| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Nor does the fact that the "religious" and "classic" Muslim text in question promotes the genocide of Jews seem to matter much to these "outraged" Muslims. More on this story.
"Deleted site causes stir for Muslim organization: Provost Nikias takes down posted documents calling on Muslims to kill Jews," by Ashley Archibald for the Daily Trojan, September 5:
Provost C. L. Max Nikias has approved the deletion of part of a Muslim student group website that hosted religious documents urging Muslims to kill Jewish people. The material was removed from a collection of scriptures known as hadiths, historical sayings of the Prophet Muhammad not included in the Quran. The hadith in question, along with thousands of others, are hosted in their entirety on a USC server as part of the now defunct Muslim Student Association's website.Really, what sort of dhimmi does not consult his Islamic overlords? Not a good one obviously.Nikias first heard of the hadiths' phrasing when Rabbi Aron Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a Jewish human-rights organization, approached USC trustee Alan Casden with his concerns. Hier was troubled by five hadiths advocating Muslim violence against Jews to hasten the coming of the "final hour."
Nikias reviewed the site, and responded that "the passage cited is truly despicable. … We did some investigations and have ordered the passage to be removed."
Members of the Muslim Student Union, which is the dominant Muslim student organization on campus but which is not associated with the MSA [officially, anyway], declined to be interviewed, but in a statement, they called Nikias' actions "unprecedented and unconscionable" and said they amounted to unwarranted censorship. Nikias did not consult the group before he took down the hadith, they said.
"We are outraged at the censorship of a complete religious and classic text without consulting us or any religious authority first," the group said in the statement. "The 'compendium' is now incomplete. There are verses in many religious texts (be it the Torah or the New Testament) that when taken out of context can be taken as offensive."USC, as a place of higher education, has prided itself on academic freedom and freedom of speech, and their censorship on this issue is unprecedented and unconscionable. …The administration's actions have gone behind the backs of their students and we have been left in the dark."
David Horowitz, head of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, said that similar hadiths exist on Muslim Student Association websites across that country. This was one of the first times the "hadith of hate" was taken down due to his advocacy, he said.
"My staff goes through Muslim Student Association websites, and one of the things we're critical of is that they have statements to incite violence," Horowitz said. "For this particular hadith, this is the first time we've gotten a response from administration."
Horowitz called the MSA a radical group.
"The MSA pretends to be a religious organization but it is nothing of the kind," he said. "It's an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood."
[...]
Horowitz said the message of the hadiths overshadowed the context of how they were taken down.
"It may be part of the religious canon, but that doesn't make them less hateful," he said.
Posted by Raymond at September 6, 2008 5:30 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Seems like the perfect opportunity to press the MSA to explain just what those deleted hadiths "really" mean. What does it means for Muhammad to have said these things? Just historical points long forgotten -- that now Jews and Muslims are meant to live as equals? Or words that live forever given that Muhammad is seen as the perfect example of human behavior for all time?
Maybe for once the these folks will provide the "context" that is always somehow "left out" whenever a non-Muslim talks about these same hadith.
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 6, 2008 6:12 PM
There are verses in many religious texts (be it the Torah or the New Testament) that when taken out of context can be taken as offensive...
But these verses are offensive when taken IN context. And we really don't have to worry about offending any Amalkites with talk about killing them all. Now do we? Keep it up disingenuous fools.
nabi ZK (pbum)
Posted by: zonie kafir at September 6, 2008 6:13 PM
The nabi remembers exactly where he was when he first heard this hadith. I, nabified, wise, peace be upon me and all my homies, was sitting on a flight next to a young medical student from Patterson NJ. It was about a year after 9/11 and he was telling me about the hadith and his emnity for the Jews. He blithered on and on about "OUR noble quran". He also stated that "WE" are going to use "OUR OIL WEAPON" against the America to force it to abandon Israel. The nabi remembers thinking "What do you mean "WE are going to use the "OIL WEAPON" against America" you idiot? Have your forgotten that you are a native born American and will be on the receiving end also? It was clear that by WE he meant the mohametans. In retrospect it seems that he had no loyalty at all to the USA and wished evil upon his fellow Americans. Spit.
nabi ZK (pbum)
Posted by: zonie kafir at September 6, 2008 6:27 PM
They are outraged? I am outraged that in this day and age anyone could hold such ignorant hateful views and not be deeply ashamed at their own lack of humanity.
