If a non-Muslim had said this, he or she would be accused of “racism,” “bigotry,” “xenophobia,” and “Islamophobia.” Is Ahmed Aboutaleb guilty of those crimes? “Muslim mayor of Rotterdam Ahmed Aboutaleb tells Islamists to ‘pack your bags’ and ‘f**k off’ on live TV,” by Jack Moore, International Business Times, January 13, 2015:
The Muslim mayor of the Dutch city of Rotterdam has told Muslims who turn their back on freedom to “pack your If bags” and “f**k off”, live on television.
Ahmed Aboutaleb told NewsHour of his anger at the refusal of a number of Muslims to adapt to their new surroundings, which he said he has done after living in Holland since 1976.
“It is incomprehensible that you can turn against freedom… But if you don’t like freedom, for heaven’s sake pack your bags and leave,” he said.
“There may be a place in the world where you can be yourself, be honest with yourself and do not go and kill innocent journalists. And if you do not like it here because humorists you do not like make a newspaper, may I then say you can f**k off.
“This is stupid, this so incomprehensible. Vanish from the Netherlands if you cannot find your place here. All those well-meaning Muslims here will now be stared at”.
Over half of Rotterdam’s population consists of ethnic minorities and non-native residents.
Aboutaleb is Moroccan-born and became the mayor of Rotterdam in 2008. According to Breitbart, he was initially criticised by anti-Islam parties within the Netherlands but has outlasted the stigma of his faith.
This is not the first time that he has made controversial comments about Dutch Muslims, in 2004 he said that if they did not wish to practice Dutch values they could “catch the first plane out”….
Paul says
This is precisely what Obama should be saying.
BlockJihad says
Yes, Obama should be saying same as this. Good Luck to USA to cause a change in this apologist of islam. The no-go zones of France will not be permitted here in America; well, except for NY NY.
godless9383 says
The no-go zones of France will not be permitted in the U.S. besides in NYC? First of all they are not unique to France we see it happening in a lot of Western countries. We are in the process of it happening here too and not just in NYC. Look at Islamberg in Hancock, NY and Shelbyville, TN and Dearborn, MI. Will not be permitted? Our government is not even whispering about a response to this.
john spielman says
and don’t forget the sharia compliant no go zones in Dearbornistan in Michigan
terry says
He’s not a true Muslim, not a true Muslim, not a true Muslim, not a true Muslim, not a true Muslim, plain and simple!!
And yes, the above was not a typo, I did that for a reason. Because I encounter that every day, non Muslims telling me that, “Hey, there are many Muslims who are moderate or against violence ….etc.”, sometimes I almost feel like giving up!
Many seem not able to grasp this simple fact or already decided to not accept the possibility that there is something wrong with the religion itself, hence they use that line to justify keeping the status quo regarding how the west to deal with Islam’s threat.
I say to them, take sometime off, from work or leisure activities, and go study more in depth the Koran, Hadith and Sunnah, go to the source and not take the word of Muslims, themselves, about Islam. See what kind of fruits it produces, consistently, study its history, how it was spread from the present gulf area to north Africa, Spain, southern Europe, Turkey, Persia (present day Iran), Asia.
How many thousands of men were slaughtered in each of its major battles to bring the people it fought into submission to it. For example in one major battle with the Persians to convert what is modern day Iran to Islam, Khalid Bin Al Walid chopped around 70,000 of their heads! This is well documented.
Think, analyse and compare it for example with Christianity or Buddhism beginnings and teachings. Also one can make use of two simple, yet very profound and universal points, mentioned and the importance of which was stressed by Jesus, so as to arrive at the right conclusions and not to be fooled by appearances.
He said, and I simply quote the essence of his words, that any religion, group of people or teaching, for that matter, could be identified and understood by what kind of fruit it produces, any tree producing bad and poisonous fruits would be cut down and thrown in eternal destruction.
He also said, Satan or evil spirit can come in the form of an angel of light. So it’s very dangerous to judge the subject of Islam, a very serious and important issue, by mere positive things or feelings experienced with some Muslims or in visits to some Muslim communities because it’s part of human nature to put the best possible face or outward look, to attract others or strangers.
It’s part of the seduction process, one can see it at work on the individual, group and cultural levels and it’s even more pronounced in the case of Islam which uses it to the maximum, seducing people, to have them attracted and converted to it. Deceit is always part of this process, covering up its true nature while showing off only positive things, which many times are not even part of its tenets, just for the sake of proselytism, to bring people to it, as it is all for the sake of Allah. Case in point, marketed as a “religion of peace and love”.
One has to do some mental work and draw on different disciplines such as history, religion, and contemporary world affairs to understand reality and the true nature of Islam. In addition I personally think it would be very helpful to understand how the human mind works, the role of emotion in shaping behaviour and destinies, and above all the great role conditioning plays in building belief systems and how all of them affect decision making and behavioural processes.
It may look like an enormous process on paper, but one step at a time and the whole mystery will be unravelled!
Kasey says
What a great and complete assessment of Islam and it really shows that “Islam Is As Islam Does”.in all its total brutality.
Bamaguje says
Finally, the long sought secular true moderate Muslim who appreciates free expression
joeb says
He’s a M.I.N.O. “muslim in name only”. Personally, I’m a C.I.N.O. – catholic in name only. If anyone ever asks me what religion I am, I say catholic, even though I’ve broken practically every ‘rule’ in the book, and don’t go to church any more. Tell a lie, I went to the latin mass at the Brompton Oratory on Christmas Eve, which was superb. To me, it’s simply about being a good person, and doing unto others etc., not eating the altar rails. I don’t need everything else.
You can say I’m not a real catholic, like this man isn’t a real muslim. Yet I will always identify myself as one. Always. And likely he will do the same as a muslim.
Anyway, my point is there are muslim equivalents to me. This man appears to be one. How many, I don’t know. Anyone want to take a guess?
nothosaur says
Joeb,
how many equivalent to you? The most scientific answer we can find would probably be in the polls of Muslim opinion:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/opinion-polls.htm
These are polls of Muslims across the world, asking them questions about whether they agree with penalty for apostasy, punishment for blasphemy, etc.
The most disturbing one for me are the polls concerning “aggressively defending Islam” and “violence” and “sharia”. Those numbers were higher than I thought they would be.
Personally, I would like to see a poll regarding how many Muslims believe the following:
1. The Koran is true.
2. The strong hadiths are true
3. Muhammed is “an excellent/beautiful example of human conduct.” (Quran 33:21)
If anybody answers “yes” to all 3 questions, then I do not want him/her anywhere near me or my family.
cathy says
Response to Terry….I agree…..great comment. People do get seduced…..because of the organizations that appear to be authorized to defend the violent actions that are written in the Koran, but denied by the very same people who read and follow the directives. Its like being taken by a GRIFTER .with government consent. It is a grand seduction….just hope the sharia law of slander ( exposing the truth) does not get signed into law.
c
phil maduri says
veery well said!
Bill says
You absolutely hit the issue head on. We in the West do not get it. Todays mess in Europe is the West’s tomorrow. Sadly history does repeat itself.
voegelinian says
terry’s “not a true Muslim” effectively performs the same function, by a roundabout way, as the Moderate Muslim I suspect terry does not even realize that he or she is effectively retaining that justly rejected meme (i.e., the Moderate Muslim) as a “rose by another name”. No, the Counter-Jihad needs to be more robust than this, and adopt total suspicion — ALL MUSLIMS ARE EQUALLY SUSPECT. If a given Muslim seems to be saying statements against Islam, we must assume he is using taqiyya in order to fool us, as a Good Cop distinguishing himself from the Bad Cops (the “Islamists” — which, by the way, should be a sure sign something’s fishy). The Good Cop/Bad Cop tactic only works, by the way, when the dupe is gullible enough to believe the Good Cop is NOT in collusion with the Bad Cop.
katnis says
I second that thought!
