| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
"…the group says the ads -- which will coincide with the holy month of Ramadan -- aim to educate non-Muslims and reach out to those interested in joining the faith…" -- from this article
The “holy month of Ramadan”?
No, it is not "the holy month of Ramadan," despite that use of that fixed phrase here in The New York Post and, I have noticed, also in The New Duranty Times. It is, and it should be, merely "Ramadan" to Infidels. No other faith gets such solicitous treatment, where what is believed by the adherents of that faith is described in the precise terms that those adherents, but no one else, use.
We should not be subject to the drip-drip-drip of what is essentially Muslim propaganda, however unwitting. Or rather, we should not have to have affixed to our daily journalistic lenses the prism of Islam, so that we begin to be mentally acclimated to the idea that yes, indeed yes, it is not merely "Ramadan" but the "holy month of Ramadan."
And one also sees much the same thing with the "holy cities of Mecca and Medina." They are not holy to me, or very likely, to you, dear Infidel reader. They can be described, properly, as merely "Mecca and Medina," or, if one insists, as "Mecca and Medina, the two holiest cities for Muslims" or "Mecca and Medina, regarded by Muslims as holy cities." Perhaps the most common and egregious example of this is the constant invocation of “the prophet Muhammad.” He is, or should be, at best, “the Islamic prophet Muhammad.”
What is illegitimate, and needs to have exposed and discussed and overturned as in-house style-sheet policy, is the use of epithets accepted only by Muslims and foisted on us. Those who do this are forcing a kind of mental or emotional collaboration upon us that we should not be expected to endure.
There is apparently no end to this.
So attention must be paid. Or rather, not merely attention, but something deeper, what can be called "eternal vigilance" -- the same eternal vigilance to be found in that celebrated phrase "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
"Ramadan."
Not "the holy month of Ramadan."
“Muhammad.”
Not “the prophet Muhammad.”
Make The New York Post, make The New Duranty Times, aware of your fury at the ease with which their editors have succumbed, and have forced you, the innocent reader, to slowly succumb as well.
And as for this initiative that is to come to the New York subways during this month, not holy month, of Ramadan, Infidels ought to meet it head-on. A million little stickers ought to be printed up with such remarks as Siraj Wahhaj's "In time, this so-called democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing, and the only thing that will remain will be Islam" and “if only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.” Other stickers should be printed with other remarks, equally enlightening, by Omar Ahmad and other past and present CAIR officials -- remember Ahmad’s statement about Islam not being here to be "the equal" of any other religion, but to become dominant, and the Qur’an the only law of the land. Print those stickers, and distribute them to all concerned and resolute Infidels, and let them be plastered all over those subway ads, by way of retort.
Oh, and it might be fun to have another million little stickers with, say, Qur'an 9.5 and 9.29, also suitable for placing over the Da'wa campaign posters in the subway.
And meanwhile, Bloomberg and others in New York should be made to remember this. Infidels have to become one-issue candidates. By that I do not mean you cannot have views, and wish to see them expressed, on taxes and bridge-building, on the usefulness of mass inoculations, or on the wastefulness of another Man-on-the-Moon program. No -- I mean that you must let everyone in political life know that no matter how much you may support them on other things, if they show signs of appeasing Islam and inadvertently promoting the Jihad, you will do everything you can to oppose and defeat them, and that on the other hand, a candidate whose views would cause you normally not to support will have your support, if his misgivings about Islam correspond to yours.
It is simply a question of numbers. There needs to be a sufficient number of such Infidels for whom Islam is regarded, rightly, as a threat to their laws and customs, their assumptions and safety. It should be regarded as a threat also to whatever posterity, whatever products of planned or careless parenthood, one may leave behind. That posterity will be forced to endure the effects of the ignorance and negligence and stupidity of those who supposedly have been our leaders, and this sticker campaign is just the least of it. That posterity deserves a fighting chance. They did nothing to deserve this.
Posted by Hugh at July 22, 2008 11:02 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
If not intentional, the redundancy above is somehow fitting.
Posted by: justamomof4![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 22, 2008 11:10 PM
Gah . . .I must be seeing things at this late hour . . .now that my initial comment was posted, I no longer see a repeat of paragraphs . . .kindly disregard the above comment. Good night.
Posted by: justamomof4 at July 22, 2008 11:14 PM
justamomof4:
I just happened by and fixed it.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at July 22, 2008 11:16 PM
Since when is the NY Post a hallmark of journalism?
Posted by: skevin at July 22, 2008 11:18 PM
"You just happened by" at 11:16 p.m.? You should be in bed by now.
Posted by: Hugh at July 23, 2008 12:11 AM
Hugh-
Did you write this article from the Holy City of Najaf in Iraq?
(Where the "first imam" Ali is reputedly buried ...or maybe he's planted in Afghanistan, as other Mohammedans claim).
I have yet to hear any Western journalists says "the holy city of...[fill in the name of any non-Islamic religious town]" when reporting a story about the infidel world.
Wholly craven.
Posted by: profitsbeard at July 23, 2008 12:26 AM
Hugh's criticism of the follow-up post article is not only warranted, but necessary.
There is NOTHING sacred about Islam and specifically, Ramadan, at least to this card-carrying, "Islamophobe".
This is not a "rogue" sentiment at this point. Our thanks are obviously directed, appropriately, to the gracious hosts of this site.
Read, Hugh Fitzgerald. Google, Hugh Fitzgerald, and be done with it already. Google Robert Spencer and return to this site.
It is quite easy.
Posted by: awake at July 23, 2008 12:53 AM
I made the stickers.
