| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald discusses the little-noted difficulties involved in integrating Muslim populations in Western countries:
On an NPR station I heard a very smooth-talking Muslim from Holland, like Hirsi Ali only in that she is, apparently, also a member of the Dutch Parliament, speak about how there is "fear on both sides" -- Dutch and Muslim -- and that Muslims who feel problems of "identity" embrace "Islamism" because, she said, they simply cannot go back to Turkey or Morocco (why not?) because they are now "Dutch."In what sense, exactly, are they Dutch? What is it about the Dutch laws, customs, manners, or history that they comprehend and fully identify with? Anything? Or is their "Dutchness" merely a matter of where they are, geographic happenstance -- and then also a matter of knowing Dutch, or possibly a bastardized form of it, which will not do as a definition of "Dutchness" that should satisfy any of the Dutch themselves, even if at one time it seemed to?
She did not explain this, this plausible sounding lady, who spoke excellent English and who no doubt would welcome the "integration" of other Muslims -- that is, their being well-versed in the local languages of whatever Infidel country they happen to have settled in, and well-versed enough in the way the locals think to better appeal to them, better conduct propaganda and apologetics, either to deflect any criticism of Islam and Muslims, or to actively conduct Da'wa among the Infidels.
And the height of absurdity was reached -- though apparently the interviewer, on a program called "The World," did not find it absurd – when the lady said that the poor Muslims were being asked to choose between their Dutch identity and their Muslim identity. This, she insisted, was like asking someone to choose between his mother and his father. But the analogy is false. In this case, Islam is not the loyal wedded spouse of Holland and the Dutch. Islam, rather, is an alien creed. To be sure, plenty of Believers in exotic creeds alien or new to the West have managed to fit in perfectly well, and be friendly neighbors and loyal citizens, even if they came from Vietnam or India or China. Only one group, only one belief-system, distinguishes itself by appearing incapable of fitting in. And that is Muslims, and Islam. For their belief-system does not envision a Holland, an Italy, an England, a France. Islam does not distinguish between the various components of one single unit, the Dar al-Harb, the regions of the world were Islam does not yet reign and Muslims do not yet dominate. The analogy, while it may have fooled some and won sympathy for local Muslims in Holland who are "forced to choose between their mother and their father," is ridiculous.Now there is a problem in France. Will government-funded monitored mosques, language teaching, and affirmative-action programs for Muslims (but not for all those non-troublemaking Vietnamese, and Chinese, and non-Muslim blacks from sub-Saharan Africa or the Caribbean, Hindus and Sikhs, since these people can integrate, and so there is no need to do special favors for them) solve the problem? It will not.
"Integration" will only lead to a loss of precious time. It will continue to hold out hope, when there is no hope for real integration. What is in the Qur'an, the Hadith, and the Sira, though it may not always be fully comprehended or distributed, remains, cannot be changed, and can always be appealed to by any Muslim who wishes. There is no way that those so-called, very slippery "moderate" Muslims can suggest that no, it is the "extremists" who are untrue to Islam. They aren't untrue. They are perfectly loyal Muslims, good and righteous followers of that exemplar Muhammad. No Muslim can contend otherwise, although of course that is what many Muslims are doing -- attempting to make Infidels believe that there is no problem, or that the problem can somehow be fixed. Yet they never tell us exactly how they are going to change those texts, those passages in the Qur'an, the Hadith, the Sira. And they cannot explain, and will not discuss, the real history of Muslim conquest and mistreatment of non-Muslims. For that matter, they will not explain, nor discuss, the treatment of Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Zoroastrians (yes, about 150,000 remain in Iran), and all other non-Muslims. Why won't they? Because they can't.
If integration can't work, except to benefit Muslims and keep the day of Infidel comprehension from arriving in time, and if non-integration can't work, what then?
At this point some will prefer -- since there is no solution that we find "thinkable" -- not to think about anything, and to go back to the previous state of denial. Just pretend that somehow things will work out. Pretend that Islam is not what it is. Pretend that the spicy lamb with cumin you were served at a Mosque Outreach Iftar is all ye know about Islam, and all ye need to know. Umm, the food. Umm, Muslims can be so nice, so soft-spoken, so hospitable. And that chicken with pita! No, there will have to be something a bit more substantive about the tenets of Islam. But if one really knew what Islam contained, as not all Muslims born or raised in the West may quite realize, then how could any decent person remain a Muslim? Hard to explain the hold of this belief-system on so many who cannot, out of some kind of diseased loyalty, insist on standing up for it. They needn't.
The solution is to stop all Muslim migration to the Lands of the Infidels, and wherever possible, to reverse it. This can be done by taking care to ruthlessly enforce the immigration laws when it comes to those who, by virtue of their beliefs, are not unreasonably deemed to constitute a group that supports, actively or passively, those who do not wish this or any Infidel country well, in its laws, customs, manners, understandings, and will work, are required as a duty to work, for the triumph of Islam --and hence for changing those laws, those customs, those manners, those understandings.
