The historian Jeffrey Herf has written a trenchant letter to the president of Brandeis University over its capitulation to Hamas-linked CAIR over the honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali. What Herf describes as his experience here in being accused of “Islamophobia” is exactly the same experience that everyone has if he or she speaks honestly about how Islamic jihadists and supremacists explain and justify their actions by reference to the Qur’an and Sunnah. What happened to Ayaan Hirsi Ali and what Jeffrey Herf describes here as having happened to him is not singular. It is the universal experience of everyone who has ever stood against Islamic supremacist groups and their “scholars” in a thoroughly corrupt academia.
…Ms. Hirsi has had the courage to say unpopular things about the religion of Islam and the ideology of Islamism. In two of my prize-winning books, Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World (Yale University Press, 2009) and The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda during World War II and the Holocaust (Harvard University Press, 2006), I have had occasion to address the role of Islam and Islamism in fanning the flames of Jew-hatred. In publishing work that documents the role of the Islamist interpretation of the Koran in promulgating the most absurd and idiotic ideas about the Jews, I have faced intolerance from scholars working on the Middle East. They have denounced well-founded scholarship as “Islamophobia” or “Zionist propaganda” and denied that the Koran or Islamism could possibly have anything to do with anti-Semitism. Like Tony Kushner and Desmond Tutu, to whom Brandeis has given honorary degrees, they have erroneously argued that Arab and Islamist antagonism to Israel is exclusively the result of the alleged sins of Israel. As far as I know, neither has had anything of substance to say about the role of Islam and Islamism in fanning the flames of hatred of the Jews and of Israel. These critics have said that those of us who point to the anti-Jewish elements of the Koran and the Jew-hatred of modern Islamists are guilty of intolerance towards Muslims. I have seen this up close for years now. The last place I expected to find groveling, embarrassing appeasement of this rubbish was from the president of Brandeis University….
Your decision reflects a now-widespread double standard of broad criticism of Judaism and Christianity combined with fear—yes it is fear—to write and speak with equal critical spirit about Islam. We historians of modern Germany and Nazism know that the Nazi interpretation of Christianity as well as the core texts of the Christian tradition itself, were used by the Nazis to justify their mass murders. In our own time, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brothers, Al Qaeda and the government of Iran, despite their differences, all draw on phrases from the Koran and in the texts of subsequent Islamic commentaries to find theological justification for antagonism to Jews, Zionism and the state of Israel.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali has been willing to point this out, something Kushner and Tutu have never done. That the president of a university founded by Jews in the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust should have rescinded an honor to a woman who has had the courage to attack the most important source of Jew-hatred in the world today is a disgraceful act and a failure of leadership. Instead of appeasing intolerance in your faculty, you should have taken this moment to reaffirm the values for which Brandeis has stood for so long and reconfirm the place of universities as models of tolerance and enlightenment in our troubled society. Once a proud alumnus, I will be forced to disavow my relationship with Brandeis in the future.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Herf
Professor, Department of History
University of Maryland
College Park
Transmaster says
This is the same thing that was going on during the Cold War and the Soviet Union. Academic world blamed the United States for every evil the USSR, and it’s cronies around world perpetrated.
mortimer says
It is similar to the Soviet use of ‘jamming’ radio message bringing bad news about the Evil Empire.
Muslims realize that bad news about Islam and jihad, and the lack of any moral or historical basis for it are killing Islam. Large numbers are turning away from their death cult. Muslim leaders are running scared of losing their following.
Defcon 4 says
@mortimer
Define “large numbers”. I don’t see much opposition by muslimes to islam0nazism in any islamic state or outside of any islam0nazi state anywhere. At least any opposition that takes the form of concrete action.
raylanfear says
Disagree they are gaining strength. With the Saudi oil money to influence Universities and buy influence in Washington. Violence is inherent in Islam–its a destructive nihilistic cult of death, it legitimizes murder. Quote from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Muslim, who now stands up for women’s rights everywhere.http://wp.me/p2GpDB-cF
zimriel says
mortimer: I’m going to go out on a limb here and suspect you are a nice Christian fellow living in the West. Yes?
