavery into English as they are irrelevant now. Slavery is not allowed in Islam.

And if you note, you tried to take the high ground on the slavery issue, I merely corrected you.

I don’t make arguments for the sake of it. I speak because I know. You on the other hand, I doubt, have studied Islam enough to really know what it says about a subject. You, no doubt in my mind, only know how to take a “sound bite” from a translation of hadiths that has “shock value” and pretend it is similar to your “John 3;16” silver bullet that trumps the entire religion. Sorry, no such fortune…any subject takes a volume of research to understand. Not a sound bite.

There are many verses in the Quran that speak highly of Jews, Christians, and Muslims, (among many others) as well as those that speak in derision of Jews, Christians, and Muslims, (among many others) all based upon how these people responded to their respective Prophets.

CC: Nonsense, it was how they responded to your "prophet". Meccan vs. Medinan, no power vs. in power. It was all relative to Mohammad's circumstances and his reception. Do you think we are unaware of Qur'anic abrogation, al-nasikh wa mansukh? Taqiyya? Kitman?

AM: So you say the people of the Ad and the Thamud responded to our Prophet? So you say the Jews of Moses responded to our Prophet when they refused to follow the orders from God? So you say the people of Noah responded to our Prophet when they refused ands were destoyed for it? So you say the people of Jonah responded to out Prophet? So you say the people of Lot responded to our Prophet?

Funny, this is the same sophistry and circumlocution you whined about above.

It is clear to me that you do not know much about the Quran, but what you have learned from looking in from the outside and learning about it from those who do not understand it has clearly biased your thoughts about it.

I don’t whine about the fact that they are pointed out

CC: I don't whine about legitimate faults being raised either. I complain about having a genocidal pogrom prescribed against me by a dead, illiterate, Bedouin false prophet for not lauding his pretensions and involuntarily following his invented religion.

Am: So now the insults come? And you insult a messenger from God? We do not engage in this derision…it is a fault you will have to answer for all on your own.

point out the minutiae of the evil among the Muslims

CC: Is that how you see it? Minutia? My God!

AM: The percentage of Muslims that engage in violence and extremism has to be expressed as a scientific notation, the number is so very small. Yes, minutiae.

You are most likely towed around by the media ring securely fastened in your nose, and I doubt you deal with any number of true Muslims. You may know of or even know a few “moderate” Muslims who have totally abandoned Islam to shill for cash about how “bad” it is and sell copy. But I doubt you know a true Muslim.

they think that the evil arose from these criminals’ adherence to Islam, when in fact it is almost always a crime that the person has committed and then tries to use the faith as an excuse

CC: Well, "almost always" would not be good enough to vindicate Islam, now, would it? Thanks for the admission.

AM: A childish comment to make, but expected. Modesty in expressing opinions is prudent, because none of us can know everything. If a case is raised that I don’t know the answer to, I won’t answer, and thus, “almost always” is the disclaimer.

I am sure there are some things which are legal responses to external forces that are entirely within the rule of Islam…even if you don’t like it and think it is “criminal”.

There is no need to vindicate Islam.

I am educating the ignorant, but not much can be done about the willfully ignorant.

CC: So, what exactly is your relationship with Ms. Mattson?

AM: None of your business.

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at August 26, 2008 3:53 PM

I'll follow your style

You should follow my religion, as well; mine has a guarantee of expiation, yours doesn't.

Sorry, I see you have trouble with abstract thought

I was afraid to think it was a joke, since so poorly constructed. ESL? You're grammar (though not your punctuation) is relatively good?

It was a simple question, and you “outed” yourself…a child could infer that from your response.

No, I sidestepped the "trick" question. You know there is no correct answer to such. Had I said, "No, I like and have Blacks as friends and would be proud to have Alan Keyes as my President," you would have said, "So you differentiate yourself from blacks?" Fact of the matter is, you don't know if I have any African descendancy or not. On the other hand, if the question was, "Would you be proud for Obama (rather than Keyes) to be your President," the answer would be, frankly, no. Inexperience and ultimate power make strange bedfellows.