Demsci says
I live in Rotterdam. And I am very glad he said it! Yes, in Rotterdam politics now “Leefbaar Rotterdam” is in the “Drivers seat”, since last year, a party most critical of Islam. But it seems to accept and cooperate with this mayor rather well.
Yesterday I read in “metro” Ebru Umar, a columnist. She is from Turkish descent, but declared atheist. She wrote a fierce column. About the fact that the Kouachi brothers were descendants from Islamic immigrants. And she referred to Westerners granting Muslims Islamic schools. Which may well be indoctrinating children in the fundamentalist state of mind.
And she asserted, meant as a provocative feeler maybe, that “Holland was full”, which I took as meaning: “No more Islamic immigration”. Because the likes of the Kouachi brothers and their countless supporters are the descendants, the results, of both earlier Islamic Immigration and/ or Islamic indoctrination, in mosque AND school. And she was angry and fed up with this kind of ungrateful antagonistic attitude by all too many Muslims. Ungrateful also because many immigrants are importmarriages and asylumseekers who obviously seek a more affluent and free society, who already chose our societies over their own, while the reserve hardly ever happens.
And perhaps in future the Freedom party gets a boost because of the atrocious attack in Paris, which shocked the people in Holland also deeply. We could argue that Islam is a choice and that by now we have enough “proof” of it’s anti-democratic nature. So that the burden of proof is upon Muslims to prove that it is not per se anti-democratic, which is what many Muslims maintain and which mayor Aboutaleb embodies.
That which we can hold Muslims accountable for, when they keep asking us to believe that “Islam is peaceful and abused and misunderstood by the terrorists” is IMO that by now it get’s ever clearer how criminally unclear, ambiguous and multi-interpretable the tenets, guidelines of Islam are. With Islam I mean both Quran-Hadiths-Sira and the Islamic clerical leadership, like those in Shafi, Hanafi, Hanbali + Maliki + also of Al Azhar to which Al Sisi spoke.
I think some Muslims like mayor Aboutaleb should think about starting a “new Islam”, maybe under Al Azhar for authority. While still declaring them obeying God, but in doubt that the terrorists are obeying God on crucial tenets.
They could draw up a list of essential tenets for new Islam, this time in accordance with democracy (which they already claim Islam to be). And then in time invite all those “moderate” Muslims into “new Islam”.
And this time their democracy-relevant tenets should be clear and their membership should be established and liable for being cancelled, when “new Muslims” deviate from tenets in New Islam, compatible with obeying God and democracy.
In this way maybe “new Muslims” can somehow regain a trustworthyness which “ordinary Muslims” now so rightfully lost for so many Westerners.
katnis says
Thanks for sharing that. Commenters come in from all over the world, so your perspective is appreciated. Do you believe this was a sincere statement, or is it doublespeak?
Agreed on the split for a new type of islam. Not sure if that’s possible, and things cannot continue as they are now.
Demsci says
Hello Katnis.
I think what mayor Aboutaleb says comes out of his hart and is meant. But maybe I am naive. I know him, from his career in the news, for a long time.
At first he attracted my attention in 2002, when he, as chairman of some Islamic forum,objected to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, then up and coming. He opined then that she “soiled the nest she came from”. And I disliked him for that. That he as Muslim could not appeciate Ayaans heroic stand for women’s rights + enlightenment, only referring to it as “soiling the nest, or the culture, she was born in. A very un-democratic standpoint I thought back then.
But later he evolved, it seems, as a “wethouder” in Amsterdam, and prominent member of the PvdA, the socialist party. into something like a dedicated democratic person. while still a self-confessed Muslim. I heard that at least a part of the Muslims rejects him for it, but on the other hand, he is rather well liked or at least not much disliked by the original Dutch people and the other non-Islamic Rotterdammers of foreign descent. I heard him speak, for instance on healthcare and other politics. and find him very eloquent and interesting.
As far as I know in Rotterdam the population-count seems to break down into: Just under 300.000 “original Dutch”, roughly 100.000 Muslims (of mostly Turkish, and Moroccan and Surinamese descent, but also rather a lot of Iranians and other nationalities). And the remaining approx 200.000 other people who immigrated or descended from immigrants, in a wide variety. But notable there seem to be some 50.000 CaboVerdians in Rotterdam, who are mostly Christian. With the Surinamese + Antillian people the situation is complex; There are many “Black Suriname + Antillians. And there are many “hindustan” Surinameses, but these are in 2 big varieties; Muslims and Hindus. And Atheist maybe. It is interesting to me to know that Surinam, to my surprise, is one of the 56 OIC-nations.
This is what I seem to recall, it may be off somewhat, but I tried to paint the “big picture” in relation to the Mayor and Muslims in Rotterdam with the above.
Jack Diamond says
His attitude toward Hirsi Ali is still revealing. No Infidels need to count on Muslim “reform” or fret about whether they really mean it or are lying to us, “reform” and following our laws and principles have to be imposed on them if they are in dar al-harb along with zero tolerance for jihad and shari’a. Nor would Muslim immigration be allowed to continue, simply as a matter of national security. Yes, it is good to hear Muslims in Europe say such things, if you don’t like freedom fuck off and leave, but that should have been the official attitude of France (or England or Holland) instead of Eurabia but it wasn’t and isn’t. There certainly are Muslims in France fleeing shari’a, not wanting to impose it, and the policeman murdered in front of Charlie Hebdo was a Muslim too, but that anecdotal evidence of “good Muslims” is hardly grounds for optimism in the face of other anecdotes: “French newspapers reported that some students in these neighborhoods (banlieues)—as well as other heavily Muslim areas near cities like Lille—refused to participate in Thursday’s national moment of silence for the victims of the terror attacks. One teacher said up to 80 percent of his students didn’t want to observe the silence, and some said they supported the attackers. “You reap what you sow,” a student who refused the moment of silence told his teacher in reference to the terrorists’ victims, according to Le Figaro.” “It was a conspiracy designed by the Jews to make Muslims look bad” (another Muslim says, having it both ways, you reap what you sow and/or the Jews did it).
–http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/13/jihad-fanboys-in-the-paris-burbs.html?via=newsletter&source=CSMorning
Jack Diamond says
Islam is at war with us and Muslims, of any stripe, are not on “our side.” How could they be?
Sovereign Man says
Interesting commentary, Demsci. I have my doubts that such a sick cult as Islam can ever be made compatible with the rest of humanity, but it is worth the effort – or else there will be a lot more bloodletting in the years to come.
GlennC says
Please read Terry’s comment just above yours. Read it slowly and please do what he suggests. It really will open your eyes. As a matter of fact, use eye drops. It’s a lot to take in, but worth the effort.
Michael Copeland says
@ Demsci. Thank you for your comment. Some observations, if I may: “how criminally unclear, ambiguous and multi-interpretable the tenets, guidelines of Islam are.”