I have read a lot of stories from the Christian press about this supposed groundswell of pro-Christian feeling in the Near East, for a long time. If this were true then Christians would be going INTO these places, and thriving; they would not be leaving them.
The Near East isn’t Boulder, Colorado; it isn’t full of nice tolerant liberals eager to prove they’re not racist. The Near East is full of Arabs, and Arabs like shows of strength, or at least they won’t challenge such shows unless they think they’re stronger. Christians look weak in the Near East right now, and this makes Arabs not want to sign up.
Jay Boo says
Relax
THE QURAN IS MERELY A COOKBOOK
(Repost) Followers of the once very popular 60’s television series ‘The Twilight Zone’
might recall an episode titled “To Serve Man”
To those who are unfamiliar, I will attempt a brief summary.
Alien beings arrive on earth uninvited declaring that they come in peace
and soon begin to convince a skeptical public of their good intentions
with the help of progressive minded culturally enlightened intellectuals.
When one of a staff of US government cryptographers translates their ‘book’ title
to mean ‘TO SERVE MAN’ everyone is relieved and overjoyed and soon all the (leftists) pat themselves on the back as if to say “see we told you so”
Later on to everyone’s horror it is discovered that
‘TO SERVE MAN’ is actually a COOKBOOK.
CAIR Definition:
Quoting the Quran’s hate speech is called Islamophobia unless done by a Muslim supremacist to advance Islam sense of special entitlement.
mortimer says
The Koran is the arrest and death warrant for kafirs who dismiss Mohammed as a fraudulent hoax.
London Jim says
Test:-“
Beth says
‘We historians of modern Germany and Nazism know that the Nazi interpretation of Christianity as well as the core texts of the Christian tradition itself, were used by the Nazis to justify their mass murders.”
“Tradition” – yes.
Actual New Testament teachings/commands – No.
I must address this common misunderstanding:
Rom 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
And that’s it. 5 (count them) golden rules for true peace for all:
Do not cheat
Do no murder
Do not steal
Do not lie
Do not covet
Rom 13:10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
Here is fact that I wish all scholars would get correct once and for all:
There is not one single sentence that exists in the New Testament that teaches humans to be violent with each other. Not one.
Hitler, if anything – carried out the commands found in the koran.
Koran (chapter and verse given for proof)
047.004 – Beheadings
033.052 – Gang Rape of female ‘infidels’
005.033 – Crucifixions
008.067 – Treason
033.061 – Genocide “without mercy”
005.041 – Racism….
005.041 O Messenger! let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief: whether it be among those who say “We believe” with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews,- men who will listen to any lie [This is Racism – It is hate speech]
Knowing these facts now – look at this statement again:
‘We historians of modern Germany and Nazism know that the Nazi interpretation of Christianity as well as the core texts of the Christian tradition itself, were used by the Nazis to justify their mass murders.”
This is no way to win for the truth.
Jay Boo says
Good catch
Jeffrey Herf is merely setting up a pre-emptive defense of (false equivalence) to buffer against the inevitable push-back from the groveling leftist elitist Islamist butt-kiss crowd.
In other words, inspecting Islam requires simultaneous criticism of Christianity to avoid charges of Islamophobia.
Jay Boo says
P.S.
(Jeffrey Herf is a sign that even PC academia has its apostates)
kikorikid says
and, of course, there is no such requirement.
Wellington says
Yes, Beth, that sentence of Herf’s caught my eye too. You addressed it well. The way I have put it over the years is by saying that there is nothing in the Christian theological blueprint that calls for violence in this world by believers against other human beings, contra Islam’s theological blueprint of course.
In fact, if anything, Christians over the centuries have had to develop arguments as best they can to justify even a purely defensive use of force since there is a deep strain of pacifism that exists in the Christian blueprint and even with these efforts a still not insignificant number of Christians have asserted that no use of force is justified (e.g., Quakers). As for those Christians over the centuries who did use force against fellow human beings in the name of Christianity, it is imperative for all to understand that they did so in contravention of what can be found in the New Testament, again contra Islam.
voegelinian says
‘We historians of modern Germany and Nazism know that the Nazi interpretation of Christianity as well as the core texts of the Christian tradition itself, were used by the Nazis to justify their mass murders.”