Posted by: stickman at September 6, 2008 6:28 PM
It was clear that he believed that the hadith was a foretelling of an inescapable future magically revealed to his hero mohamet. What a rube. What an idiot. No wonder he was attending medical school in the Caribbean.
nabi ZK (pbum)
Posted by: zonie kafir at September 6, 2008 6:32 PM
German professor of Islam: “the task of a university is to conduct independent, open- ended research”– Muslims say “no can do”
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at September 6, 2008 6:41 PM
I say "Shame on the Provost!" for having these postings taken down. The answer to offensive speech is more speech. Leave the postings up and let the negative publicity teach people about Islam.
Posted by: jewdog at September 6, 2008 6:45 PM
With great respect to my fellow poster Jewdog...
I have a different view -- the fact that these hateful teachings have been referred to as 'despicable' by the Provost (hope they cover his back) and removed, draws attention to them. The more controversy, the better. This stirs up the energy around Islam and its teachings
Posted by: jewcat at September 6, 2008 6:56 PM
Okay Jewcat - it's a fine point. But we do have free speech in America. And that includes despicable speech.
Posted by: jewdog at September 6, 2008 7:08 PM
I could be wrong, but don't college publications (and others for that matter) reserve the right to edit, especially if the material contains hate speech, inducements to violence, or threats of genocide?
Posted by: charlie at September 6, 2008 7:20 PM
The idea that historical texts should be edited to remove the offending text is absurd. By doing this one is whitewashing Islam. We wouldn't edit Mein Kampf.
Posted by: Jerry M at September 6, 2008 7:31 PM
"We wouldn't edit Mein Kampf."
DAMN RIGHT!
It shouldn't be taken down. It should be given tremendous audience so that the world can see just what kind of "religion of peace" they're harboring!
Posted by: Callidus at September 6, 2008 7:33 PM
Just what was the purpose of posting this particular "religious text" in its entirety in the first place? So that it could be studied, or so that it could be emmulated and admired by groups of student islamic fascist murderers and wannabes?
Posted by: charlie at September 6, 2008 7:41 PM
If a court ruling on the matter of denial of recognition of the group that promotes violence contains the full text of the violent passages would we ban such court opinion from publication or reposting on the university web site?
Perhaps context does matter?
Posted by: ronled at September 6, 2008 9:01 PM
>>USC Muslim students: "We are outraged..."
Any chance you can go to school in your own Mohammedan countries, and take your "outrage" with you?
Any chance at all?
Posted by: darcy at September 6, 2008 9:16 PM
Multicultural Dogma suppresses the Passages as hate Speech(finally,) while the Offended demand the Genocidal content be accepted. All the while the one swears that it really doesn't mean what it says and the other cannot swear to it fast enough.
It is getting very expensive to learn this convoluted way of thinking.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at September 6, 2008 9:39 PM
The US Army also has deemed the MSU a hate group. Why not universities?
http://bravenewsworld.blogspot.com/2008/06/us-army-calls-muslim-students.html
at September 6, 2008 10:12 PM
BTW-- The MSU and the MSA are the same organization, just with a different name depending on campus.
Posted by: Max Publius at September 6, 2008 10:14 PM
Are they not always outraged. Where ever you see them they are rioting because of the truth about Islam and Mohammad is stated. But hear the silence when Jihadis kill Non-Muslim children, women and men. The silence is deafening. It makes me sick these cowards and their cowardly acts of violence and lies.
Posted by: savsiv at September 6, 2008 10:17 PM
There is something to be said both for censoring this, and for leaving it standing. The poster above who suggests that removing it, and then waiting for the inevitable fury from Muslim groups -- they've fallen right into the trap -- is the best outcome. By itself it was not attracting attention. But taken down and then having the protest ensue -- now that's the way to bring attention not only to this Hadith, but to others, and not only to these Hadith, but to passages in the Qur'an, and important events in the life of Muhammad. I certainly hope that someone "stands up for Muslims" by writing a letter to the alumni magazine saying that this is simply not fair, and that next we'll be seeing editions of the Qur'an without 9.29 and 9.5 -- carefully quoted -- and indeed, without Sura 9, and then without a hundred other Jihad verses, and many Hadith (list three or four), and then what about the Banu Qurayza, and little Aisha, and Abu Akaf, and Asma bint Marwan, and the attack on the Khaybar Oasis -- "we may not necessarily all like these events in the life of Muhammad but we must understand that Muslims regard him as the Perfect Man and it is not up to us to censor the long-established facts that are so essential to their faith."