No. This claim is a deliberate deception propagated by Islam for the bafflement of the Kuffar (the non-muslims): it is part of Islam’s “taqiyya”, authorised deception. The Koran contains instructions that contradict each other. How are these resolved? The later ones “abrogate”, that is, cancel out and over-ride, the earlier. See chapter 9: it can be found online. That “sura”, the Sura At-Tawba cited by the Woolwich killer of Lee Rigby, is the latest complete chapter. It is full of instructions to kill the unbeliever. As ancient scholar As-Shawkani explains, “The verses of forgiveness are abrogated by the duty of fighting”. That means all the peaceful verses elsewhere: they are history.
“Interpretation” is another component of Islam’s deception. It is a deliberately dishonest distraction, a “red herring”, as we say. Here is a handy interpretation guide: kill means kill, stone means stone, cut off means cut off, what your right hands possess means slaves.
The violent jihadis do not abuse, misunderstand, warp, twist, pervert, or hi-jack anything. They are, as Lt. Col. Allen West says, “doing exactly what this book says”. The root teachings of Islam instruct muslims to subjugate non-muslims by force into submission, and kill them if they refuse, taking their property as booty, and their wives and children as slaves (Koran 9:29, see it online). This is the fundamental essence of Islam, as evidenced by almost 1400 years of doing just that. Witness Islamic State in Iraq today.
“Radical” and “fundamentalist”
The word for root in Latin is “radix”. Root matters are “radical”, the core essence of the ideology. They are likewise “fundamental” to its identity and definition: without them it would not be what it is. Careless uneducated modern journalists, and politicians who should know better, misuse these two words, “radical” and “fundamentalist”, as if they denote erroneous understanding, or the endorsing of a violence that does not belong. This usage is itself badly in error. The root, the fundamental essence, of Islam is coercion, force. “Violence is the heart of Islam”, says Ayatollah Yazdi, adviser to Ahmedinejad of Iran, “heart” being another metaphor, like “root”.
A reformed Islam
The idea of a new reformed, moderated, Europe-compatible Islam is appealing, but it is another and dangerous red herring, designed to occupy much management time, and to draw attention away from the Jihad. Look at it this way: Islam will never accept any changes proposed by filthy kuffar. If Islam can manage to change itself that will be good. Until it does so we must recognise it – by its fruits – for what it is, “incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy” (European Court, Welfare Party case, 2003).
Michael Copeland says
All credit to Robert Spencer and http://www.TheReligionOfPeace.com for the information cited.
Acknowledgment omitted by mistake.
Charli Main says
@ Michael C
Muruna is a tactic being increasingly used by Muslims in Europe and I’m sure elsewhere.
MURUNA======Blending in with the enemy or surroundings to deceive the Kaffirs
Demsci says
Thanks Michael Copeland!
(I am) Digesting your response here. Impressive, agree for 95 %. Also saw earlier good informative posts from you.
I love to see Islam & Democracy in historical context. And I believe in historic progress for mankind and am optimistic about the future, about Democracy persevering and winning.
When young I was really scared of the Soviet Union, with as high point 1979, when Jimmy Carter solemnly warned us of the great danger we were in. But my fear was proven wrong, as all know, in 1989-1991.
Then, as NOW, the oil price played a large role, I later learned. With satisfaction I note that the Americans, with their shale revolution, turned the tables on IRAN, the Russian Federation. And I speculate that an energy-independent America will not need and befriend Saudi Arabia so much any more. Is n’t that great?
Oh, I believe in the wisdom of the masses. I can never be a lone wolf, I need my fellow democratic citizens. And when they hurt my feelings, I still want to stay with them, I have my priorities straight (I hope). A part of the Muslims will not just hurt my feelings, but also my body and loved ones, and fellow democratic citizens.
but where I do see the nature of the threat, are we all in agreement about it’s SCOPE? There IS NEGATIVITY BIAS, which is prejudice for expectation of too much danger.
And let us look at what Muslims should be afraid of; I don;t believe in Artificial Intelligence taking over. But I can imagine TRANSHUMANS, much augmented humans, hostile to primitive ideologies like Islam AND so much more powerful than the 7th century-based Muslims, who only have the copycats of the Transhumans.
Will the Muslims, militarily or otherwise, eat us, democratic citizens, later transhumans, up? Or will we eat them up?
Even demographically they can only win so much. it seems that even the Muslima’s get less and less children (and this comes from David Goldman, aka Spengler).
eib says
Let him know that the majority is behind his statement by more than a vote. Protect him best by validating his words, being confident in the strength of your citizenship. He deserves both informal and formal support.
voegelinian says
“burden of proof is upon Muslims to prove that it is not per se anti-democratic, which is what many Muslims maintain and which mayor Aboutaleb embodies”
You mean which Aboutaleb is pretending to embody. I am flabbergasted that Jihad Watch veterans like Demsci actually believe it’s possible to be a Muslim and not be at enmity with the free world. Calling for a reformed Islam (as Demsci is doing here) is no less ridiculous (and reckless) as it would be to call for a “Reformed Nazism” — indeed, it is much, much, worse. There is simply no excuse for this type of thinking in the one place in the Universe where hearts & minds are supposed to be free of the PC MC of the Mainstream.
Jen says
I agree Voeg. I feel that this would be reckless. In less serious matters, you could offer some leeway- but not with Islam. You have to assume the worst possible outcome; even if you hope for the best. The worse possible outcome is written in the texts themselves! It is not a simplification to say so.
I want western countries to squash this threat by adopting a zero-tolerance approach. This is truly the only way to do it. The alternative is living with troops in your neighbourhood on a daily basis.
Given the culture in many western countries (perhaps excluding the US), I’m not even confident that they would provide that level of security for people so infidels should be worried. The culture isn’t ‘militant’ enough in most western countries. My relatives have been lucky enough to have had a military base built, right in their own town and this is the only thing stopping Muslims over-running it. I can’t see this happening in this country and the likelihood is that troops will be removed as soon as they deem (in their predictable naivety) that the threat has ‘diminished.’ The threat NEVER diminishes! Never, once Muslims are present. Muslims will run rings around western countries when they sense a weakness.The best approach, is the ruthless approach- from the **outset** Otherwise, what will happen is that you fumble; gradually leading to the inevitable conclusion that the west cannot deal with this problem any differently to any other country. In that interim period, a lot of damage and lives could be lost. The softness of western culture is an enormous disadvantage and if anything, western countries are far worse off in dealing with these problems than others! It is possible that this man is not a proper Muslim. **However** you can’t forget, that after years of having western countries bend over backwards for Muslims, the recent level of outrage against them is a new thing- they need to adopt a new approach to adjust to this situation otherwise (being outnumbered by non-Muslims at this stage), they might come under attack. It is possible that some Muslims will shield their ‘brothers’ by having key figures speak to the media; in order to provide the appearance that most Muslims don’t want sharia, and do not think like the terrorists. In fact, they already do that! (but they tend to play the victim card which is worn out now). When you know you’re almost beaten, throwing out a few candy bars to please the naive infidel is likely. There is no way that any country should gamble with something like this. Give them the boot or kiss your freedoms goodbye. I’m telling ya guys…
Demsci says
Voegelinian. Rest assured I agree with MOST, only not ALL, with what JW-ers say. And also that I at least, thanks in great measure to Jihad Watch, know what I talk about, to a large extent.
But I live among a family, friends, colleaques, friends, who …. are all political correct, trying to protect Muslims AND Islam. I live in a city of 100.000 Muslims and have dealings with them often. In these circumstances I try to be both as kindhearted and fair and logical and not hypocritical as I can. And also I like to contribute to the slightest possibility of preservation of peaceful coexistence, because i think I have no choice but that.