“Tradition” – yes.
Actual New Testament teachings/commands – No.
An unfortunate spasm by Prof. Herf in an otherwise sterling and spirited defense of truth and human rights. However, it’s not even “Tradition”. Most of the pneumopathology of Nazism was a mishmash from New Age pagan lore, medieval Gnosticism and alchemy, and cranky modern philosophy (modern at the time — 19th century; vulgarizations of Nietzsche, etc.).
Hitler despised Christianity in no uncertain terms, while he admired Islam. Surely Prof. Herf knows about Hitler’s “Table Talks” (Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-1944, translated by Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens, first published by Weidenfeld and Nicolson in 1953, later reissued in 2000)? Just to pluck one example of many from that collection of Hitler Hadiths one could adduce:
Only in the Roman Empire and in Spain under Arab
domination has culture been a potent factor. Under the latter,
the standard of civilisation attained was wholly admirable; to
Spain flocked the greatest scientists, thinkers, astronomers and
mathematicians of the world, and side by side there flourished
a spirit of sweet human tolerance and a sense of the purest
chivalry. Then, with the advent of Christianity, came the bar-
barians. The chivalry of the Castilians has been inherited from
the Arabs. Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers
— already, you see, the world had fallen into the hands of the
Jews, so gutless a thing was Christianity! — then we should in
all probabihty have been converted to Mohammedanism, that
cult which glorifies heroism and which opens the seventh
Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races
would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented
them from doing so.
It is sad to see Prof. Herf parrot a most injurious — and erroneous — meme; a meme often used by precisely the same types of propaganda forces he himself otherwise learnedly refutes.
RodSerling says
That is laughable, Voeg.
Table Talk (i.e., 100% hearsay, transcription with no recording to back it up, and the translation of a translation you cite was edited by the Islamophilic Trevor-Roper, who among other things agreed that Rushdie should be violently punished for writing the Satanic Verses) is “no uncertain terms”? And if you like Table Talk, why don’t you quote the parts favorable to Christianity? Unlike you, Herf is an actual historian who has researched the subject matter and knows what he’s talking about.
voegelinian says
The unremarkably mainstream academic scholar of WW2 history, Gerhard Weinberg, makes no mention at all of your unsubstantiated claims in his meticulous 2007 Foreword to an edition of the Hitler Table Talks, in which he is discussing all matters directly pertinent in this regard.
http://books.google.com/books?id=fk-aXlliu6cC&pg=PR12&lpg=PR12&dq=hitler%27s+table+talk&source=bl&ots=Oj3tD_BgVm&sig=YR19pfY623GwtgXeSxeA2d7ws0U&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UcBJU9byAarfyQHQv4HwBQ&ved=0CFQQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=hitler%27s%20table%20talk&f=false
Boston Tea Party says
I think the essence of Hitler’s take on Christianity is largely the difference between communism and Nazism. While the communists were openly hostile to Christianity, Hitler was a bit more practical, and preferred to co-opt the churches. As long as their views coincided with Nazi policy, they were tolerated. And certainly, Hitler was cognizant of the cultural power of Christianity in Germany and had to at least feign respect for it before he had fully consolidated power—and that’s where a lot of Hitler’s pro-Christian quotes come from. After he came into power, though, he banned religious education, he banned Christmas carols and nativity plays, among other things. I believe Jonah Goldberg documented much of this in his book “Liberal Fascism.”
RodSerling says
Voeg,
“Gerhard Weinberg, makes no mention at all of your unsubstantiated claims in his meticulous 2007 Foreword to an edition of the Hitler Table Talks, in which he is discussing all matters directly pertinent in this regard.”
