Robert -

There is no fun in Islam.

Ayatollah Komeini

Posted by: tanstaafl at October 31, 2008 2:35 PM

If another person would reject this even though the evidence is clearly in favor of Islam, they are free to make this choice but would live in the society still receiving the benefits and services available, such as food, shelter, clothing, protection and charity.

Posted by: AnneCrockett at October 31, 2008 2:43 PM

"If another person would reject this even though the evidence is clearly in favor of Islam, they are free to make this choice but would live in the society still receiving the benefits and services available, such as food, shelter, clothing, protection and charity."

Maybe Yusuf Estes should ask the Iraqi Christians being persecuted and driven out of Mosul how that's been going for them. If he did it, he could take a step further and ask Buddhists and Hindus in Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia and Pakistan the same question.

But we know he'd never do it, since doing that would only prove how fallacious the BS he spews is.

Posted by: Proud_Kafir7908 at October 31, 2008 3:18 PM

Were the American government intelligent, it would organize groups prepared, at a moment's notice, to appear at such events as those of Yusuf Estes. In his case, the group should consist entirely of black people, ideally with some who grew up, as Muslims, in Islamic countries and have now left Islam, with still others who, like the many refugees from the southern Sudan (Francis Bok, the other "Lost Boys"), grew up as Christian black Africans subject to Arab discrination, persecution, and mass murdre, and with some who were lured into converting to Islam in this country and who, once in, gradually discovered what the whole thing was about. And these people should arrive, not singly or in twos or threes, but with five or ten people at a time, ready and able to speak intelligently about what Islam is all about, and especially about all the ways in which it is inimical to the interests of black people.

Several themes suggest themselves. One is the existence, long before and long after the European slave trade, of the Arab slave trade in black Africa, and the fact that it did not ever come to an end but continues to this day, in several countries where black slaves work for Arab masters. It should be pointed out that slavery is legitimzed by Qur'an and Sunnah, and that it was only the efforts of non-Muslims that forced Arab states to end -- where they did -- the practice of slavery.

Another theme would be how Islam, because of its inshallah-fatalism, promotes poverty. It should be pointed out how the support of Muslims and the Muslim state was, for a long time, found inthe Jizyah tax on non-Muslims, a tax that has its contemporary embodiment in the fantastic sums transferred to Muslim lands, either for oil and gas (which the Arabs and Muslims do not have to lift a finger to find or produce or transport), or because Infidel countries for some reason think that they, and not the rich Arabs and Muslims, should be paying for the upkeep of every Muslim state or polity that happens not have oil wealth to exploit.

Still another theme would be to point out how Islam encourages despotism, because the legitimacy of any government depends, in Islam, not on the will expressed by the people but by according to whether or not the ruler is a Muslim, and thus acting according to the will expressed by Allah in the Qur'an, and glossed by the Sunnah (Hadith and Sira).

And another theme would be the mistreatment of women, that cannot be blamed, as the Arabs attempt, on African "cultural practices" but rather, come out of the texts, tenets, attitudes, and atmospherics of Islam. Discussions of how a husband can beat his wife, of how a man can so easily divorce his wife, of the unequal treatment of male and female children in the disposition of property left by parents, and of so much else, including the many Hadith about the inferiority of women, can be ready, on a page, for easy quotation.

And the prohibition in Islam of all sculpture, and of all depictions of living humans, which is one of the main subjects of Western art, and the antipathy, in Islam, to most music (see how the Taliban and other fanatical groups kill singers, and bomb music shops), making clear that, for example, gospel music could never have come out of Islam, nor could jazz or any other form of music, would be something worth using, in sweetly undercutting a propagandist engaged in Dawa such as Yusuf Estes.

The discouragement of free and skeptical inquiry, which fits perfectly with the view of men as individually unimportant, as mere "slaves of Allah" (slavery being very important in Islam), can also be discussed at such a gathering.

Finally, all the ways in which Islam is and always has been a vehicle for Arab supremacism should be adduced, from the need to read the Qur'an ideally in classical Arabic, to the taking of an Arab name, to bowing toward Arabia five times a day, to assuming an Arab name, and so on -- this can be convincingly conveyed, and should be, with plenty of quoting of Anwar Shaikh, and other former Muslims.

This is a brief outline of what the government should be doing but is not. However, ministers can take it upon themselves to do this, and to obtain support for such efforts from other Christian denominations, or simply from those interested in halting these campaigns of Da'wa that are a permanent threat to our legal and political institutions. No doubt some institutions would be happy to help support counter-Da'wa efforts.