I also am much more optimistic that Islam will be contained and perhaps even beaten in the coming time. I just want it to be beaten in as peaceful manner as possible, which according to me is still safe. As you perceive well, I am less afraid of Islam taking over than you. But please appreciate that we both are heavily in favor and love with the democratic system.
And it is not so that I necessarily naively believe that Islam can be reformed. If you give me the space I like to point out my “strategy”. My proposal for “New Islam” is a follow-up of Al-Sisi’s speech to Al Azhar; he was “saying”: Muslims, YOU are at fault and responsible, do something!
And I can tell you that I do not have to believe that Islam can be reformed, but that it is very necessary that Muslims are challenged to reform it! So that when they inevitably fail to do so, we have one more strong argument, and political correct people can be shown how totalitarian and rigid Islam really is.
The so-called Moderate Muslims, like Aboutaleb, keep saying: These terrorists are not Muslims. Robert Spencer by now has made a “million” remarks about Muslims “misunderstanding Islam”. And Aboutaleb must accept to be called a “democratic Muslim”, because if he was not democratic he would not be socialist and mayor.
Let us keep these moderate Muslim at their word! Even if we know they will fail to respond. If they do, show this to the political corrects,we have tried everything else that is democratic and peaceful! maybe this works!
I say: If so many Muslims MISUNDERSTAND Islam, according to “democratic Muslims”, if “democratic Muslims” implicitly tell us that they can “obey god and their reiligion and at the same time be democratic” (THEY say that, not I, challenge them to prove it!!!),
So what about the challenge, the demand from us, to form a “new Islam”, a “democratic Islam”. And “Democratic Islam” must be MUCH CLEARER and else re-written until it is, than “traditional” Islam, which is criminally unclear, ambiguous and prone to anti-democratic misuse. And members of “Democratic Islam” must be thrown out, when they do not abide to the re-written clear tenets of “Democratic Islam”. When we know that in traditional Muslims the rotten appels can never be kicked out! Instead: They are obligated to stay in, on pain of death.
Should Aboutaleb and co pull this off, then “Democratic Muslims” can be trusted a degee higher than traditional Muslims, they can be held accountable a degree higher then the others. and on immigration and even citizenship can be imposed the condition of membership of “Democratic Islam”, for Muslims.
And now, what IS the risk of trying that?! Is THIS going to give them the chance to finally conquer us???
Demsci says
Voegelinian, you and are both democratic and want to bequeath that system to our descendants and possible most humans. Of necessity that means that you don’t want to forbid or sensor me nor I you, that is in the heart of democracy, that is what Charlie Hebdo was all about. You should not even want to get rid of me. Not even on Jihad Watch!
And People like me need people like you, on condition that you stay democratic too. I suppose when Muslims come to power they will first kill people like Spencer and you, but inevitably afterwards to people like me too. I know that, even if stupid political correct people don’t.
But we both need not change, nor even to pretend. We both represent Democracy and we both should be taken into account as Democrats.
The political correct fault is that they want to censor people like you and Spencer and Wilders. But I RELY ON YOU.
And A fault of the Muslims that they use your group as excuse to get radicalized and anti-Western. And Muslims often consistently do not enough appreciate people like me, in agreement with you on democracy, but precisely because of that, sometimes in disagreement with you and more out-reaching and protective of them!
We can be both democratic but otherwise as democrats MUST be sometimes NOT on the same page.
voegelinian says
Whether I want to “get rid of” Demsci or not, I still stand by what I said:
” There is simply no excuse for this type of thinking [i.e., one based on hope for reform among Muslims] in the one place in the Universe where hearts & minds are supposed to be free of the PC MC of the Mainstream.”
There is a wider world of the Mainstream where such insane hope is trafficked in all the live long day. Why anyone would want to handicap the still small, beleaguered anti-Islam movement with PC MC-derived shibboleths is beyond me. And I will continue to criticize such ideas.
jay says
Countdown until he’s without a head.
katnis says
Right on! We have been waiting for a public message like this from a muslim leader.
Ren says
Some politicians are braver than others!
Nat says
Talk is cheap. Especially coming from a politician / muslim.
Dave J says
BRAVO! (If sincere).
Someone needed to say this.
All the prisoners of Islam: break out, speak up, give thanks!
Georg says
Hmm… Seems like a pretty decent guy. Thanks.
GlennC says
Please read Terry’s comment just above yours. Read it slowly and please do what he suggests. It really will open your eyes. As a matter of fact, use eye drops. It’s a lot to take in, but worth the effort.
Salah says
I’m sure this guy is sincere. I’m sure many, if not most Muslims do agree with him. Why? because most Muslims are actually “nominal” Muslims. They have their own interpretation of Islam (i.e. the peaceful Meccan verses.)
Most Muslims firmly believe that the Medina violent verses were meant for a specific situation, a specific people and a specific time.
Of course, they are wrong. This is why I call them “nominal” Muslims.
Nevertheless, they are sincere, they want to live and let live, they are decent, peaceful and they reject violence.
We need more people like him in the West. In my country (Egypt) we see people like him all the time, everywhere, including public TV shows. They are growing in number and are getting louder.
Al Azhar is trembling with fear!!!
If you have a few minutes to spare, watch this video and listen to this 5 mn speech by President as-Sisi. Then, ask yourself: is this man a True Muslim or is he a Subtle Christian?
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2015/01/historic-christmas-day-in-egypt.html
Danny says
Hey Salah,
This is the first of your comments I must disagree with. There is no substitute for leaving Islam. He knows all about Mohammed and Allah. Yet, he wants peace with the kafir. It makes no sense. If he wants to get serious, reject Islam completely.
Uninformed Muslims may know nothing about what they ‘believe’, making them the most dangerous aspect of Islam. The enemy doesn’t really exist, until it’s too late.
It’s the ‘moderates’ that give cover to the true Islam. How is that a good thing?
What we need is more people like Zakaria Botros. Tell it straight and get ’em out.
We need Muslims rejecting Islam, and being very clear on why they left.
Death by smokescreen is Islam’s secret weapon.
E. Alexandra Pierce says
That’s unrealistic. It doesn’t matter what religion a person is – they’re unlikely to leave it just because you point out how much its doctrines suck. Their reactions are generally to ignore it, ignore you, lash out, or choose to interpret their religion differently. That’s what Christianity did, and for long time now it’s been relatively mild-mannered in spite of scriptures which are every bit as awful as those in the Quran. If Christians and Jews actually lived according to literal readings of the Old and New Testaments, the west would be every bit as barbaric as the Islamic world. It isn’t, however, not because people just decided not to be Christian or Jewish anymore, but because they undertook interpretation.
People who are smart and open-minded enough to listen to criticism of their religion – to the point that they actually consider abandoning it – are rare, indeed. And even more rare are those who apostatize even though doing so puts their lives, and the lives of their loved ones, in jeopardy.
Islam is going to reform, not disappear.
E. Alexandra Pierce says
The end of the first paragraph should be “because they undertook re-interpretation.”
voegelinian says
Would E, Alexandra Pierce hope for a reform of Nazism? Would she even find such a “reform” coherent at all? Now, when considering Islam, let us take that hypothetical skepticism and multiply it to the 10th power. A mountain range of bloody history (with the still living and raging volcano of Current Events at its forefront) indicates I am underestimating the problem, if anything.