Substantiation of my claims:
1. The standards of evidence: No objective recording.
Weinberg wouldn’t have had to mention that there is no objective recording of Table Talk because
(a) it is well known that there is no such recording, and
(b) his foreword appears ahead of your source Trevor Roper’s preface, which does mention that there is no objective or mechanical recording of it (pp. xxv-xxvi), allegedly because Hitler didn’t want a mechanical recording of these informal monologues. Instead, according to Trevor Roper, Hitler allowed his words to be transcribed, and the transcriptions were subject to Bormann’s approval (Bormann also transcribed some of it himself). “Table talk” itself is merely a partial transcription of these informal talks. Moreover, according to Trevor Roper, “It contains only those parts of Hitler’s table talk which Bormann thought worth recording.” [I.e., noting or transcribing].
In other words, the portion edited by Trevor Roper was itself selected and edited, “corrected,” etc., by Bormann.
Hence, even the original is 100% hearsay that had to meet the approval of Bormann.
2. Quality of evidence: There are better sources.
Your source, Weinberg, cites Hitler’s Mein Kampf as having “pride of place” among the sources on Hitler’s views, and then cites numerous other sources, all ahead of Table Talk.
3. Accuracy: Translation of a translation.
The alleged original talks were in German. Your source, Weinberg, p. xi, says this Table Talk is an English translation, of a French translation, by a source (Genoud), who Weinberg characterizes as dubious.
4. Your source, Islamophilic thug Trevor Roper, during the Rushdie / Khomeini fatwa affair:
“I wonder how Salman Rushdie is faring these days under the benevolent protection of British law and British police, about whom he has been so rude. Not too comfortably, I hope. I would not shed a tear if some British Muslims, deploring his manners, should waylay him in a dark street and seek to improve them. If that should cause him thereafter to control his pen, society would benefit and literature would not suffer.”
sources: (orig. The Independent
Home Thoughts, On Affair of Salman Rushdie, 10 June 1989.)
Otherwise quoted in various places:
http://www.juliushonnor.com/catalyst/catalyst/The-Rushdie-Affair-and-the-British-Press.pdf
http://books.google.ca/books?id=2lyTuqovUnEC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Salman+Rushdie&hl=en&sa=X&ei=IxxLU4GNDNO72QX2hIHgCA&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Salman%20Rushdie&f=false
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=1562
http://www.claremont.org/index.php?act=crbArticle&id=196
5. Trevor Roper, dubious source on Hitler:
“Hitler Diaries Hoax”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Trevor-Roper#.22Hitler_Diaries.22_hoax
6. Voeg’s misleading presentation of Hitler’s meaning of “Christianity” in Table Talk.
Read the book. You’ll see that, according to what’s quoted there, in any case, Hitler claims to admire Jesus and God, though he has his own bizarre version of them.
p. 548 “Jesus fought against the materialism of His age, and, therefore, against the Jews.”
p. 49
“One may ask whether the disappearance of Christianity would entail the disappearance of the belief in God. That’s not to be desired. The notion of divinity gives most men the opportunity to concretize the feeling they have of supernatural realities. Why should we destroy this wonderful power they have of incarnating the feeling for the divine that is within them?”
Hitler has his own version of belief, wherein Jesus is an Aryan (p. 60) and not a Jew (p. 554). He claims “Christianity” was corrupted by the Jews who eventually used it to spawn Bolshevism, which Hitler hated. He blames “the Jew” Paul for distorting the original teachings. Hitler presumed to have the correct view, claiming to know what “Christ” originally intended (p. 60), which was quite different from the Christianity which emerged due to Paul’s alleged tampering etc.
Here’s Hitler again from Table Talk:
p. 62 “Whilst Roman society proved hostile to the new doctrine, Christianity in its pure state stirred the population to revolt. Rome was Bolshevized, and Bolshevism produced exactly the same results in Rome as later in Russia.
It was only later, under the influence of the Germanic spirit, that Christianity gradually lost its openly Bolshevistic character. It became, to a certain degree, tolerable. Today, when Christianity is tottering, the Jew restores to pride of place Christianity in its Bolshevistic form.”