Posted by: Lori B. at July 23, 2008 9:05 AM
My only problem with these ads, Huge, is that no where on them do they explain what kind of present to get someone for Eid. Wholly inadequate if you ask me.
Posted by: Jewel Atkins at July 23, 2008 9:37 AM
I am tired of hearing the term "holy month of Ramadan" used in the media and academia.
I have never heard them use the term "holy month of Christmas" or "holy month of Easter" for Christians?
Similarly, the "holy city of Rome" or the "holy city of Jerusalem" is never used when referring to important Christian cities.
How come Muslims get special treatment and have their religious seasons referred to as "holy?"
I am tired of hearing the "holy city of Medina" or the "holy city of Mecca."
I don't consider either city to be "holy."
The media should not be favoring Islam and their mystical descriptions by placing "holy" before important religious locations and religious seasons in the Muslim calendar.
Posted by: Johnathan at July 23, 2008 10:49 AM
Fitzgerald: Call journalists and politicians to account
... and impeach the traitors, starting at the top:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/ramadan/islam.html
Posted by: Alert at July 23, 2008 10:55 AM
This may be a bit naive, but I always thought these identifiers were simply for the benefit of readers who might not know what Ramadan is, who Muhammad was or where Najaf or Mecca is and what each of their significance may be. Sure, the paper could have just said "Ramadan" and then had an explanatory phrase saying something like "Ramadan is the month of the Muslim lunar calendar deemed most sacred by that religion" - but newspapers are extremely space conscious and will make every effort to use a word or two in place of a longer phrase. I haven't done a search to see if when, for example, writing of other places deemed holy to non-Western religions (e.g. Benares, the Ganges, Amritsar, etc.) the papers use "holy city" or "holy river" too, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that that's the case. Whereas sometimes (as in the BBC's web pages of different religions) the unctiousness displayed toward Islam (e.g. the "PBUH" nonsense) is indeed a function of the page being edited by believing Muslims, I'd think that shorthand is the better explanation for what's going in the The New York Post. As for the NY Times, it's probably a combination of journalistic concision and PC respect, but something still short of endorsement.
Posted by: Registered Dhimmicrat at July 23, 2008 11:24 AM
It is a damn shame we have to know what Ramadan is, not long ago we didn't have a clue, nor did we care.
Now, with the 1965 immigration act producing fruit, we have Islam in bloom among us.
Just sickening.
at July 23, 2008 11:51 AM
Jonathan ranted: "I am tired of hearing the term "holy month of Ramadan" used in the media and academia.
I have never heard them use the term "holy month of Christmas" or "holy month of Easter" for Christians?
Similarly, the "holy city of Rome" or the "holy city of Jerusalem" is never used when referring to important Christian cities.
How come Muslims get special treatment and have their religious seasons referred to as "holy?"
I am tired of hearing the "holy city of Medina" or the "holy city of Mecca."
I don't consider either city to be "holy."
The media should not be favoring Islam and their mystical descriptions by placing "holy" before important religious locations and religious seasons in the Muslim calendar."
I agree most heartily. Ass-holian is a much better descriptor, methinks.
Posted by: Jewel Atkins at July 23, 2008 12:03 PM
I've been thinking about this for a long time. I think I've been forced to learn more religious Arabic than I ever wanted to. I don't want to know how their religion refers to any of their concepts. I'm trying very hard to forget them and make a concerted effort in my speaking and writing to avoid using them. There are plenty of English words to describe those things. Even the Arabic name of their religion has a meaning that I don't believe in. I call them Mohammedans. They may not like it but that is what they are.
Posted by: Jayke Feltz at July 23, 2008 8:01 PM
Thank you for saying this. I am so sick and tired of hearing 'holy' this and 'holy' that when it comes to Islam. There's nothing holy about the teachings of Islam.
(Plus, as was said, what other religion is talked about in this way?)
Posted by: Mo at July 23, 2008 11:16 PM
Great article! I always see the term "holy" affixed to the names of cities like Qom in Iran but why do we never call Rome "holy"?!
In fact I happen to think that any western city is holier than Mecca or whatever other abomination these freaks are trying to sell to us as "holy".
Holy to whom - satan?
Posted by: Ummah Gummah at July 24, 2008 12:08 AM
Well I am in New York. So I will paste jihadwatch.org stickers over where they have the phone numbers.
Puck figlsam!
Posted by: Ummah Gummah at July 24, 2008 12:11 AM
Oh, Prophet Ummah,
I, your loyal Caliph of the Levant and environs, am supporting your effort to counter this declared Jihad in NYC!
P.S. I really hope the MTA told this a$$hat Shiraj where he can stuff his campaign. Any news?
at July 24, 2008 12:50 AM
Ugh. Again my beloved NYC lets me down.
Posted by: Vee at July 25, 2008 12:02 PM
Hugh has an excellent point about giving journalists the F they deserve. These are egotistical people who dislike hearing the truth about themselves.
But his brilliant idea is for millions of stickers to be given out on subways or left everywhere. Remarks of Siraj Wahhaj's "In time, this so-called democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing, and the only thing that will remain will be Islam" or “if only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.” or typed up remarks of his ilk freely circulated could create certain problems for those masses truly ignorant about the religion of peace.
The brillance of reproducing these stickers and having jihadwatchers hand it out, is that the language confronting infidels on these pamphlets may wake up infidels to the dangers we face and secondly it may contradict the fact that we alarmists are just spreading hate as the pamphlet bears an exact quote of the one who hates us. Handing out islamic hate speech, is self authenticating and an excellent idea. Let the beloved muslim repudiate what the muslim actually believes about the dumb hapless infidel!
Posted by: David England at July 27, 2008 3:19 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)