Danny says
Not sure if that was a serious reply. Unfortunately, it probably was.
You’d get along with Reza Aslan. You can both claim Christianity and Islam are the same thing. Words have no meaning. Right?
Christianity is following the teachings and example of Christ. Islam is following the teachings and example of Mohammed.
Christ was completely non-violent and Mohammed was extremely violent. Is that the same thing to you?
Christ taught to love they neighbour without condition. Mohammed taught to kill or enslave thy neighbour, if he’s an unbeliever. Can’t see the difference?
Islam desensitises otherwise healthy individuals by convincing that unbelievers are ‘the vilest of animals’ and ‘worst of creatures’. And they themselves are, of course, ‘the best of people’.
Christianity taught self-sacrifice for unbelievers. The first Christians went to their death spreading their message to unbelievers.
Christ died for what he believed. Mohammed killed for what he believed. Is that the same thing too?
Christ and Mohammed were complete opposites. Just as true(following the teachings of Mohammed) Muslims and true(following the teachings of the Christ) Christians are opposites today.
voegelinian says
“There is no substitute for leaving Islam. He knows all about Mohammed and Allah. Yet, he wants peace with the kafir. It makes no sense.”
It makes sense in terms of the taqiyya deception of the Good Cop (or the “Better Cop” who makes a show of seeming to be scolding fellow Muslims) — which only works, one should recall, to the extent that the dupe is gullible enough to believe the Good Cop is not, in fact, in collusion with the Bad Cop he is pretending to be against. I wouldn’t bat an eyelash if someone in the Mainstream were so gullible; but it’s quite dismaying and dispiriting when I keep bumping into otherwise robustly anti-Islam folks who seem unwilling or unable to exercise a judicious suspicion of all Muslims (of course, not everyone who comments on Jihad Watch is actually Counter-Jihad; some (like E. Alexandra Pierce) are virtually PC MC themselves).
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“of course, not everyone who comments on Jihad Watch is actually Counter-Jihad”
And who gets to decide who is and who isn’t a Counter-Jihad? You, who spend most of your time here attacking Counter-Jihadis and trying to gather pity by playing the victim? Didn’t you create Jihad Watch Watch, a blog dedicated to attack Jihad Watch contributors (Robert Spencer, Hugh Fitzgerald, etc.) and commentators alike?
Apparently, by voeg’s standards, key-figures of the CJ movement are “softies” (or, as voeg would put it, “asymptotic JWers who mostly talk tough against Islam but here and there reveal their PC MC soft nougaty chew center, reflecting a relatively high degree of obtuse quasi-dhimmitude”).
Danny says
It makes sense in terms of the taqiyya deception…
Salah said he thought he was sincere. In that context, it makes no sense.
My view was ‘death by smokescreen’.
voegelinian says
One appreciates Salah actually articulating the asymptotic view so that we can see many of its inner gears and mechanisms in full view — all, of course, hinging on the sweeping (and utterly unverifiable) belief that hundreds of millions of Muslims are somehow not really… Islamic.
E. Alexandra Pierce says
You tell ’em, voeg! Yer darn tootin’! AIn’t no such thing as a Mooslim without ulterior motives. Filthy taquiyya artists, every last one of ’em!
Maybe I’ll go trick-or-treating on Halloween next year and show up at your door in a Zuhdi Jasser costume. “Hello. I’m collecting candy for the American Islamic Forum for Taqi- um, Democracy. BOO!”
Salah says
@ voegelinian
I replied to you on a previous thread and I asked you to watch this video.
In case you missed it, here’s the link. Please watch it.
We all know that Islam is evil, but we must have the decency and the courage to acknowledge that some Muslims, for whatever reason, are not.
Please watch Al-Sisi’s 5 mn speech in his unannounced visit to the Coptic Cathedral on Christmas Eve.
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2015/01/historic-christmas-day-in-egypt.html
Jen says
I agree some Muslims are not Salah, but Muslims can sort these problems within their own communities in their own country, perhaps under Sisi style of leadership; if they continue to let him live, and if western countries wouldn’t interfere. It is not fair, nor decent to throw my country (in this case I’m talking about England; other times I’ve been talking about NZ when I said ‘my country’) away to Muslims who out-breed the native population and belong to a supremacist cult which drains the country of resources. Even providing troops to an area is expensive and the economic situation may mean they will skimp to make savings, and put peoples’ lives at risk. I’m concerned for the children of my country who will have to live in this situation and I don’t feel it is responsible to place this burden on their shoulders. It’s extremely unfortunate, but sometimes you have to pick the lesser of two evils. My family has fought in war to defend that country and the new immigrant Muslims have trashed it. It has obviously been enabled by the weakling culture in that country, and the people are definitely to blame for their sleepy state this entire time and for that, I am very angry. But any aspect of Sharia should not be tolerated in that country and even non-violent Muslims are capable of wanting aspects of sharia for cultural reasons. I’m multi-racial but I don’t buy this focus on ‘multiculturalism,’ because I feel it has contributed to their weakened cultural identity. The country belongs first and foremost to the native people, with those who are patriotic newcomers being welcome. The burden should be on newcomers to assimilate, and if they don’t then they need to leave. All that country has done (along with others) is repeatedly move the fence posts to accommodate them when they should have stood firm. If I, or anyone else, can risk their safety to talk about Islam then Muslims should be forced to do the same. I’m not doing this, only to end up with my own people being a minority in their own country! You know the situation with birth rates and what not…They already have enough to deal with…The financial situation in the US is also not very good….What has happened in the US, tends to have a domino effect on our interlinked economies. I do believe that many westerners are very naive and this is not a good thing. They have no real concept of genuine hardship; and it shows. Sometimes you have no alternative but to save yourselves. What reasonable grounds can anyone possibly have to rely on the Muslim community to straighten itself out? If this turns out to be a fatal mistake, there is no reversing it anytime soon. Look at all the fallen-to-Islam-countries today….Do people want even MORE children born into Muslim countries by allowing this? The child abuse in Islam is already horrific enough. Not to mention the cultural rape problem among Muslim men. Their behaviour is frightening – and I have met enough Muslim men to see this. Their country of origin doesn’t make a difference. It’s a cultural-religious problem. I feel that the priority should be safeguarding as many countries as possible and preventing even one more country having to deal with this. All I can think is; how is this fair to my ancestors who helped to build that country? Haven’t people already done enough accommodating?