Lastly, I can provide more on Hitler’s views and the “German faith” that he was advocating and implementing, if anyone is interested. But the above should suffice to respond to Voeg’s allegation that my claims are “unsubstantiated.”
voegelinian says
Wow, I didn’t realize that RodSerling was such an industriously zealous defender of the “Hitler was a Christian/Nazis were Christians” meme. You learn something every day.
RodSerling says
Voeg,
As usual, you lie, probably to (a) stir up trouble, and (b) ignore my rebuttal of your presentation. I don’t believe that Hitler was a genuine Christian, any more than Muhammad/ the authors of Islam were Christians. Hitler and the Nazis were busy rewriting Christianity and teaching their version as the “German faith,” for their own agenda, with Hitler (like Muhammad) writing himself into the story.
voegelinian says
I ignore RodSerling’s rebuttal because it’s a clotted mass of specious sophistry and/or the obsessive-compulsive mess of a disordered mind.
RodSerling says
Voeg,
What’s specious is your entire performance here. Your initial comment which started this exchange indicates that you hadn’t considered the meaning of the words “interpretation” and “used” mentioned by Herf. You were simply looking for an opportunity to use your handy but dubious source, about one figure whose views on Christianity are all over the map, and which doesn’t even really address what Herf said in the first place.
Beth says
@voegelinian
The New Testament is the sole supreme authority of all of Christianity – just as the Koran is the sole supreme authority of all of Islam.
I gave the facts (and references) of which all can check out for themselves on the web.
The tree is known by its fruit (and today – it is quite obvious – worldwide – Islam is violent). I could have said you’re too ignorant to realize it. But at this point – I believe the word is evil, rather, than ignorant.
You people never (not once) ever address those horrid violent teachings of the Koran. Therefore – you’re wrong – and you know it. Bottom line.
I told the truth – and I gave the proof. I’m comfortable with that.
And in the end – you will lose – because lies only bring destruction – both physically and spiritually. And at the judgment – you will not be able to say “I didn’t know” – because now, you’ve been told. We are witnesses.
voegelinian says
Huh? Between Rod Serling and Beth, I think of that old Stealer’s Wheel hit…
raylanfear says
Well said and true. Violence is inherent in Islam–its a destructive nihilistic cult of death, it legitimizes murder. Quote from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Muslim, who now stands up for women’s rights everywhere.http://wp.me/p2GpDB-cF
Boston Tea Party says
I certainly agree that the links between Christianity and Nazism are tenuous at best, at not at all analogous to the direct relationship between the Quran and Islamic violence. But still, I think most of us here agree that these statements just make Professor Herf simply wrong, and do not make him an evil, intolerant hate-speechifying Christianophobe who should be silenced by any means. That’s the difference between the Western concept of free inquiry compared to the Muslim concept of no inquiry.
jihad3tracker says
Professor Herf’s letter is the latest example of resistance to preposterousl charges of unfair unmerited animosity to Islam.
That resistance is coming faster and faster, and the counter-pushback is also coming with ever greater breadth and notice. Why ?
Because Ibrahim Hooper, Linda Sarsour, Nihad Awad, & imam Suhaib Webb (in a vid here at JW where his real agenda for America is revealed –BY HIS OWN VOICE) have only one card in their deck, one play in their game…
“Islamophobia”. Other than that, they possess zero, zip, nada. What the modern Muslim taqiyya peddlers DID NOT ANTICIPATE — and STILL have not realized (hard to believe, but true) is this:
THE INTERNET’S COMPLETE COMMUNICATION WITH ALMOST EVERY ONE WHO MATTERS AND ACCESS TO VIRTUALLY ALL WRITINGS WHICH MATTER makes successful deception impossible.
Yes, for those here at JW comments who say that the struggle is far from one, and too many Americans remain clueless, I completely agree. My point is that there has been a stilling of the tide toward Islamism’s persuasion, and that tide will be inevitably retreating as our allies — FOX and Megyn Kelly is the current best evidence — dig in to fight until freedom wins.