And along with it, in ways little and big, the country can be Islam-proofed the way a house is child-proofed. Instead of letting the Saudis buy land and build mosques, and paying for the upkeep and the staffing of those mosques, let them be monitored so that no foreign money, or any money judged tainted, can be used to pay for mosques or madrasas. Monitor what is said in khutbas. At the first sign of hate-preaching, do not merely be satisfied if a congregation removes the current imam. Close the mosque. Put everyone on notice that this kind of thing cannot go on. Nor can it be allowed in any of the textbooks used in madrasas. Close any madrasa that makes allusion to smiting the Unbelievers. Since the division between Believer and Infidel is so central to Islam, and since the Jihad is a virtual "sixth pillar" of Islam, it should not be hard to find ways to limit the spread or practice of Islam. And if in addition to whatever local, state and federal government officials do, private parties simply conduct their own boycott of goods and services offered by Muslims, in the same way that they would have refused to buy, in 1938, a German Voigtlander camera, or in 1953, to buy Baltic amber from the Soviet government's official trading-with-the-West ministry, Vneshtorg or something like it. Why should one buy an oriental rug, or dates, or curry powder, from people whose presence, in merely swelling Muslim ranks, will inevitably swell Muslim political power -- which, in turn, makes the lives of Infidels, in the end, more insecure?
If people born into Islam are at long last free to investigate fully what Islam is all about, and having done so, they still insist on remaining loyal to Islam, there is no reason for Infidels to support or indulge them on some specious theory that Islam cannot really teach what it teaches, and that adherents of Islam cannot possibly want what they are taught, according to Islam, to want: the spread of Islam, and the submission of all non-Muslims to, at best, the status assigned them in Islam of dhimmi.
Why should we tolerate this? On what theory? On what grounds?
Posted by Robert at November 3, 2005 7:36 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
"Why should we tolerate this? On what theory? On what grounds?"
Mainly because of our pathological need to see ourselves as modern, progressive and tolerant I'd say. Not to mention the billions invested in the pretense that Islam has something more to offer us than just terrorism, rioting, the death of free speech and artistic expression, homophobia, Jew-hatred, female genital mutilation, limb amputation, gang rape, stoning to death for victims of gang rape, hanging underage girls from cranes in public parks etc.
Posted by: Doctor Phibes![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 3, 2005 8:54 AM
".....who no doubt would welcome the "integration" of other Muslims -- that is, their being well-versed in the local languages of whatever Infidel country they happen to have settled in, and well-versed enough in the way the locals think to better appeal to them, better conduct propaganda and apologetics, either to deflect any criticism of Islam and Muslims, or to actively conduct Da'wa among the Infidels."
........Right.......(?!?!?!?)
____________________________________________________
"To be sure, plenty of Believers in exotic creeds alien or new to the West have managed to fit in perfectly well, and be friendly neighbors and loyal citizens, even if they came from Vietnam or India or China."
I have fitted in perfectly well, I am friendly and a loyal citizen. I also happen to be Muslim.
__________________________________________________
"For their belief-system does not envision a Holland, an Italy, an England, a France. Islam does not distinguish between the various components of one single unit, the Dar al-Harb, the regions of the world were Islam does not yet reign and Muslims do not yet dominate."
ha ha ha, what a load of rubbish. You expect any rational person to believe this rubbish?
__________________________________________________
""forced to choose between their mother and their father," is ridiculous."
How do you know?
You're whole article is based on your own prejudice, bigotry and frustration. You really don't like 'Brown' Muslims doing well in the UK or Europe do you?
Its interesting to note that the people here want immigration reversed. That means Muslim out, but hold on a second. That will mean Brown and Black Muslims out while White Muslims (White, British Born) will no doubt be able to stay. That is just pure racism and it’s disgusting.
__________________________________________________
Posted by: ia786 at November 3, 2005 9:03 AM
No ia, we want even the white muslims out, as well.
Posted by: Voltaire at November 3, 2005 9:15 AM
ia786,
____________________________________________________
"To be sure, plenty of Believers in exotic creeds alien or new to the West have managed to fit in perfectly well, and be friendly neighbors and loyal citizens, even if they came from Vietnam or India or China."
I have fitted in perfectly well, I am friendly and a loyal citizen. I also happen to be Muslim.
__________________________________________________
In which case why are you here, wouldn't it be better if you were out there dealing with those Muslims that want to kill us Infidels and try to reform Islam, if that is what you are then this would be the actions of a friendly, loyal citizen. But remember you talk as a moderate Muslim who rejects at this time certain verses, many do not.
Posted by: Daffersd at November 3, 2005 9:28 AM
"I have fitted in perfectly well, I am friendly and a loyal citizen. I also happen to be Muslim."
According to orthodox Islam, a good Muslim can't be loyal to an infidel government.
So, assuming you are not resorting to takiyya or kitman, don't disclose your kafir loyalties to the devout Muslims you know.
My advice: visit this webiste,
Ali Sina and his website can help you a good deal.
at November 3, 2005 9:59 AM
Hugh:
I'd hazard a guess that some of those "...Muslims who feel problems of 'identity' embrace 'Islamism' because, she said, they simply cannot go back to Turkey or Morocco (why not?) because they are now 'Dutch.'" are Dutch in the sense that they have tapped into the social welfare system sufficiently to subsudize their new-found religiousity.
Not exactly consistent with my understanding of "Dutch Treat" means.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at November 3, 2005 10:08 AM
... they simply cannot go back to Turkey or Morocco (why not?) because they are now "Dutch."
In what sense, exactly, are they Dutch?
The material sense. They are now Dutch in terms of the benefits that society bestows on them.