There are people in this country such as the Egyptian Muslim girl whom I went to school with, **still** being a Muslim. This girl has read the Bible enough times as we went to a Christian school but she’s still Muslim, in spite of Muhammad’s blatant inferiority. Why on earth should I “respect” her choice to remain with Islam, while her co-religionists butcher my fellow Christians? What level of embarrassment is required to make people like this leave? Who is to say that her children don’t decide to take a more strict adherence to Islam than herself? If she remains in Islam, then her children will be Muslims. There are some Muslims who will leave Islam due to its negative publicity, but there are also this new breed of “Jihadi baby” being bred and it is easier than ever to unify their Muslim cultural identity on a global scale because of the internet and these Jihadi “parenting books” that can easily be distributed. The Muslims that used to kill one another over tribal disputes, are now unified under the “Islam banner” and part of the ummah, because of foreign money (Saudis for one), than they were in the past. There were some groups of Muslims in my relatives’ place who used to be largely ignorant of Islam, maybe 40 or so years ago but things aren’t improving because their cultural identity centres around fighting (in other words, following Islam). This isn’t being helped by all the gruesome ISIS footage being shown on the internet which I know some of them must be watching. That is the problem with the mere presence of Islam. It can exist in largely peaceful forms for a long-time, but when needed to be “reinvigorated” for political ends, it is the perfect tool to de-stabilize the country from within. I feel that people should only rely on that which has shown itself to be reliable.
voegelinian says
I watched the video. It would be nice if Sisi acknowledged that Islamic Egypt, from the day it rapaciously conquered and subjugated it in the 7th century clear through to the 21st century, has been a wicked and unjust atrocity. That honest admission would be a good place to start a genuine dialogue (as opposed to one that one has good reason to suppose is a phony dialogue); but it would be a devastating admission. By analogy, it would be like a man who, let us say, does love his wife, but has been living a lie for 30 years, beating her and sleeping with other women. One day he comes to his wife, hat in hand, to honestly admit all his crimes against her, begging her forgiveness. Now imagine the same man approaching his wife — without being honest about his wicked past against her. Indeed, lying about it. Would he deserve her forgiveness? Would she be wise to accept his request, when he’s not even showing her the basic respect of being honest about his crimes?
Salah says
@ voegelinian
One step at a time, voegelinian, one step at a time. After 14 centuries of Islamic horror we cannot expect change to happen overnight. Yet, change *is* happening, and it’s happening relatively fast.
Thanks for watching the video. Thanks for your reply.
P.S. We’re on the same side, fighting against the same enemy. We just happen to use different tactics.
Jen says
Salah…You said the change was happening fast- perhaps in some places it is; but not in others – not for the better anyway! There are Muslims protesting in my mother’s hometown and burning Israel’s flag, burning the Jewish scriptures, and burning pictures of Netanyahu!! I have never heard of this happening before!! The anger was mostly directed at Christians, rather than Jews. It’s because of the caliphate and Muslims rallying around one another on a global scale. I’m beginning to get to get very annoyed at people who suggest we need to have the “courage” to “trust” them. On what basis??? Nobody has given me a sensible answer to this because there isn’t one.
Jen says
And Salah…Change may come to a place like Egypt as time passes but this is not indicative of the Muslims everywhere else! Don’t you care about Europe?? Do you want European girls to get raped like the Muslim men rape and harass women in Egypt?? I sure don’t!! It is seriously unfair to expect countries to accommodate any of this, for any reason. These ridiculous and deluded nominal Muslim types need to stop kidding themselves about Islam. I am not being “respectful” until they stop advertising Muhammad in their Islamic dress. Following a God which has people yelling “God is greater” while they kill someone is not okay!! They need to use their brain…
Ed says
Wow, this courageous kaffir could pay with his life.
He might as well leave Islam, he stands for everything that Islam doesn’t.
His prophet would want him dead. His god would want him dead. His imams would want him dead. He is against most of their teachings. Their Koran cannot be changed.
Why would he want to be a Muslim?
Dracula says
These uncompromising and patriotic statements are worthy of praise on their own, but I have to ask if the good mayor has developed a sound religious argument for his stance opposite the anti-democratic and illiberal Muslims in the Netherlands.
However much this edifies his character, I doubt he has developed a firm theological set of principles which enable him to be a Muslim and fully embrace Dutch culture at once. I find it more likely that he’s playing Cafeteria and picking and choosing what he likes and wishes to believe in from Islam.
That works for him, but it’s not productive in persuading other Dutch Muslims, if they are truly faithful, to go along with his thinking.
voegelinian says
“but I have to ask if the good mayor has developed a sound religious argument for his stance opposite the anti-democratic and illiberal Muslims in the Netherlands.”
Why do you “have to” ask? We already know the answer (or as students of Robert Spencer and many other analysts over the years we should already know the answer): it is logically and theologically impossible to be a Muslim and not be at enmity with all freedom-loving people and societies on the planet. And therefore the Mayor’s statements must be taken not merely with a grain of salt, but with the tons of salt the Romans used to definitively stop Carthage.
It’s quite dismaying to have to remind Jihad Watchers of such elementary propositions (see my multitudes of similar comments above…).
pr126 says
Does this invalidate his life insurance policy?
Clkifford Hall says
Demsci
Thank you very much. I wish you and the Mayor very well.
Terry
Are you the solution or one of the problems? I’m still trying to work it out. See, given some of the shitty things in the OT I’m not sure how quoting book verses takes you very far; and even if it does lead you to conclude that Islam is as ungodly as you suggest – and I believe you’re right, but no matter – what then? Where do you go from there? Gas chambers? Repatriation? Proscription? But who’s going to do that? You? Obama? ANY world leader? Is your mindset any different from those you oppose, that’s to say intractable and narrow? So I ask again, are you the solution or one of the problems?
voegelinian says
The comment by “Clkifford Hall” provides a glimpse into the asymptotic knobs and gears of the asymptotic mind:
“…even if it does lead you to conclude that Islam is as ungodly as you suggest – and I believe you’re right, but no matter – what then? Where do you go from there? Gas chambers? Repatriation? Proscription? But who’s going to do that? You? Obama? ANY world leader? ”
Notice how he glides so effortlessly from the diagnosis of the problem (which he never really clarifies) to demands for a solution. Then notice the deftly charged squib he sows to taint the conversation with —-insinuations of another Holocaust (“Gas chambers?”) — immediately followed by “repatriation” and “proscription”, thereby implying they are all of an alarming piece and should be lumped together as Unthinkables in his audience’s mind.
Now, back to the primary problem: the avoidance of the diagnosis phase of the problem. We can’t have a reasonable discussion about “solutions” until we hammer out what the nature of the problem is, and until we make sure we are all on the same page.
The approach used by “Clkifford Hall” indicates that he is not, in fact, on the same page as terry in this regard (or me, or anyone else in the Counter-Jihad who has shown their ability to graduate along the horrifying learning curve of this dreadful problem). An analogy/metaphor may be useful at this juncture: Imagine two people (Peter and Mary) talking about a problem – the problem of a house on fire. Mary insists the house is, in fact, on fire. She wants to knock down walls and douse the entire house with water (which, needless to say, would ruin the house as it stands). Peter sits at the table with her sipping coffee, condescendingly assuring her that: “and I believe you’re right, but no matter – what then?…”. No, Peter obviously does not “believe” Mary is right. He wouldn’t be asking her the stupid rhetorical question “what then?” if he agreed the fucking house was on fire, for fuck sake! Et fucking cetera.
Clifford Hall says
Demski
Thank you very much. I wish you and your Mayor very well.
Terry
Are you the solution or one of the problems? I’m still trying to work it out. See, given that there are satanic verses even in the OT, the thrust and effect of which we now ignore, I’m unclear how simply quoting verses takes you very far other than to disabuse the world of the ‘religion of peace’ slogan. But even if you do, what then? Gas chambers? Repatriation? Proscription? Book burning? And who’s going to do that? You? Obama? A Republican President? Any world leader? And then, is your mindset any different from those we oppose, that’s to say intractable and narrow? As I say, I’m still trying to work it out. Meanwhile, again, are you the solution or one of the problems?
Michael Copeland says
The Old Testament does not form part of Dutch law.
The Koran – all of it – is part of Islamic law.
Denying any Koran verse brings the death penalty, which can be carried out without repercussion by anyone “since it is killing someone who deserves to die” (Manual of Islamic Law, “Reliance of the Traveller”,o8.4). The Manual is a free download: anyone can consult it.