Sincerely yours,
YOUR NAME HERE
Go to it. Go to it everywhere.
Posted by: Hugh at September 6, 2008 10:18 PM
The text was complete by any stretch
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 163(a):
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
That the Prophet said, "My livelihood is under the shade of my spear (from war booty), and he who disobeys my orders will be humiliated by paying the Jizya.
at September 6, 2008 10:35 PM
Yet I haven't seen banners stating that muslims must be beheaded for insulting christianity or pacifists must be slaughtered because they have insulted anyone else. These banners are always worn by rioting muslims. Always. Coincidence?
Posted by: Robin_Shadowes at September 6, 2008 11:24 PM
>>USC Muslim students: "We are outraged..."
Any chance you can go to school in your own Mohammedan countries, and take your "outrage" with you? Any chance at all?
There are quite a few universities popping up all across the Middle East. A periodic check of the Chronicles of Higher Education employment site can enable an observer to add to the growing list. If a Muslim student of any nationality is uncomfortable with the values of the West, he is free to get his education in an atmosphere he would find more congenial.
at September 6, 2008 11:38 PM
USC Muslim students: "We are outraged
big deal muslims are allways outraged
at September 7, 2008 12:39 AM
I'm trying to find an email address for Provost Nikias in order to email him and congratulate him for bringing attention to the 'truly despicable'
teachings of the disputed hadith. Anyone know this?
at September 7, 2008 12:44 AM
I must concur with Jewdog: "Leave the postings up and let the negative publicity teach people about Islam."
Next thing you know, they'll be removing all the hadith about Mo owning slaves, approving the hideous murder of the pregnant woman and the elderly man who criticized him, etc.
Posted by: kaffirchick at September 7, 2008 12:52 AM
The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.
Is this from the Quran? Is this from hadeeth?
You guys can play games all you want and make these claims that the Muslims are the ones who teach about slaughtering jews etc...
Don't jews believe the their Messiah will come and only jews will exist? If jews only exist what happens to non jews?
Dont Christians believe the when their Messiah comes that they will only be the ones that are saved? Is this going to happen by happy peaceful means?
Stop being hypocritical....All the Talmuds and bibles have to be rejected as well.... God knows who is just and He knows those who play games.
Still wont stop the growth of Islam in OUR country
Posted by: Isa at September 7, 2008 1:13 AM
I am offended and have a concern of violent attack due to the fighting words contained in the Koran and its attachments, and, I am specifically targeted because of my religion. These are sufficient grounds for a hate speech violation under many hate crime laws.
Anyone game for coordinated nationwide filings?
Although my preference is for speech not be be banned, if this is the current playing field why should only one viewpoint have access to judicial redress under current laws?
I hope the MSU appeals to a court. Can't wait to see the legal briefs. They won't attack the Hate Crime Laws, their tool, (ACLU will file friends brief) but rather would be trying to justify the clause... 'its not hate because they deserve it' ' 'the killing is only justified in self-defense, and everybody knows we are under assault form those people' [no, no, the ACLU is not their tool, the Hate Crimes law is]
The important part is not to ban the speech, but to have it judicially recognized as Hate Speech. Talk about framing the argument; 'well, an impartial Judge has ruled that your "Holy Book" is Hate Speech.
Posted by: Sashland at September 7, 2008 1:22 AM
What a surprise that someone had to turn to the Book of Revelation, which many millions of Christians understand to be only a **symbolic** text, in order to find a description of people being slaughtered. The verse quoted is not quoting the words of Jesus, nor do does it describe any actions of Jesus.
Good luck trying to find examples in the Bible of Jesus beheading people, Jesus ordering his followers to kill people, Jesus approving the brutal murder of a pregnant woman, Jesus approving the murder of an elderly man, Jesus giving his followers permission to rape women, Jesus having sex with a nine-year-old, Jesus receiving "revelations" from God that he can have sex with pretty much any woman he wants....