Posted by: Cynic at November 3, 2005 10:09 AM
geez..can't the monthly checks just be sent to General Delivery in Turkey or Morocco?
Posted by: KingTesticle at November 3, 2005 10:13 AM
"That will mean Brown and Black Muslims out while White Muslims (White, British Born) will no doubt be able to stay. That is just pure racism and it’s disgusting."
-- from a posting above
Here we have the usual nonsense about "racism" when all that is being discussed, all that is ever being discussed, are the beliefs of those who claim to believe fully in what the Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira offer them, inculcate in them, fashion their attitudes and world-view. Why is this illegitimate? Why are Infidels not supposed to examine what Muslims are taught to think of, and how to deal with, and what ultimately shall be the divine dispensation of, Infidels? Wouldn't you be interested, if you were an Infidel?
The business about skin color is absurd. In fact, perhaps the most sinister of Muslims, as a group, are not those who are simply born into it, who are largely non-white, and have not given it much or any thought, but rather the local converts from the Western Infidel population. For those who, nowadays, in the full light of current events, choose to convert to Islam are making a clear statement. They may never have read the Hadith, never studied the Qur'an, be foggy on the details of Muhammad's life (how many know about Aisha?). But they don't have to know. They "become" Muslim not by studyiing Islam, but by simply reciting a simple phrase. And in so doing, they are making nowadays a declaration. They are expressing as clearly as they can their own sense of alienation, and taking it out on the society that they think has done them wrong, or which somehow must be thrown over lock, stock, and barrel, not by patientlyt attempting political, economic, and social amelioration, but by embracing a static Total Regulation of Life that is hideously opposed not only to the rights of the individual, but also to the very idea of individualism, and that constantly emphasizes the Community, the Group, and that too appeals to the psychically marginal who find their salvation in the instant Community of Believers, with whom they share only this professed belief in something they need not even know about, but "believe" in, identify with, wish to further without knowing quite what it is they are furthering. These converts in the Western world may not be as easy to deal with as those who are non-natives, but both sets of the single menace can be discouraged, or inhibited, in their activities, in a thousand ways, both by governments and private parties willing to engage in economic and other forms of boycott.
But in order to do that, one first has to understand Islam, so that when someone declares he is a "loyal and friendly" fellow, one need not accept this self-description, but ask oneself how it is possible for a Believer to be loyal to Infidels and to a nation-state that reflects, and embodies, Infidel rather than Muslim ideas of what is right, how government obtains its legitimacy, what rights -- including freedom of conscience -- are regarded as the most important. It is not possible for a Believer to declare, and mean, he is "loyal" to that Infidel nation-state, its laws, its manners, its customs, its permanent understandings -- it is illogical, it makes no sense. It is an attempt to make A and not-A the same. Can't be done.
Posted by: Hugh at November 3, 2005 11:10 AM
OT
"Fitted in well....". Mmm. Really?
IA
What is the difference between being British and being English?
Mmm. Exposed yourself well & truly there.
How long have you lived here IA?
Such an inept question!
You posted:
"Another thing, how much do Brown and Black people make up of the total UK population. It is very low, I can tell you that. Your views are not rational."
What the hell has this to do with anything I have written?
As much as you would like me to be an intellectual omeaba that judges a person on their skin colour I am patently & clearly not that dude.
English people can be many different colours & races - its your attitude & loyalty to the Nation that is important.
An example of me:
Ever since the Ireland England game a few months back when they humiliated us, Ian Wrights reaction after the match was exactly my own. The day after that match I & several others started a mini campaign to the FA to have him considered as the next England manager.
Ian Wright or Sven?
Give me the Englishmans choice - Ian Wright, everytime, because he is ENGLISH! Because he understands the Nation & is absolutely part of the Nation of England.
Do you understand that, or are you going to dismiss me as a racist again?
Its too easy to call people racist / bigot / fascist just to shut them up, a little more difficult to understand what they are truly saying. Don't stifle the debate by using 1980's terminal terminology, engage.
Posted by: albion at November 2, 2005 12:43 PM
I don't really care what you think of me IA, but a retraction to your fascist / bigot / racist clap trap would be appreciated, as well as you actually engaging in the debate instead of indulging in your usual 1980's terminal terminology & of course, the Muslim defence of deflection once the questions get a little close to home.
Posted by: albion at November 3, 2005 08:13 AM
at November 3, 2005 11:15 AM
ia786 writes:
"I have fitted in perfectly well, I am friendly and a loyal citizen. I also happen to be Muslim."
UK police reported that they are getting little
help and a lot of flak from the local mohammadan
community in their work finding terrorists. I take it that you are an exception, and that you've volunteered your help in finding these people? You said earlier that the police weren't
helping keep your mosque clear of extremists. So
now you've volunteered to the police to find these people? Is that right?
"You're whole article is based on your own prejudice, bigotry and frustration. You really don't like 'Brown' Muslims doing well in the UK or Europe do you?
Its interesting to note that the people here want immigration reversed. That means Muslim out, but hold on a second. That will mean Brown and Black Muslims out while White Muslims (White, British Born) will no doubt be able to stay. That is just pure racism and it’s disgusting. "
No, you are unable to read or think clearly. It's
mohammadans we want out. Color is irrelevant. I'd
rather have 20 million dark brown Hindus than
100 Nordic mohammadans. Clear now?
at November 3, 2005 11:16 AM
I've recently, when feeling particularly adventurous, been tip-toeing(as in a bathroom where the toilet overflowed, not as in "stealthy") around a website labelled "The Islamic Server of MSA-USC".