Christianity (nor Jesus himself) does not forbid slavery or order it to be ended.

Unlike Islam, Christianity does not profit from false obeisance. Read Philemon. Jesus also spoke through plenary inspiration through Paul.

CC: Abdullah. How do you feel about Mohammad?

AM: What do you think?

I think you applaud and excuse his every evil deed. You have to. You're a Muslim.

Odd logical connection to make in respect to the topic [slavery]. Stay on topic, don’t divert.

This from you? Puhleeze. The topic is Ms. Mattson, you, and your patriotism and fidelity to the foundational values of the Republic. The whole purpose of the dhimma was to generate revenue. Later caliphs forbid conversion of some groups to perpetuate it.

Yes, you and your faith ARE beneficiary and party to industrialized slave trade in the Americas. Period.

My faith? How so, do tell.

There is no sacralized continuing slavery in Islam, if you understand Islam.

Fraud alert. You missed the term "sacralized". It's in your Sunnah, don't tell me you haven't read it. I have some great sahih hadiths about coitus interruptus with female captives right in front of their husbands with Mo's approval if you want to go there.

did not even translate the old laws legislating slavery into English

Into English. That's very telling, isn't it? Is it in French? German?

as they are irrelevant now.

Kind of late in the cycle for ijtihad, isn't it? Let's be frank. These ancient tomes were edited for sensitive Western ears. Show me where the dominant Arabic versions have them removed. USC removed some foul hadiths from their website within the last week. It didn't make them go away.

you tried to take the high ground on the slavery issue

Still there, and waiting on the above.

You on the other hand, I doubt, have studied Islam enough to really know what it says about a subject.

I find fascinating the instinjaa techniques you use, but that really isn't relevant, is it? I don't have to know everything about Islam, only how it says kafir are to be treated.

“sound bite”

Fortunately, the sahih ahadith repeat the same statements over and over with variant isnads, so "sound bite" is not really an appropriate appelation for "quotation in context of the Sira".

So you say the people of the Ad and the Thamud responded to our Prophet? So you say the Jews of Moses responded to our Prophet when they refused to follow the orders from God? So you say the people of Noah responded to our Prophet when they refused ands were destoyed for it? So you say the people of Jonah responded to out Prophet? So you say the people of Lot responded to our Prophet?

They were followers (or not) of YWVH, not Allah. There is no archaeology supporting any deviance of Islamic texts from the JudaeoChristian narratives. Mohammad couldn't get his stories straight, then became murderous down when corrected. He is not a part of those traditions.

that you do not know much about the Quran

Because I won't accept your taqiyya, your pretending the hijrah never occurred, and all Medinan verses are trumped by Makkan rather than the other way around?

And you insult a messenger from God? We do not engage in this derision…

I wasn't expecting you to insult Mohammad. I will do that for you, as needed to correct your portrayal of him as something noble or benign.

The percentage of Muslims that engage in violence and extremism has to be expressed as a scientific notation, the number is so very small. Yes, minutiae.

Well, then, let's look at it the other way. What percentage of terrorist attacks are perpetrated by Muslims? 99%? Is that high enough for you? Have you read the percentages of Muslim students in UK who condone murder for the sake of religion? It's pretty high. How about the supporters of Al Qaeda in Pakistan?

You are most likely towed around by the media

What planet are you living on? They hardly report anything negative about the great "Religion of Peace".

But I doubt you know a true Muslim.

More than you would think.

CC: Well, "almost always" would not be good enough to vindicate Islam, now, would it? Thanks for the admission.

AM: A childish comment to make, but expected. Modesty in expressing opinions is prudent, because none of us can know everything. If a case is raised that I don’t know the answer to, I won’t answer, and thus, “almost always” is the disclaimer.

Hardly a "childish" observation about the immutable and infallible. There are better ways of expressing your ignorance as a disclaimer.

I am sure there are some things which are legal responses to external forces that are entirely within the rule of Islam…even if you don’t like it and think it is “criminal”.