Now that I think about it, the New Testament makes awfully boring reading compared to many of the hadith!
Posted by: kaffirchick at September 7, 2008 1:36 AM
Isa,
Someone once claimed that the following is "racist" in its evident disparagement of African racial features:
Bukhari Hadith 1:662
Narrated Anas:
The Prophet said, "Listen and
obey (your chief) even if an Ethiopian
whose head is like a raisin were made
your chief."
The words of the Prophet of Islam described as "racist"! Imagine that!
I was unable to debunk that claim of racism. Perhaps someone of your clearly superior intellect could? Please help. Thanks.
Posted by: del at September 7, 2008 1:54 AM
Isa,
If you possess any intelligence or discernment, you would know that that citation of yours from Revelation is purely metaphor; in any case, the overwhelming majority of professing Christians DO NOT believe in coercing others to believe in Jesus as the Christ, NOR do they believe in the ultimate physical destruction of non-Christian believers EVER! Now, then, what fate do you anticipate for non-Muslims, O so pious Muslim?
Posted by: John C at September 7, 2008 1:55 AM
It certainly is wrong to take those verses down. They should stay there, and be subject to criticism.
Posted by: FreeSpeech at September 7, 2008 3:56 AM
oh, you people are outraged at everything.enough with it!
Posted by: oppressiondetester at September 7, 2008 4:13 AM
Sadly the lie that "Christianity is just as bad" is more common than you might think. I think if one who believes that took a closer look at what the bible actually teaches (The new testament message of redemption) vs. the Koran there's a startling difference.
Posted by: Foolster41 at September 7, 2008 4:22 AM
I have to agree with the idea of not deleting them. It just serves to whitewash Islam, and make it harder for kuffar like us to show how despicable Islam can be to those who think of it as a "religion of peace".
Maybe, take them down, but put a big note on the website saying:
ATTENTION-THE FOLLOWING VERSES WERE REMOVED BECAUSE THEY TAUGHT MUSLIMS TO KILL JEWS.
That way, they could be removed, but still their existence acknowledged.
Seriously, though, it's good someone called them despicable, but censorship (imo) is never the solution.
Posted by: Mo Foe at September 7, 2008 4:26 AM
oh, you people are outraged at everything.enough with it!
Posted by: oppressiondetester at September 7, 2008 4:13 AM
There is so much for us infidels to be outraged
about pigslam how do we even begin to start it would take pages about how we are outraged about mohammed's pedophilia, raping, murdering, stealing, breaking oaths etc, on and on it's giving me a headache just thinkiing about it.
at September 7, 2008 6:16 AM
Muslims need to read the constitution of the United States.
The U.S. has freedom of religion, but it says, freedom of (and from) religion peaceably-Peace is without violence.
It does not say all religions...it says peaceful ones. Got it Muslims?
Posted by: herself at September 7, 2008 8:29 AM
Isa,
There is no Isa. There is Jesus, the Son of God. Your book is a fiction. Your beliefs are lies.
Oh, and only your book instructs the mass-murder of all "Unbelievers" until the whole world worships only your god - allah, a pagan moon deity that doesn't exist.
I pity you. You have a "holy" book which should be universally condemned as a hate crime, and you worship a pre-Islamic pagan moon deity your false prophet used only to get power as a prophet. You're so deluded and deceived.
Isa, there is no Isa. There is Jesus, the Son of God.
Posted by: darcy at September 7, 2008 8:56 AM
""We wouldn't edit Mein Kampf."
DAMN RIGHT!
It shouldn't be taken down. It should be given tremendous audience so that the world can see just what kind of "religion of peace" they're harboring!""
WRONG IMO.
We would not edit Mein Kampf, but we would remove quotations from Mein Kampf on a School web-page.
at September 7, 2008 9:05 AM
Why isn’t there outrage that the idiotic and or cowardly Provost is not demanding the MSA publicly REPUDIATE this particular hadith to maintain university support? Most posters here can’t seem to realize that getting the hadith removed is stupidly counterproductive; we should want people to see some of the psychopathic baggage that Islam brings to the West.