The selective, inaccurate, and incomplete nature of the arguments, explanations, descriptions, and verbal illustrations are so carefully constructed that had I found this site before having educated myself to even the miniscule degree that I have accomplished to date, I would have thought that Islam was just the greatest thing since sliced infidels.
I had so many red flags going up I thought I was at a Man. U. match.
I would highly recommend that someone new to this site read Mr. Spencer's P.I.G. and then take an afternoon or evening to practice your powers of identifying "taqiyya". You need go no farther than the section titled "Common Misconceptions of Islam". All you need is to have read one of Mr. Spencers books and have a passing knowledge of current world events and the rationales presented to explain/defend them. This is not an example of "a little knowledge is dangerous" or "he reads ONE book and he thinks he's an expert". No, the fact is that it takes THAT LITTLE to expose Islam for what it is, once your eyes are opened.
Granted, there is exponentially more that I don't know yet than what I do, and granted, far more agile thinkers than I would be able to carry my observations to far larger pictures, far more detailed arguments, far more encompassing conclusions, but there are so many glaring points of contradiction right up there on the surface that one cannot come away thinking that we've got it all wrong.
The reason I bring this up is that reading this article reminded me of an explanation on that site explaining why "pure democracy" was un-Islamic. I won't recount how the argument got from point A to point B, but the phrase that stuck in my mind was "nonsensical lines on a map" regarding national borders.
So, having now taken "the long way around the barn", explain to me your "Dutchness".
One REAL benefit to the site is that the Quran is presented with each line shown in it's 3 primary translations(Ali, Pickthal, Shakir), so if, like me, you find the language awkward and some meanings difficult to comprehend, between the 3 you can usually muddle through.
Posted by: t-ham at November 3, 2005 11:22 AM
Lyin' for Islam ia786 is a hopeless case, he states "ha ha ha, what a load of rubbish. You expect any rational person to believe this rubbish?"
A rhetorical question no doubt but he believes the rantings of a cave dwelling arab child molester so it is unlikley that he would be able to answer the question anyway.
Posted by: TooBad at November 3, 2005 12:32 PM
One of these days, after the Big One, leadership in some nation somewhere will confront the Moslems they have foolishly let into their midst with either denouncing Islam or being expulsed.
PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH
To help set the stage, let's file a lawsuit against the federal court system for allowing antisemitic hate speech into its prisons, and demand that the Koran and all the Sunnah books be banned.
As a compromise, we could settle for redaction of the books to disinclude all passages that speak of hate, antisemitism, antichristianism, discrimination, misogyny, racism, violence, terrorism, kidnapping, murder, pedophilia, and other less-than-desirable features of Islam.
Do you think such a lawsuit is feasible?
This settlement would accept having the same redaction applied to Bibles let into the prisons.
Posted by: Chaz MarteL 732 at November 3, 2005 12:34 PM
Chaz;
what do you think would be left of the quran?
Just about enough to fit on a standard business card?
Posted by: t-ham at November 3, 2005 12:43 PM
"I have fitted in [sic] perfectly well, I am friendly and a loyal citizen. I also happen to be Muslim."
-- posted by ia786
Do you denounce Mohammed for wearing cum-stained garb? I do.
Do you denounce pedophilia? I do.
Do you denounce Allah as a horse's ass for calling for discrimination? I do. What your God advocates is a direct violation of the U.S. Civil Rights Act.
PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH
Aisha [who was 9] said, ‘I used to wash semen off the Prophet’s [who was 53] clothes. When he went for prayers I used to notice one or more spots on them.’
-- Bukhari:V1B4N1229-33
Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends.
-- Koran 5:51
PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH
If you do not denounce these things, then you don't fit in at all well, cuz the Brits do denounce these things.
You *blend* in, I'll give ya that much. You blend in cuz you keep that switch in the middle of your back set to Off. For now, at least.
Posted by: Chaz MarteL 732 at November 3, 2005 12:44 PM
"I'd rather have 20 million dark brown Hindus than 100 Nordic mohammadans."
-- posted by American
Hindus are cool. Great personalities.
Mohammedans are uncool. Dour. Always pissed off at the world.
I would be to if I had to submit to a puke-puddle dreamed up on the fly by a criminal organized crime boss with a pedophilia habit. Man, I'd be ANGRY.
at November 3, 2005 12:48 PM
Muslims do not integrate into other cultures. the Quran forbids it: "4:144 O ye who believe! Choose not disbelievers for friends in place of believers. Would ye give Allah a clear warrant against you?" Islam is like a parasite on other societies. They grow in number until they choke and kill the host, like missletoe in a tree.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at November 3, 2005 1:09 PM
"...like missletoe in a tree."
Under which, you DO NOT KISS -- especially in public, as that would offend the missletoe...!
Posted by: jsla at November 3, 2005 1:16 PM
Again, Ia misses the boat. And his mummy.
either to deflect ANY criticism of Islam and Muslims, or to actively conduct Da'wa among the Infidels."
Which is what Ia does.
____________________________________________________
"I have fitted in perfectly well, I am friendly and a loyal citizen. I also happen to be Muslim."
And engaging in da'wa. Yes, we know.