Yes, and I don't like it. I abhore it. It confirms Islam as a false religion to me. As it should.

There is no need to vindicate Islam.

In your mind, only.

CC: So, what exactly is your relationship with Ms. Mattson?

AM: None of your business.

My, you were so proud before

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 26, 2008 4:45 PM

Abdullah Mikail:

"And by the way, Ghasan Elashi is not serving time for “helping to fund Hamas”. You have just lied. He was convicted for customs violations in that he shipped computers to Lybia that were legal to be sold and shipped there, only he marked “printers” on the customs label, and thus forged an official document… this is your projection bias, you steer everything you say and do to support the agenda of demonizing Muslims."

Err, you are the one doing the lying. You appear to have overlooked a conviction or two.

In July 2004, Ghassan Elashi [ founder board member of the Texas branch of CAIR ] along with his four brothers, was found guilty of conspiracy to falsify export documents and of exporting technology to countries designated as state sponsors of terrorism - Libya and Syria.

In a second trial, in April 2005, [which you appear to have conveniently forgotten] Ghassan and two of his brothers were also convicted of conducting business with, and laundering money for, their absent co-defendant Mousa Abu Marzook, leader of Hamas. Can you explain how investing money for Hamas’s self-admitted leader is not helping to fund Hamas?

Of course, I can understand your reluctance. Ghassan Elashi was an influential figure at the Dallas Central Mosque, where your wife Nia was formerly chairperson of the Women’s Committee. Did you, like your fellow worshippers at the DCM (aka the Islamic Association of North Texas), help to raise funds for the Elashi brothers' defence?

"The purpose of that Washington Post article was to make it seem as though the victim were being punished by the “wicked” Saudis for being a victim of rape."

Wrong. The purpose of Eboo Patel’s article was to point out that there are a good many moderate Muslims out there who are appalled by certain aspects of their religion, but feel too cowed to condemn them. His article encouraged them to speak out. Clearly, you are not one of them.

You accuse me of using “snippets” to support my “warped view”. Yet that post wasn’t the only occasion when you’ve attacked so-called “moderate” Muslims, was it? You regularly snipe at them for failing to adhere to the true nature of Islam. Indeed, you admit that you have taken issue with CAIR for promoting “moderate” Muslim groups:

“I get sideways with them quite a bit on some of the information they relay to the public.. Mostly on the subject of pointing out "Moderate Islamic" groups that get press from CAIR, when beneath the surface these groups are only parasitic termites that seek the abandonment of Islam and espouse the hedonistic life style.”

You clearly disapprove of “moderate” Muslims who do not share your enthusiasm for Shariah law and punishing innocent women. You must appreciate the rich irony of a convert telling life-long Muslims that they do not understand their religion. But then as we have seen, converts are often the most fanatical of Islamists - Richard Reid, Jermaine Lindsay, Adam Gadahn and John Walker Lindh among them.

And since I was disabled in the service of this country, I guess that also make me “Extreme” in the sacrifices I have made for this country, count me in.

US Navy, wasn’t it? Although back in those pre-Islam days you were just plain old Mike Mackay, all-American boy. I wonder what your old buddies on the Woody Woo would think about you shilling for a terrorist enabler like Ghassan Elashi?

Matamoros (original one)

Posted by: Matamoros at August 26, 2008 7:38 PM

Matamoros,

I was not aware of the second conviction, and thanks for pointing it out.

I guess one needs to be sure in doing business that someone you are associated with has not been put on a list of an organization that was named as a “specially designated terrorist” entity…wasn’t that done at the special request of Israel? This kind of “business” thing may retroactively put certain government officials in the hot seat later on for supporting organizations that are now “specially designated terrorist” organizations. Time will tell.

I support justice and the rights afforded citizens under the constitution, which seems to be disregarded and trampled more and more in the zeal of special interest groups as they pursue special agendas…I see it as New Age McCarthyism, where they are taking advantage of public fear, real or imagined, and using it to forward their special interests. In the end the truth will come out.