The important thing is to insist that the MSA repudiate this hadith (which I doubt it will) or lose funding and incur denunciation. We want denunciations, not censorship!
Robert Spencer et al should say as much.
at September 7, 2008 10:04 AM
FM,
Yes, I concur.
While the fact that a university provost has actually called the words of the profligate Muhammad "despicable" is a major step, removal of theses despicable passages is counter-productive; painting a more Christ-like image of Muhammad by those who are relying on the MSA-USC Hadith database for research.
In removing the offensive passages, the Provost's actions are counterproductive and akin to discovering a dangerous sink hole and then covering it up with a collection of branches & leaves in an effort to hide it's unsightliness from the public. Better to rope it off and place warning signs around the sink hole than to hide it. Or, just get a backhoe and fill the whole bloody dang thing in...
Cheers
Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at September 7, 2008 2:20 PM
We wouldn't edit Mein Kampf, but it has been banned in every EU nation as hate speech. I like the precedent this sets whereby Islamic texts are too evil to be tolerated. It's a huge victory for us reasonable, decent, thinking, moral, ethical, civiized, evolved outbred folks. And Hugh's right that it brings attention to the sickness of the texts and to the fact that the violent, genocidal verses are more important to Muslims as a group than they would ever admit outright, since they protested their removal.
Mein Kampf reads like Oliver Twist compared to the Koran and the Hadith. Hitler's logical fallacies were better concealed/contrived, his book was in a logical order, it made sense since everything was placed in somewhat of a context, when he repeats himself he at least rephrases his statements, he avoids making scientific statements which could serve to turn the entire text irrelevant should it be discovered that the earth were round or that women don't produce sperm and store it in their kidneys, and all of his historical references, though revisionist and framed in a sick way, at least had some basis in reality. Like, he had a concept of time and space and doesn't put everyone in all of history together on one continent and one place in time, like Mary, Moses, Abraham, Noah, Adam, Eve, etc. Furthermore, while Hitler hated Jews and called for their annihilation, he made no provisions obligating his 'believers' to kill Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Animists, Sikhs, Zoroastrians, Jains, feminists, apostates (although he had Stalinesque plans for them), atheists, dogs, gays, poets, artists, musicians, writers, or people who engage in romantic relationships independently of Sharia sex slavery. Hitler actually valued hard work, individual agency/responsibility, and education, whereas Islamic texts emphasize the importance of ignorance to the point of abject retardation, the importance of parasitism as a career, and the importance of being a reprehensible, grossly irresponsible person by having more children than one can provide a good life for. Hitler didn't hate women. Hitler didn't ever hate blacks and Turks like Perv Mo. Hitler didn't glamorize rape, pedophilia, incest, slavery, female genital mutilation, violence against women and children, etc., etc., etc. Hey, this Hitler guy makes a much better prophet than Perv Mo!
And honestly, and I am not saying this flippantly, Hitler treated the Jews at Auschwitz better than Muslims treat their own women. Remember that the only difference between 'permission to penetrate' (buku nikah) sex slavery (Islamic 'marriage') and regular sex slavery as far as women are concerned is that Muslim women can't already be married when they're enslaved, the captor has to pay a price and sign a contract with the original slaveowner (which, btw, forces the slave to sign on a line that she is a virgin or get killed by her famly), and he can't beat her about the head. That's an exhaustive list. I would rather be a prisoner at Auschwitz than be a Muslim woman. Jewish prisoners knew freedom before being shipped off to hell. Muslim women are born in and die in hell, never knowing anything approximating freedom, spending their entire lives as sex slaves to Muslim men, who are more evil, more sadistic, and have a much sicker conception of sex (and are so much uglier!) in my mind than any Auschwitz guards. Auschwitz prisoners lived with hope of liberation, escape, or at least imminent death. Muslim women never know anything approximating hope, as Islam has only steadily worsened their condition over the course of the last 1400 years in a Taliban-esque direction (i.e., Islamic progress). Auschwitz prisoners were penned-in with friends by their sadistic captors. Muslim women spend their lives in solitary confinement - interrupted only by abuse from one's mother and rape by one's captors - or with often unwanted children, by their sadistic captors, unles she should be so