And who thinks that 9/11 was a big Jewish - sorry, Lizaroid-Illuminati-CIA-ZOG - plot.
__________________________________________________
Article: "For their belief-system does not envision a Holland, an Italy, an England, a France. Islam does not distinguish between the various components of one single unit, the Dar al-Harb, the regions of the world were Islam does not yet reign and Muslims do not yet dominate."
Ia: "ha ha ha, what a load of rubbish. You expect any rational person to believe this rubbish?"
For an amazing THIRD TIME, Ia and I agree. (!) There are indeed plenty of national and even religious divisions in islam, many of which have involved massive violence. There is - as I think Ia will agree - no reason to see islam a single, unified well of evil. Rather, it is a collection of disjunct, slightly connected wells of evil, swirling up against the borders of their own miasma - or that of others. But to imagine it as a SINGLE evil is pure - as Ia seems to be saying above - rubbish.
__________________________________________________
"You really don't like 'Brown' Muslims doing well in the UK or Europe do you?"
Well, I personally have Chinese cousins and no problem at all with brown people. I have Hindu friends and I quite like Hindus. It's islam I'm not too keen on, and Arabic supremacism. Besides, I thought you'd already admitted that distaste for islam did not equal islamophobia?
Prophet Geoff [bbuh]
Posted by: Geoff at November 3, 2005 1:35 PM
Hi, IA, MI5 released this picture of you loving your country!
Posted by: KingTolerence at November 3, 2005 2:14 PM
I agree with this morsel from a posting above..."no reason to see islam a single, unified well of evil. "
Islam is a manifold well of evil.
Posted by: jsla at November 3, 2005 4:37 PM
wow im impress, you seem to have the same rhetoric as a certain german we all know, who died 60 years ago. we should clean europe of muslims. maybe we could come up with some kind of final solution for muslim question. After all we all know that the jews are the superior being.we all know that every single muslim on this planet is a terrorist and that every jew are peace loving folk. and that littel thing of King DAvid Hotel bombing my our former great prime minister (Israeli statesman (born in Poland) and active Zionist who organized resistance against the British after World War II; prime minister of Israel (1886-1973)) David Ben Gurion which killed 28 British, 41 Arab, 17 Jewish, why that was good, even moses would of been proud of that.
Posted by: bob86 at November 3, 2005 4:54 PM
Who were allies during the life of Hitler?
http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/
at November 3, 2005 5:26 PM
wow im impress
Did you send Charles Johnson (at Little Green Footballs) an email a few days ago?
at November 3, 2005 5:29 PM
You sound the same...
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=17815&only
at November 3, 2005 5:42 PM
Bob86, thats an interesting post. I am a Muslim by the way, a British Muslim.
___________________________________________________
I was just thinking, lets say someone in a position of authority was to say this:
"The best characterization is provided by the product of this religious education, the Muslim himself. His life is only of this world, and his spirit is inwardly as alien to true Christianity as his nature two thousand years previous was to the great founder of the new doctrine. Of course, the latter made no secret of his attitude toward the Muslim people, and when necessary he even took the whip to drive from the temple of the Lord this adversary of all humanity, who then as always saw in religion nothing but an instrument for his business existence. In return, Christ was nailed to the cross, while our present-day party Christians debase themselves to begging for Muslim votes at elections and later try to arrange political swindles with Muslim parties-- and this against their own nation.
How many people here would embrace and celebrate such a figure. Those of you that haven't worked it out, these are the Words of Hitler. I swapped Jew for Muslim.
___________________________________________________
Then you wonder why no one takes you seriously.
___________________________________________________
Will reply to posts soon, its Eid tomorrow, so...., yeh.
Posted by: ia786 at November 3, 2005 6:27 PM
Carolyn2
no i cant say that i did. must of be someone else's email. but i would like to say that Fitzgerald does a diservice to his people and his religion. this website should be used to cataloguing real acts of discrimation and oppression of jews and christians by arab goverments. it should not be used by one man, to spread his racist and damaging opinions. may god help you change your ways
Posted by: bob86 at November 3, 2005 7:40 PM
muslims integrating into western civilization?
Impossible. They live in another level
of consciousness, that of master/slave
where fear, pain and intimidation reign.
Free humans function at a more rational
level based on an individual's rights
within the collectilve society
and social agreements and contracts.
islam produces a stagnant,unchanging world,
they've yet to discover
the only constant is change.
at November 3, 2005 8:33 PM
i espesially like this bit "since these people can integrate, and so there is no need to do special favors for them) solve the problem? It will not" after all its not as if there are more state funded jewish faith schoolsthan there are skih, muslim or hindu, put together in london alone. this must me so that the young jewish people can intergrate with other young jewish people. Fitzgerald, i would just like to say that i do in fact solute your intelligence and your tabloid paper-like journalism. you have truly raised the Star of David to unatainable hights.congratulations
Posted by: bob86 at November 3, 2005 8:50 PM
Ia: "ha ha ha, what a load of rubbish. You expect any rational person to believe this rubbish?"
Rational people have rational thoughts. What we believe is based on the evidence of that concept.
Mohammedans rarely have rational thoughts, that is what makes them Mohammedans. That is the reason why 1a or the other troll above are incapable of making a case: They are indoctrinated by a belief-system that forbids rational enquiry, so all they can possibly come up with is deflection, nonsense, threats or cursing...