If a police officer wears the uniform, the badge, and the gun, yet engages in criminal activity, is he a police officer, is he a “good moderate” police officer, or is he a criminal with a badge?

If it takes A, B, and C to say one belongs to Group #1, and a person claims to belong to Group #1, yet advocates not doing and publically does not do any of A, B, and C are they a member of group #1, are they a “moderate” member of Group #1, or are they simply not a member of Group #1, yet claiming that status for ulterior motives? Abandonment is not moderation, it is extremism.

When an individual of an organization mistakenly issues a report citing a “moderate” group, and a person who knows the minimum definition to belong in that group, not just wearing their uniforms, their badges, and their guns, but their actual performance of the job, when he investigates that “moderate” group and the research determines that they are in fact a “criminals with a badges” there is nothing wrong in pointing it out and getting “sideways” with the organization who mistakenly published the error.

And the whole HLF trial, I am sure in your rabid zeal to push your agenda you think all defendants are guilty until proven innocent simply because the charges serve your special interests, but unfortunately for you there was no crime, so there can be no conviction. The evidence is in, and without further jury tampering and/or illegal/un-ethical actions on the prosecution team the results should be a just outcome, and the acquittals that were being entered into the record last time, prior to the judicial impropriety and jury tampering, will be allowed to be fully read and realized this go around. Any rational person can look at the mountain of documents and see there is no case against these men. You think so? Then why isn’t the Red Cross also charged? They were working hand in hand with the HLF under the same license granted by Israel to give aid to those only designated to receive it by Israel.

Matomoros, you wrote, “You clearly disapprove of “moderate” Muslims who do not share your enthusiasm for Shariah law and punishing innocent women. You must appreciate the rich irony of a convert telling life-long Muslims that they do not understand their religion. But then as we have seen, converts are often the most fanatical of Islamists - Richard Reid, Jermaine Lindsay, Adam Gadahn and John Walker Lindh among them. “

You "clearly make" negative comments and insulting associations that are based only upon your opinion.

I only disapprove of people who advocate abandoning simple basic elements of Islam, the prayer, the fasting, the modest dress…etc. the simple basic mundane list goes on, and yet those people want to claim the title of “moderate”.

Without abiding by these simple basic things one can not claim to be a “moderate Muslim”…one can only claim to be abandoning Islam.

They should be honest about themselves.

Irony? I appreciate the simple fact of knowing the truth, and being secure in knowledge, being able to identify the poison of culture in what people claim is their “religion”, and having the freedom to point it out.

Peace

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at August 27, 2008 10:39 AM

I only disapprove of people who advocate abandoning simple basic elements of Islam, the prayer, the fasting, the modest dress…etc. the simple basic mundane list goes on, and yet those people want to claim the title of “moderate”.

You're clearly understating your own views, as your previous writings betrayed offense by the inapplication of the least letter of Shari'ah and comfort with its legitimacy as an institutionalized legal code, an ideological paradigm incompatible with the ideals enshrined in the founding documents of the United States and most "Western" cultures.

OR you disavow your previous views and writings, and are now only concerned about lexicographical purity and categorical 'minimum' standards of inclusivity for sake of semantics.

I will assume the latter. Welcome to the human race. Rather quick turnaround for you, too.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 27, 2008 11:58 AM

Abdullah Mikail wrote:

"Answering Concerned Citizen, at the request of Moe Foe

[BTW: I like that handle, first name "Bad?" :) ]"

I got what you meant; "Bad Mo Foe".

But I wonder if you really like my handle's meaning; I am against Muhammad-- because he was a savage homicidal warlord, who had all the men of an entire tribe beheaded.

He was a sex slave owner, had sex with a 9-year old and had critics assassinated. His "Allah" was also sure to back him up whenever he needed.

And, most relevantly, his followers today kill in his name, and want the world ruled under inhuman Islamic law.

I am forever against pretty much everything Muhammad stood and stands for.

But to bring this back on topic, way back when you wrote:

"I dare say not a single one of you has ever even spoken to Ingrid Mattson. I know her personally, and she is a very well educated moderate person with the best of intentions and motives that serve all of America, not just the Muslim demographic."