But it has to start with the understanding of what is going on, and why it is so threatening.

Posted by: Hugh at October 31, 2008 3:44 PM

You should have a similar brochure ready to go to rebut such brochures. However, I suppose that any brochure answering the lies might be characterized as "hate speech" and banned from the campus.

In fact, the recent "hate speech" exception to "free speech" has the potential to expand to include any communication that bucks the party line. If good people do nothing, you can expect that the inroads to free speech already so prevalent in Europe may be coming to a location near you very soon, making intelligent discussion of such sensitive matters impossible in a public forum.

Posted by: Karl2 at October 31, 2008 3:45 PM

Compare this deliberate recruiting of people without telling them the half of what they're getting into, with the normal procedure of Christians - let alone Jews.

The general procedure of Christians with inquirers who are 'of age' is to set out, very clearly, what they are getting into. We want people to know EVERYTHING before they make their decision. ( I know there have been times in Christian history when this has not been done...but if and when Christians didn't bother to fully instruct their recruits beforehand, they were NOT following the model set out in the Christian scriptures; and they always found that such superficial uninformed conversions of persons or groups led to all kinds of trouble).

The same procedure is followed with 'unchurched' or nominally Christian families who turn up wanting their baby baptised - I know my own parish church spends quite some time instructing such families and trying to disabuse them of any superstitious and superficial notions they may have about what 'christening' means, so that if they do go ahead they know what they're doing and what they're actually supposed to be teaching their kid as it grows up. (As the child reaches years of discretion, they can then choose whether to be Confirmed - that is, undergo a period of instruction and then publicly re-affirm that yes, they identify as a Christian - or...not).

As for Judaism: people can convert to it, often because they are marrying a Jewish person, but the process is - I am told - slow and difficult and involves a lot of study and instruction and warnings. The last thing Jews want is an ignorant and superficial convert! (After all, such a person is going to join what Mr Fitzgerald has called "the most persecuted tribe in human history").

Basically: with Christianity, and with Judaism, it is WYSIWYG - 'what you see is what you get'. The cards are all laid out on the table for the seeker to assess and examine. An intelligent and informed decision is sought.

By contrast, Islam in its proselytising seems to be deliberately aiming for an *uninformed* decision. Its 'sales technique' is highly suspect. It does not produce the impression that Islam's salespeople are very confident of the quality of their product, if they are so anxious that much of it should escape pre-sale inspection.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at October 31, 2008 4:02 PM

It would be good to share this Siddiqi's work with ordinary Americans. I'll do my part, sending the PDF along to friends & relatives. However, the link to the pdf doesn't seem to be working. Help!

Posted by: Vee at October 31, 2008 4:43 PM

Vee

Apologies. It works now.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at October 31, 2008 5:27 PM

Got it, Robert. Thanks much.

Posted by: Vee at October 31, 2008 6:23 PM

So in Islamic societies non-Moslems don't have to join the army, but pay a tax, jizya, instead? This is interesting, because they must see that non-Moslems would not be able to be trusted in the army, and might well become a liability.

But what about here? Do we want Moslems in our armies, especially considering the places we are going to to fight? I would be interested to learn a little about Moslems in our Western armies, their motivations and how they feel about fighting in Moslem countries.

Or do Moslems simply not join our armies? Are we importing people who are an economic cost to us but will be useless (or worse) in a crisis?

Posted by: PG at October 31, 2008 9:42 PM

[...] To conclude, Islam comes from Allah, the actual Creator and Sustainer of the universe.

Clever...Had I read that spiritual propaganda first, I would not have bothered with the rest of it...

Posted by: duh_swami at October 31, 2008 9:47 PM

Nowadays it has gotten even more insidious as they are marketing themselves as freedom of thought democrats. They do not even tell you about Muhammad in their dawa sessions. If they do they will tell you about the more Jesus-like Meccan version of the story and not about the warrior that massacred 700 Jews who simply did not want to live under his heel.

It is very sad that this deception is allowed, however that is why the arena of ideas must be allowed to remain open and these types of scams exposed for what they are.

Posted by: Axel Foley at October 31, 2008 10:50 PM

I've just had a skim throught "THe Methodology of Dawah" by Siddiqi and it's very transparent and revealing. Does your Homeland Security department know about this? Are they reading it? DO they care? If the Commies had written something like this, it would have been pounced on and utilised to demonstrate their treachery and desire to bring down the democratically elected government of the USA.

Posted by: jewcat at October 31, 2008 10:58 PM