E. Alexandra Pierce says
The Old Testament, however, contains numerous laws supposedly passed directly from God to men, which were codified as the laws of the Hebrews and all those they conquered – and many of the harshest OT laws are repeated, almost verbatim, in the Quran, right along with prescribed punishments, like stoning, for specific crimes, such as being suspected of not being a virgin on your wedding night. And just like the Quran, The Old Testament’s tales were considered literally true – talking donkeys and all.
Just like Judaism and Christianity, Islam is entirely capable of re-interpretation of its doctrines, distancing itself from silly/tribal/horrific/genocidal origin stories, and abandoning theocracy. All it would take is enough Muslims to decide to do it – and that’s precisely what’s happening. It may be in a nascent stage, but there are more and more Muslims actively pushing for reform all the time. The fact is, the west is infecting Islamic thought much more thoroughly that it’s infecting ours.
voegelinian says
“Just like Judaism and Christianity, Islam is entirely capable of re-interpretation of its doctrines…”
Hang on, Sloopy. Just a cotton-pickin’ minute there with your glibly breezy neo-Wilsonian Universalism that assumes that Everything Is the Same. No, Islam is not the same as Judaism or Christianity — or anything else on the planet. It is unique. Get that through your multiculturally thick skull.
Jen says
Has this person read the Qur’an or are they Muslim?
For the sake of defending your country, waiting on “more and more” Muslims to get off their butts and reform their death cult is hardly a safe strategy. Why on earth would any country give violent Muslims and their stealth jihad brothers, any leeway? What can any country possibly gain, even from a “reformed” version of this death cult? Why do people keep suggesting that this burden to babysit them until they “come to their senses” or “pluck up the courage”, rests on non-Muslims in a non-Muslim country? I get more angry at this style of comment, each time I come across one.
Demsci says
Thank you Alexandra Pierce, I agree.
Jen. The answer to your questions is that we are democratic people, and the majority of the people and parliament need to agree on strond measures like discernment, or what others call, discrimination of whom to let immigrate and whom not. For everything we need a majority. The people to PERSUADE are that majority of neutral, disinterested, often ignorant people. THERE is your battlefield. Very the majority will reject your suggestions.
Jen says
Demsci, I understand what you’re saying but what I cannot understand is why people **wouldn’t** already be persuaded enough!! Haven’t people seen enough!! This in an emergency situation!! What will it take for them to open their eyes!!
voegelinian says
“what I cannot understand is why people **wouldn’t** already be persuaded enough!! Haven’t people seen enough!! ”
Indeed, Jen. The likes of Demsci (and, unfortunately, all too many others in the Counter-Jihad) are still thinking in term of approximately 9:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time, September 11, 2001.
8:45 a.m. (all times are EDT): A hijacked passenger jet, American Airlines Flight 11 out of Boston, Massachusetts, crashes into the north tower of the World Trade Center, tearing a gaping hole in the building and setting it afire.
I.e., their brains are still stuck back in time to a point in time not much more than 15 minutes after the first plane hit on that gloriously sunny day; as though they haven’t been processing — really processing — the horrific flaming bloody lava torrents of data which Mohammedans have been spewing in the last 15 fucking years.
Man, what I wouldn’t give to have that kind of Pollyannishly rose-colored complacency…!
Angemon says
The whole what, 3 of them?
“Well-meaning” is a misleader – muslims want to enforce sharia because they believe it came from allah and therefore it’s the best for everyone.
duh_swami says
The bottom of the bottom line…Never trust anyone who believes Allah is God, no matter what they say…Period…
voegelinian says
Not only does Mayor Ahmed believe Allah is God, he also believes Muhammad is the greatest man of history. That alone should make him utterly suspect in our eyes. Unfortunately, most commenters here seem to be naive on this account.
Theo Prinse says
The muslim mayor of Rotterdam has a double pasport (Moroccan) and is member of the Dutch Labour Party that promotes marxist culturalism and the idea that islam is peaceful. He fully supports the prosecution of Freedom fighter Geert Wilders. Mr. Aboutaleb is a wolf in sheep clothes
voegelinian says
Thanks. Are the CJ Softies taking notice?
Jen says
Thanks for the link. That link needs to go up on the front of this blog. I don’t think it’s good idea to ‘promote’ the idea of this ‘nominal’ Muslim mayor when we don’t have all the facts on him! Now there are a bunch of people who probably think that he can be trusted!!! Voeg, it’s because there are so many naive infidels out there who are so eager to find a peaceful and ‘less harsh’ solution that they will leap at anything which looks remotely promising; thereby immediately letting their guard down.
Jen says
That link doesn’t provide any information about him… but maybe it’s fitting. It is ridiculous that so many people are so willing to believe someone (a Muslim), based on a few words Voeg!! It’s probably due to the fact that these people operate from a stance of believing that ‘most Muslims’ don’t know what their cult is about or this ‘tiny minority extremists’ thing; like this makes any difference to anything! I’m sorry but people who believe that and influence policy accordingly, are naive and will throw their country under the bus!! I cannot believe this is happening sometimes…What on earth will it take for people, even those who have followed counter-jihad for years, to use basic common sense? I can almost forgive those who know nothing about Islam thinking this until they learn more; but I cannot forgive those who have followed counter-jihad for a long time and should know better! The naive idiots are going to give our countries away on a plate.
Demsci says
The situation is very complex. We are as a democratic society muddling through it, for a few decades But once we are clear in majority, we might be very strong.
Voegelinian is a guard, almost a general, we need those. Those will not kill me, curtail my freedom. Muslims would.
But Voegelinian is all about what we are AGAINST. And he is much better at it than I am. But my terrain is what non-Muslims are supposed to be FOR. And I might be better at it than he is. I don;t hear much from him about what we should be FOR.
About Pollyannish optimism. Take 5000 years, then esp. 200 years. I believe in huge progress, in fits and starts, but still, of mankind. Including improvement in longevity and less war, less crime, less poverty, less totalitarian rule, per capita.
If a person does not believe in progress in the past 200 to 5000 years, that person is very illogical to believe that mankind this time CAN progress, through his/ her efforts. Such a person should understand that in the case of no progress, and I mean on aggregate, his. her efforts are futile, even insane.
In the past the pessimists, predicted great catastrophes looming, but were often spectacularly wrong. Regardless, the people listen to the new pessimists. But the “Pollyanna” predicters were IMO much more accurate
But I think that the newly coined or published term “negativity bias” influences most people, including Voegelinian.
Jen says
I understand what you’re saying but there is too much at stake here, not to think as Voeg does. You know the old expression “prepare for the worse, hope for the best’? Personally, on such a serious matter; this is the only sensible thing you can do. You cannot afford to be caught out- if you make the mistake of fumbling for too long then the damage could be irreversible. Being an optimist works well in other areas of life such as personal goals. It is helpful when wanting to achieve personal goals to somewhat bolster your drive through a little bit of self delusion because otherwise you would slip into focusing on the negatives instead of focusing on finding solutions to overcome the hurdles. But with Islam, it is different! I’m sorry but it is SO SO different…It is a gamble that is not worth taking! Nothing in the future regarding our progress as humans is certain. But one thing that is very likely, and which you can probably rely upon more, is that if your country doesn’t fight hard, then it will fall to Islam. There is no firm basis for thinking otherwise. The question is: how much do people love their country? Are they willing to die for the sake of saving your country? What are the people there prepared to do? Is there any suggestion that someone there is going to hold a large scale protest? Somebody needs to organise this immediately!! This is the way to do it. You may get some media attention by doing this and it will cause the sleepy people to look into the matter further. There must be enough people in that country who know about this problem to attend something like this.