And, because Hooper, Sarsour, Awad, and now Webb are continually following Robert Spencer’s wonderful work here, here is a serious personal pledge to each one of them:
YOU ARE NOT GOING TO WIN — I AND MY CIRCLE OF FRIENDS ARE READY FOR A FIGHT IN WAYS AND CAPACITIES WHICH SPRING UP IN THE NIGHTMARES OF DOMESTIC SEDITIONISTS, TRAITORS, AND JIHADISTS.
Google search a flag of long ago, bearing the motto “Don’t Tread On Me”…. Print that out, tape it to your foreheads, look at it in the bathroom mirror every morning.
Defcon 4 says
@jihad3tracker
The internet is no guarantee that your rights to free speech and free expression won’t be compromised. I seem to remember internet clearing houses for credit card fraud being shut down by the FBI and those cyber-criminals had some idea of how to remain anonymous on the internet. In islam0nazi states people have been arrested and murdered for posting negative stories about islam on the internet (e.g. atheists in Bangladesh).
I’d imagine counter-jihad websites are universally blocked in islamofascist states and increasingly even in non-islamic states (some public libraries have blocked access to counter-jihad websites right here in the USA).
jihad3tracker says
Hi Defcon 4 —
Thanks for a reply… Yes, agreed that not everyone who “matters” can get web content.,
My inadequately-made point should have put emphasis on a sufficient percentage of persons being reached, but, as always in such opinion based conversations, there will be disagreements.
ray says
Right on and you speak the truth. Violence is inherent in Islam–its a destructive nihilistic cult of death, it legitimizes murder. Quote from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Muslim, who now stands up for women’s rights everywhere.http://wp.me/p2GpDB-cF
mortimer says
“…yes it is fear—to write and speak with equal critical spirit about Islam.” – Prof. Herf
More academics need to show equal courage as Prof. Herf. In the Nazi era, few spoke out against Hitler when it was easy to do so. Later, it became impossible to speak out. Only won German judge said that Hitler’s subversion of the constitution was illegal. He was given early retirement.
Muslim governments are all involved in anti-free speech propaganda. It is free speech that must be criticized, rather than Islam which is ‘perfect’ and thus beyond any criticism, since that would be blasphemy. In short, Brandeis University is imposing Sharia law over the university without realizing it. They have been duped.
raylanfear says
Your are absolutely correct. Violence is inherent in Islam–its a destructive nihilistic cult of death, it legitimizes murder. Quote from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Muslim, who now stands up for women’s rights everywhere.http://wp.me/p2GpDB-cF
Defcon 4 says
“Once a proud alumnus, I will be forced to disavow my relationship with Brandeis in the future.”
I get the feeling that the scumbags that run Brandeis couldn’t care less. Anyone who doesn’t go along to get along with islam0nazism isn’t welcome at Brandeis anymore, or practically any other educational institution anywhere — whether public or private.
When was the last time Geller, Spencer, Horowitz or Aayan Hirsi were allowed to speak at any university?
Isabellathecrusader says
This is excellent news. The crack in the wall is getting bigger. With Meghan Kelly pounding relentlessly on CAIR for over a week now on her prime time show and Brandeis humiliating itself and many diverse people taking offense at it’s cowardice, all the hard work Robert and Pamela have been putting into this is finally starting to payoff. Even Bob Beckel, that stalwart apologist for everything the Obama administration continues to do to destroy us, is a staunch opponent of the crappy way Muslims treat people.
CAIR has hit the bigtime. Like the proverbial actress who would kill to become famous but now can’t stand her loss of privacy, CAIR is being noticed everywhere, and Dougie doesn’t like it. : ( Boo-effing-hoo.
raylanfear says
CAIR nothing but one of the many front organizations for terror for the muslim brotherhood and hamas. The Saudi influence and their money that pours into the coffins of universities and government officials must be stopped. Violence is inherent in Islam–its a destructive nihilistic cult of death, it legitimizes murder. Quote from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Muslim, who now stands up for women’s rights everywhere.http://wp.me/p2GpDB-cF
Always On Watch says
From a professor at the University of Maryland, which sits in highly Islamicized territory? Amazing!