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at November 3, 2005 9:40 PM
bob86,
When do you plan on integrating orthography into your English writing?
Posted by: Dr. Pepper at November 3, 2005 10:24 PM
Chaz Martel,
First of all, I like the moniker. Anyone who still doesn't know about Charles Martel should look him up.
Second, the quiz format is very effective.
You wrote:
"Do you denounce Mohammed for wearing cum-stained garb? I do.
Do you denounce pedophilia? I do.
Do you denounce Allah as a horse's ass for calling for discrimination? I do...
...If you do not denounce these things, then you don't fit in at all well, cuz the Brits do denounce these things."
In fact, I've tried (3 times now!) to get ia786 to complete my morality quiz. I even gave ia786 a way out of the dilemma, noting that the Koran itself admits of Mohammad's sins (48:1-3), when "Allah" forgives Mohammad of all past and future sins.
His inability to answer these questions indicates that his loyalties lie not with Britain, but with Islam. He is mistaken if he thinks the two are compatible. Islam is not compatible, ultimately, with any other nation or ideology.
Posted by: Archimedes at November 4, 2005 12:42 AM
IA457;
Your witty little substitution was the most ridiculous exercise imaginable. Pointless and absurd. The logic for doing it wouldn't stand if you propped it against a wall.
Happy Eid
Posted by: t-ham at November 4, 2005 6:04 AM
haha, the propoganda and lies from these posts are rather entertaining. All the lines you quote from the Quran and the Hadith are all false... I challenge you to disprove this.
Posted by: bobo26 at November 4, 2005 9:01 AM
Greetings bobo26
Which postings with regard to the Quran & Hadith
are you disputing here?
Please clarify so we can respond with the facts & evidence.
As for your earlier accusation of racism against Hugh, I am sorry to inform you that Muslims & Islam do not constitute a "Race", therefore any comments against them cannot be deemed "racist".
We have had many Muslims appear on this site claiming "racism".
This is purely a deflection tactic away from the failings & inherent evil as we see it of Islam.
Please, we welcome Muslims & Islam apologists here to debate with them & maybe get the occasional straight answer.
Don't just call people names - attempt to hold your own in the debate.
There's a good fellow.
Regards
Albion
at November 4, 2005 9:51 AM
"haha, the propoganda and lies from these posts are rather entertaining. All the lines you quote from the Quran and the Hadith are all false... I challenge you to disprove this."
You mean to say that the Quran and the Hadith are all false?
Whew! Well that simplifies things IMMENSELY. Which religion are you switching to then? I recommend Monophysitic Christianity - an interesting concept on the complete nature of Jesus, they have, quite a poser it is.
Put another way...
haha, the propaganda and lies of the Quran and the Hadiths are rather entertaining. All the lines they quote are false...I challenge you to disprove this.
And a very pissy Eid to you.
(I would offer you a Happy Eid, or a Merry Eid, or even a Bloody Eid, depending on your sect and where you live, but the prophet did say "Take not the Christians and Jews as friends, for they are friends to each other", and I have far too much respect for your religion to interfere with it by trying to make a friend of you.)
=)
Prophet Geoff [bbuh]
Posted by: Geoff at November 4, 2005 10:34 AM
Oh, and Ia-Pia: Hitler hated the Jews and made up crap about them to justify his hate of their "otherness".
People here get pissed off at islam where and only where it interacts with our culture/religion/ethnicity in a negative manner, not at muslims themselves. We recognize a sick and evil meme when we see it. But blaming the victims themselves is foolish, save where they try to give others the same malady. I personally have little concern for the fate of muslims in their own lands and religion, if only they could convince themselves to leave us alone.
Actually, the former paragraph, but not the latter, is also very similar to islam's feelings about Jews.
Indeed, I have discerned it; it is fard on all believers.
Prophet Geoff [bbuh]
Posted by: Geoff at November 4, 2005 10:39 AM
Dr. Pepper:
I think orthography may be the least of bob86's shortcomings.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at November 4, 2005 11:45 AM
"Oh, and Ia-Pia: Hitler hated the Jews and made up crap about them to justify his hate of their "otherness"."
I see that happening right here, but against Muslims.
The most disgusting quote I've heard here is the one about Aisha wiping of semen from Prophet Muhammed's clothes before going to prayer. That is utter BS. Why would the hadith say that when it tells muslims to wash themselves (their whole body) immediately after intercourse or ejaculation.
http://www.islam-online.net/livefatwa/english/monresult.asp
Dont make sense eh?
You probably dont know enough about Islam to believe whatever you read or hear about in the news. You all seem old enough to be able to construct sentences so I believe you boys know what propaganda means (if not, google it).
I'd rather not spend my Eid writing this post so I'll leave it to you to cure yourself of all the crap that you have infected yourself with through the American media, which is run by the Zionists who pull wool over the world's eyes over the occupation of Palestine. When you've been to Palestine and seen the crimes against humanity made by Israelis, you would see the one-sidedness of the American media.
Dont get me wrong. I am against all this terrorist crap. I am against the attacks on civillians on 9/11. Islam forbids violence against living things. This includes Jews and Christians and even trees! There is no such thing as Islamic Terrorism. You think that Muslims hate Jews and Christians? Read Surat al Kafiroon.
I am speaking for the 99% of muslims around the world who are against terrorism. The 1% are the ones that give us a bad name.