I asked you to back these up. Here at JW, there have been some pretty damning statements of hers brought up, and I wanted you to bring up some good ones. You have yet to do so, even saying your relationship is "none of [our] business."

Sorry, but you made it our business when you commented here.

Can you back up anything you've said about Mattson?

Posted by: Mo Foe at August 27, 2008 12:15 PM

Moe Foe (MF) wrote: But I wonder if you really like my handle's meaning; I am against Muhammad-- because he was a savage homicidal warlord, who had all the men of an entire tribe beheaded.

This I assume you refer to the sedition that occurred during the “Battle of the Trench”, the “entire tribe beheaded” being, I assume, the Bani Qurayza Jews. If I am not in error in assuming this is what you write of, I suggest you go and study the episode very well before bringing this up between we two so that you understand it. Then I would gladly enter a focused discussion on that issue alone between we two. Agreed?

You make blanket statements that are current political propaganda…one should not make pontifical statements…they lack validity.

I understand your opinion for what you stand for and against…there was never any illusion in me about that.

I don’t have to agree with someone to like their style… after all, there are many things to be learned by communicating, and when the communication is most terse and the subjects are volatile, it can be an thrilling experience to learn in that venue…learn about others in that medium, and even learn about myself…even the “flamers” it enspires are sometimes fun.

Being a student of truth and knowledge, it is good to be tested in a hostile environment; after all, what kind of person would one be if one lacks the courage of one’s convictions? Lacks the ability to stand for what one believes? Lacks the knowledge to prove one’s case and verify the foundation upon which one stands?

I love a challenge, and I love to tell the truth.

MF asked, “Can you back up anything you've said about Mattson?”

OT: What comments of Ms. Mattson do you take exception to?

My “backing up” of what I have said is exactly what I mentioned; I know her and understand her.

I am sure there are many comments that she made that can be taken out of context and presented in such a manner as to mean something very different than what she meant in saying them, o r to be used in selective outtakes to “imply” something different than their true context.

It happens to me all the time…take Concerned Citizen, for instance, with his op ed’s on my recent posts and those made elsewhere.

His is pretty sad example… trying to “show others” what I said, yet being unable to honestly convey it without peppering the document with his insertions, opinions, highlights, brackets, etc…. basically without infecting it with his projection bias…in light of the subject discussed, he has lost any relevance of the quote itself from its original meaning and context. Each little area he focuses on he manages to skew the meaning of it, to make it seem insidious.

Thanks for asking,

Peace

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at August 27, 2008 1:23 PM

Islam is so contextual. Is there another religion that portrays itself as so difficult to understand? Starting with an untranslatable language, it proceeds with a nonchronological, noncontextual narrative that must be deciphered with the "decoder ring" of the Sira and the Ahadith written over many decades after the "recitation". Then, any commentary provided by a devotee (scholar or average joe) about the same, no matter what length is quoted, is always out of context. ANY negative observation is likewise always sourcing materal out of context. It is truly amazing.

Fortunately, there is no degree in scholarship needed to understand the moral and ethical implications of an old man and his child bride enjoying a day watching 700+ men being decapitated, no matter what the "justification". It is sick. Add to it the portrayal of this being the "model of conduct" for all time and it only becomes sicker.

Please, everyone, enjoy Abdullah's uninfected Washington Post/Newsweek post below, sans commentary; draw your own conclusions:

As salaamu alaikum wa rahmat allahu wa barakatu,

On the subject of Sharia law and prescribed punishments, nothing is brutal about the deterrent when compared to the ultimate punishment for committing the crime despite the deterrent with no regret or remorse - in arrogance, and what follows that is the punishment from God. The punishment in this life is easier by far.

The obfuscation of the young woman’s case is a deplorable twist of the media taking focus away from what she was guilty of and making it seem as though she were being punished for being raped. No, that is not the case. She is being punished for violating the law which came to light when her case was revealed…she was given a lighter sentence for having been within the private company of a non fam