lucky to be in a polygamous marriage, in which case she has to live with her slaveowners' other slaves (who are usually her cousins anyway) and their children -- even better. Auschwitz prisoners were separated from their families, but were able to love and remember them fondly. Muslim women are invariably pimped away by their families at an always inappropriately young age, usually to someone distrubingly older and/or a relative, into a life of sex slavery under physical duress, and for a sum of money no less, just to further dehumanize them and reinforce the notion that they are objects/toys (the Nazis at least considered the Jews to be people); they endure 'religiously'-sanctioned rape at home, and get held down by their own mothers while some illiterate old skank with maybe 3 teeth in her head cuts out her genitals with a rusty razor, sans antiseptic or anaesthesia while all the women in th family sing a sick sadistic song about it how much they onjoy stelaing part of her life and subjecting her to unimaginable pain and a lifetime of psychological damage, which, btw, is way worse than being branded like Auschwitz prisoners. I'll take being separated from my wonderful Jewish family than living with any Muslim family for a week, tyvm. Auschwitz prisoners had their heads shaved and were forced to wear the Nazi prison uniform. Muslim women are forced to wear much uglier, much more oppressive, much more dehumanizing Dark-Age Nazi slave rags in order to deprive them of 100% of their dignity, humanity, and identity, and to reinforce the Islamic notion that women are filthy and should only leave their houses twice: on the day their families pimp them away, and when they die. Auschwitz prisoners endured sanctioned starvation and overwork daily, but in their hard work and sacrifice were able to maintain some semblance of dignity. Muslim women also endure sanctioned starvation should their male relatives want more than their share of food or should they be 'disobedient' toward their captors, or sanctioned forcefeeding to the point of skin-splitting obesity in Mauritania so that they can be pimped away at 7 and have babies at 10. Muslim women endure sanctioned rape and often disfiguring beatings daily, maintain zero dignity, having been reduced to parasitic sex slave baby factories, something lower than tapeworms on the food chain. Oh, and the Nazis, not being inbred to within 3 generations of living in zoos, were by and large pretty good-looking, well-dressed folks, bad teeth aside, and their ideology, while evil, as at least coherent, non-contradictory, fairly sensical, and so much less entitled.
I'll take Hitler over Mo any day of the week and I'm Jewish. Mo keeps killing my people every single day in mortar attacks on Israel, and keeps trying to steal our people's holy land for his unholy death-cult. And I'll buy into Mein Kampf long before I'll accept that the Koran and the Hadith should be on any free-world university server. They are too sick to be tolerated. That is not to say that they should be eradicated. They should always be around to remind people of how entire swathes of the world can so quickly descend into evil and darkness, to remind us of what evil really is should we ever forget. But I can't stand that my tuition and tax dollars fund an organization that even links to verses which obligate genocidal cult members to rape, enslave, and murder me for being a decent, respectable human being who respects other decent, respectful human beings.
Posted by: jdamn at September 7, 2008 2:52 PM
"We wouldn't edit Mein Kampf, but it has been banned in every EU nation as hate speech."
If Turkey gets in to the EU, Mein Kampf will be a best-seller in at least one EU nation.
at September 7, 2008 4:28 PM
jdamn: WOW!!!!
Posted by: jewcat at September 8, 2008 1:02 AM
ZK,
Do not worry, the Muslims know that using the OIL Weapon hurts Muslims more than it Hurts the West or the US. Using the oil bomb raises the price of food for most Muslims who cannot affor food as it is. What are they going to eat during Ramadan crude oil?
As for Muslims having no loyalty for their country of birth it is not new. Few awakened know this about muslim loyalty to Islam and not the country of citizenship by birth or naturalization. In time (50 years or more) most Americans will know this and hopefully it will not be too late. Most Americans are too slow to catch on this and we the awakened need to keep spreading the word.
Posted by: American at September 8, 2008 10:52 AM
I think it is a big mistake to force the MSA to take down these wicked, anti-Semitic hadiths. They should be left up there for all to see and to expose to the American public. Taking them down only helps the Moslem propagandists to pretend that Islam is benign. Islam needs to be exposed, not covered up!
Posted by: montedoro6 at September 8, 2008 7:00 PM
The MSU at IUB is celebrating September 11th this year.
Posted by: jdamn at September 9, 2008 7:24 AM
(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.)