Oh and I am sorry that you couldnt wish me a happy Eid. Although I would wish you a happy Christmas (if it was christmas) since we accept any religion in the world. Dont believe me?
http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=59401&version=1&template_id=36&parent_id=16
at November 4, 2005 12:05 PM
The sheer craziness of Islam, the way it permits Believers to deny what any Infidel can locate, quite easily, in the Qur'an and Hadith, or in the biography of Muhammad, is beautifully on display above. Print out perhaps the posting above, keep it -- especially the part about Islam being against violence toward Christians, Jews, and "even trees." The part about trees one can believe -- trees didn't have to pay the jizyah, wear identifying marks on their leaves, or refrain from riding horses (unless they were Scottish trees, making their way from Birnam Wood to Dunsinane, and getting plumb tuckered out in their lower limbs).
The dreamy misinformation above can easily be dispelled. Simply go to www.usc.edu, and you can find the Qur'an in four or five English translations, laid out synoptically for easy comparison. The same site will give you the Hadith (those of al-Bukhari and Muslim). For a taste of Islam itself, go to any number of Muslim websites, or read Qaradawi on the halal and haram.
Or google the "Calcutta Qur'an Petition" and see what comes up, about all the Jihad-versees in the Qur'an. God knows how much of this nuttiness one is expected to endure. Apparently quite a bit.
Posted by: Hugh at November 4, 2005 12:18 PM
From what I see, some European nations do little in integrating immigrants other than the legalistic definitions of "citizenship." The notion of "citizenship" is about more than having a clean criminal record and speaking the language. It is about becoming fully integrated into the society. This does not mean requiring a Turkish immigrant to Germany to drink beer at Oktoberfest. Nor should the Turkish immigrant to Germany be required to “speak more German.” European definitions of “citizenship” appear to place too much on satisfying laws and legal codes.
I have seen that there are, basically, two aspects to “citizenship.” The first is the satisfying of legalistic requirements, which are generally being fluent in the language and possessing a clean criminal record from the nation of origin. The second, and perhaps most important, is the social-psychological definition of citizenship, which involves such things as confessed loyalty to the nation and, here in America, understanding how American government is organized. The legalist definitions are problematic, such as possessing a clean criminal record, and as we have seen in Europe this past summer this requirement is NO guarantee that the immigrant does not pose a danger to the community and the nation. The best form of integration is to make the process of obtaining citizenship a goal that, along the way, the new immigrant will be psychologically integrated into the society.
Here in America, an immigrant must take a test and pass an interview, conducted in English. Becoming an American citizen is a process than does not only revolve around legalistic standards, such as a clean criminal record. This process requires commitment on the part of the immigrant. The need for the would-be-citizen to make a commitment to citizenship can have the added benefit of weeding out those who have come to America to commit terrorist acts. To note that, to the best of my recollection, none of the hijackers on September 11 2001 were American citizens. And, also, none of “the 19” had criminal records in their nations of origin (mainly Saudi Arabia).
I live within a mile of an Islamic cultural center that also has an Islamic school. I notice women pulling up to the school in minivans with their children to drop them off at the school. The women appear to be American “soccer moms” in burcia head scarves. I see women in the shopping malls in their pretty head scarves and they don’t act as if they feel “out of place.” These women are allowed to drive cars and do not appear to be distressed or downtrodden. They appear to be fully integrated into American society and perhaps the mainly social-psychological process of obtaining American citizenship is to credit for this…
Posted by: ESLaPorte at November 4, 2005 4:06 PM
"The most disgusting quote I've heard here is the one about Aisha wiping of semen from Prophet Muhammed's clothes before going to prayer."
Er...and where'd you see that one?
And - here's the really important part, so read closely (LOL) - WHY exactly would we care if, when, why, or what Aisha (Mohammed's six-year old bride) wiped off, on, or of Mohammed? HOW, if I may, as a humble kufr worthy of the Three Choices under islam, would that make us hate Mohammed, Aisha, the prayer group Mohammed went to see, or Mohammed's tailor? I mean, how would that inspire hatred of Mohammed on the kind of scale you're talking about? Seriously. How would that affect my opinion of him? How? Why would it change my mind about islam in any way? Frankly, I would expect were I religious that I would think more HIGHLY of Mohammed if he had the good graces to get his jizz wiped off before he went to talk to God and all. So, really, what the hell is that about?
The people here are angry, again, because of things islam has actually done to non-muslims, those "obstinates". We do not care what Aisha wiped on or off Mohammed, ever. From your post, it's clear that YOU consider it something to hate, not us.
Oh, and quoting from islamonline is NOT going to win you any points, Wahhabi. The freak shows that run that site do indeed make one question islam, in all its graces and disgraces, far more than Aisha and the blue-robe-crusties.
"Dont make sense eh?"
Not so far, you don't, no.
"You probably dont know enough about Islam to believe whatever you read or hear about in the news."
Well, oh he who takes monikers of chimps, I've read the hadiths, the Quran and parts of the biographies. Besides which, what the hell are you saying in that sentence? Check your syntax at the door.
Bobo: "I'd rather not spend my Eid writing this post"
Well that's two of us so far.
"so I'll leave it to you to cure yourself of all the crap that you have infected yourself with through the American media, which is run by the Zionists who pull wool over the world's eyes over the occupation of Palestine."