I wonder what got into him.
Perhaps he personally knew someone who was injured or killed during the Boston Marathon jihad attack last year.
raylanfear says
Well said. Ayaan Hirsi Ali along with “malala” is an inspiration for all women, to defeat and stamp out Sharia law at all costs. Violence is inherent in Islam–its a destructive nihilistic cult of death, it legitimizes murder. Quote from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Muslim, who now stands up for women’s rights everywhere.http://wp.me/p2GpDB-cF
PJG says
Not sure about Malala. Maybe when she grows up she will leave Islam, but I doubt it, because she has received so much praise for being the kind of Muslim she is – sweet but strong daughter of “moderate” Muslims who deny the violence in Islam – that she might find it addictive.
Jay Boo says
Be careful where ever you step, for academia is littered with piles of Muhammad’s mess.
M. Kahn says
Jay Boo-
You beat me to it! I was getting ready to refer to the same alien “To Serve Mankind” cookbook. Good job!
M. kahn
Davegreybeard says
@voegelinian
“Congratulations to Wellington and Rod Serling for self-righteously patting themselves on the back for the virtue of slowing down progress, whilst arrogantly chiding me for demanding nothing less than what many ordinary people, many without degrees, have concluded about Islam long ago”
Heavens! “Ordinary” people and “many without degrees” have figured this out? Yet we still have exalted “men of letters” in the dark, spouting foolishness.
Oh the embarrassing agony! How can an ordinary effete professor continue to look down his lengthy nose at the commoners in such circumstances?
Surely no one knows the trouble you’ve seen voegelinian!
voegelinian says
Why are you pestering me, Davegreybeard, instead of Wellington and RodSerling?
Davegreybeard says
@voegelinian
“Why are you pestering me, Davegreybeard, instead of Wellington and RodSerling?”
Just for fun Hesp.
I was so uplifted by the honorable mention, as referenced by “ordinary”people and “many without degrees”that I was prompted to comment.
It pleases me to know that we of the “Unlettered” are in your thoughts – somewhere, sort of…
On my bucket list is a BBQ with you, and some of the rest of the gang here.
That and an “Eye of the Hawk”(Mendocino Brewing Co) – maybe two of those.
I’d buy you one too – but I thought you said you quit drinking – I may have that wrong.
Take care my friend – your Base.
voegelinian says
My “without degrees” comment was for the benefit of Wellington and Serling who seem to pass over the progress of the civilians of the Counter-Jihad as though they count for nothing, when in fact they should be respected as the cutting edge of the advance in this “battle space of the war of ideas” we are all in (as Frank Gaffney so aptly put it). Respect would mean nothing, if it doesn’t recognize their plot on the graph as the standard by which to measure progress. One would then cultivate the appropriate perspective by which anyone who has influence in the world of policy-making (including academics or news media figures) who goes notably further than the mainstream PC MC default, but who still falls short of that standard set by the most advanced in the Counter-Jihad would be simultaneously commended & encouraged, but also given a polite but firm scolding for their baffling retardation with regard to that standard.
Unless Messrs. Wellington and Serling are incapable of patting their heads and rubbing their stomachs at the same time; and also want to penalize anyone else among us who has that elementary capability.
bill says
You do not need to hark back to the ‘cold war’ which was not cold at all; witness Korea and Vietnam for which USSR and China provided massive support, not to mention the wars in Africa.
Look at Putin and his Foreign Minister who are lieing through their teeth about victimisation of ethnic Russians in Ukraine. If there were any examples of it the Russian state controlled media would be shouting it from the rooftops. They do not because none of it is proved.
Jay Boo says
SUPPORT RUSSIA in UKRAINE
The number one issue currently invoking NPR indignation is Russians in Ukraine.
They are acting just the same as they did during the overthrow of Morsi.
Fight against Western influenced jihadist proxies
Jay Boo says
Turkey (and NPR) is strongly against the Russian annexation of Crimea.
Let Russia clean out the scum in its underbelly as a buffer against Jihad.