Oops. The big Z-word. Can you tell me if this control is something you would call an occupation? By Zionists? Of government? Would you call it a Zionist Occupational Government then? Just curious.
Nothing to cure, the doctor is in. We all check out.
"Dont get me wrong. I am against all this terrorist crap. I am against the attacks on civillians on 9/11. Islam forbids violence against living things. This includes Jews and Christians and even trees!"
Whew! The other theists rate as high as plants. Well, that's a relief. And you're against terrorism.
But, of course, islam doesn't forbid violence. Sura 9 confirms that, to say nothing of Sura 5 and parts of 4. Or Mohammed's biography. Or the hadiths - al-Buhkari springs to mind.
"I am speaking for the 99% of muslims around the world who are against terrorism. The 1% are the ones that give us a bad name."
Er, actually about a minimum of 33% of muslims around the world are strongly in favour of it. I think you may have missed a poll.
"Oh and I am sorry that you couldnt wish me a happy Eid. Although I would wish you a happy Christmas (if it was christmas) since we accept any religion in the world. Dont believe me?"
No, not since Wahhabis in Canada got a message from their mosque saying never to wish others "Merry Christmas", for they might then "persist in their unbelief". And not since non-muslim expression is banned or severely restricted in every islamic nation in the world. And not since the penalties for apostacy range from huge fines to prison to death in the same nations. So, no, I don't really believe you. Tell you what - go to the Middle East and try to build a church. Tell everyone you're an evangelical. See what happens.
And don't forget to take lots of hospital pics.
I'd be happy to wish you a happy Eid, if I believed you actually wished anything but evil on everyone else, Wahhabi. Tell you what - a very merry Eid to all muslims who refute violence in the name of islam, who fight against misogyny, who don't believe that other religions should be oppressed and that homosexuals have the right to live, who wouldn't try to kill apostates or extort them back into islam, and who accept that islam does not have a monopoly on religious truth, including that of atheists and agnostics.
If that be you, then happy Eid. But as you're citing Wahhabi sites, I'm betting that isn't you, so sod off.
Prophet Geoff [bbuh]
Posted by: Geoff at November 4, 2005 4:20 PM
Hmm. Technically speaking one would really have said:
"who don't believe that other religions should be oppressed and that homosexuals DON'T have the right to live"
Then again, I think my point's pretty darn clear.
Happy Eid, if you qualify.
Otherwise it's back to madrassa with
Prophet Geoff [bbuh]
Posted by: Geoff at November 4, 2005 4:27 PM
bobo26 writes:
"I am speaking for the 99% of muslims around the world who are against terrorism. The 1% are the ones that give us a bad name."
Well, according to all of the polls I've seen,
your numbers are very, very far off. So I take it that you don't speak for anyone. You're just talking out of your hat. Lying, basically.
We all know that Islam doesn't forbid, in fact, it positively encourages, violence. So, once again, you're a liar, and a very poor one at that.
And, having been to the middle east, and discuused
my experiences with others who've done likewise, I
can safely say again, you're just a liar. Just like the illiterate pervert you mohammadans worship.
at November 4, 2005 4:55 PM
From Krazy Muslim poster above:
"The most disgusting quote I've heard here is the one about Aisha wiping of semen from Prophet Muhammed's clothes before going to prayer.
And this guy is a Muslim!? He's either lying, in complete denial, or isn't aware of the many disgusting stories about Muhammad's semen stains, how they were always lovingly collected and sometimes worshipped, or how Muhammad "fondled" Aisha as she bathed in a bucket during her menses... I'm sorry for posting this filth -- but the "religion" of Islam is REPLETE with this sewage... It's instantly apparent that Islam is little more than a disgusting compendium of filth, insanity, and violence -- If only characters such as George Bush actually knew what he was talking about when discussing Islam --
--------------
Good points made above by Hugh pointing out the vulgarity and insanity of Islam... I also want to say that I enjoy reading various syllogisms here almost as much as the silly jism denials like bobo26's above...
Posted by: jsla at November 4, 2005 5:44 PM
Puns lead us, and ought, into temptation, and Dryden was wrong to impugn Shakespeare for never being able to avoid making a "clench" -- but jsla, still...
Posted by: Hugh at November 4, 2005 7:06 PM
Chaz Martel 732 posted this:
"Aisha [who was 9] said, ‘I used to wash semen off the Prophet’s [who was 53] clothes. When he went for prayers I used to notice one or more spots on them.’
-- Bukhari:V1B4N1229-33'
Is the muslim poster denying that muhammad had sex with Aisha when she was 9? The citation is there so I suggest that the muslim visitor check it out for himself.
Posted by: CGW at November 5, 2005 7:56 AM
A "clench" will do in a pinch -- and this pun was a cinch --
I could not let this chance go by although it made me wince!
at November 5, 2005 1:30 PM
The only Muslims who fit in are those who have completely abandonned and turned their back on that faith like one female friend of mine who describes it as "bullshit." She'll openly say she left her country because she wanted to enjoy the same freedoms that other women in the West enjoy. She's cut off with nearly all her family as a result. If that means wearing skimpy clothes and getting drunk on a Friday night, so be it. The worst of our decadent culture is harmless compared to the worst of Muslim countries where women are burned and raped and "honor killed."
Posted by: londongirl at November 6, 2005 7:16 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.)