Have you watched this video before? http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=899_1311720974
Demsci says
Jen, seen that video. shall prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
The video looked like the fall of the Roman Empire again!
Don’t you and Voegelinian think that the majority of the Western Europeans deserve no better? Hear me out, I don’t, but I mean, in view of their stupid stubborn refusal of facing the real nature of Islam?
The war would be terrible for so many people, but the primitive Islamists, winning all? No. Parts maybe. And again; even the Muslima’s get less and less children. and the Muslims would need MANY ANGRY YOUNG MEN, BUT THEY WILL HAVE many more decrepit old men and more women. While our side would have the mainspring of creative new powerful weapons.
In my youth I was seriously afraid of the Soviet Union. But when I tried to speak out, I was mostly ignored, people did not see the danger. And you know what, they were right, it never materialized! The people who ignored the danger I saw had been proven right! I vowed never to fear a negative outcome so much as I feared a Soviet takeover.
but, please, don’t curse me, i am convinced of your deep concern of your fellow humans,
Jen says
Demsci!! The Soviet Union wasn’t Islam!! This rule of “I was afraid of this and it never happened so I won’t worry about this” is not safe! Especially if you can’t draw exact parallels. This situation is unique. Islam being associated with the ‘divine’ provides an extra dose of zeal and determination as well and is something that has been lacking in Europe to resist them to the extent where they have already made plenty of inroads. If you sat down at the table and had dinner with the average man in the army (pick any government force) you would be likely to find that many or most are decent people who are just “doing to their job” in the army and following orders. People may have joined for the sake of fighting for ideals, defending their country, or maybe they just wanted a job or maybe they were conscripted. Could you say the same for the average male in an army of jihadists? The type of people who join are people with raging anger in their heart and a desire to butcher, rape and steal with the approval of “God.” Additionally, there are millions of Muslims around the world who agree with them.
Even if Muslims did manage to take over only a certain part of a country, this would also be a disaster! What it would lead to is continual insurgency and a continued expense to these countries to monitor the situation, provide armed security in public places like shopping malls, having to check for bombs that might be attached to cars, or inside someones purse- this is the standard routine for some countries, such as the Philippines which is only around 5-6% Muslim. There’s also Thailand’s situation, or even Israel. It’s easy to kidnap people, drop a few bombs on public transport, or open fire on people and you can’t easily prevent these attacks. The people who do it aren’t afraid of dying because they think they’re going “paradise” as a reward for this behaviour. It’s just enough terror to make life difficult. The division between Muslims and non-Muslims will inevitably become sharper as more people learn about Islam and justifiably, have a hard time trusting them.
Regarding whether they deserve no better…the people who will be born into this situation don’t deserve this and neither do the younger people who didn’t have a hand in creating this climate of hopelessness which allowed it to get to this stage. As for the older sleepy people…I cannot believe this has happened. It’s no different in this country though. People still don’t understand this situation at all.
Allan Mandrowski says
I think this man deserves praise before suspicion.
He basically puts his life at risk for saying on LIVE Television that Muslims who don’t like Freedom should pack their bags and (as he put it) “f*** off”.
This man has more balls than any native Dutch politician cowering to the Islamists.
Kudos to Ahmed Abouthaleb. We need more Ahmeds like him speaking out vocally against Islam and for Freedom.
duh_swami says
He is brave sort of, but he is not a pious Mahoundian…He is taqfir…He does not actually represent Islam and Allah. He is ‘slandering’ other Mahoundians…No pious Mahoundian is going to do that, unless it’s for taqiyya purposes..
Always On Watch says
The proper attitude from a Western leader! YEEHAW!
Paul Weston says
Geert Wilders, a white Dutchman, is being prosecuted for stating he wanted fewer Moroccans in Holland. A Muslim Dutchman tells Moroccans to fuck off and he is lauded as a hero. London Mayor Boris Johnson hails the Muslim Mayor’s words as the spirit of Voltaire and the Enlightenment……
All very sad. Native Europeans can no longer defend their culture and country but Muslim immigrants can. And we still have so called “white privilege” rammed down our throats! Viva Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders! The next elections might just see the beginning of the Revolution if they attain power.
JOE MELO says
I also believe that eventually European politicians and the European people are going to wakeup and realize that a change in Muslim policy has to be put in place. If thousands of Muslims leave THERE to come HERE but refuse to INTEGRATE, in time, HERE will BECOME THERE. The equation is SIMPLE and EVERYBODY can see it.
cheekturner says
Welcome Paul. Yeah this muslim taqquiya artist can say what he does and get lauded for it by the western politicians simply because they need fear no personal repercussions from demented muslims as this POS will be their target.
Viva Marine
Viva Wilders
Long Live Liberty U.K.
Michael Copeland says
@ nothosaur above
Polls.
Polls showing what muslims say they support or do not support can be interesting, but Islam is not defined by polls. Islam remains the same whatever the polls say: it is defined by its source texts, which, by Sharia law, cannot be changed.
Support for Sharia
Significant numbers of muslims continue to “support” sharia. Indeed: they have no option: they are trapped. “Sharia is Islam and Islam is Sharia”, said Fouad Belkacem, Abu Imran, of Sharia4Belgium. To express opposition to Sharia is to leave Islam, to become an apostate, for which the penalty is death that can be inflicted vigilante style by anyone with no legal repercussion (Manual of Islamic Law, “Reliance of the Traveller”, o8.4). The Manual is a free download: anyone can consult it.
JOE MELO says
You are SOOO….. right Michael Copeland.
Cliff Ross` says
Pretty simple. Assimilate, or leave. Honor and accept the values of your new Country, or go ride a camel somewhere else.
JOE MELO says
Why can`t we minimize the problem for God sakes by simply reducing the number of Muslims coming to western democracies via legal immigration and deporting the illegal ones.I undertand that for France Belgium and others is probably too late `cause a great number of them were already born there.
Paul says
Difficult one for the ‘intellectual’ left this. A secular minded
Arab Muslim speaking up for freedom and democracy.
Should they just ignore what he said, or should they label
this non-white, non-Westerner who has dared to have a
contrary opinion a ‘racist’? We await the verdict of the
oracle!
JOE MELO says
He would better watch out or he could be the next to have his head chopped off in the middle of the street.We have seen that before in Holland.
Paul says
Very true. Let’s just hope that doesn’t happen,
and may God be with him 🙂
voegelinian says
Actually, the PC MC can find Mayor Ahmed’s speech quite useful. For one thing, the PC MC does not think entirely coherently. What the PC MC does with a Mayor Ahmed is just vaguely adduce it as evidence that Muslims are “diverse” and “not all of them” are “extremists”; and so, we should continue to absorb and assimilate innumerable Muslims into our societies. (What dismays is when this same reflex may be found within the Counter-Jihad.)
cath says
I suspect the Mayor is feeling pressure. to appease the French citizens or calm them.If he really wants “freedom”, he would not be following sharia law. I like his idea, just suspect motive. c
Allan Mandowski says
He is a Mayor of a major Dutch city. Don’t see how this has got anything to do with French people.
And where do you get from that he is following Sharia Law? If anything this secular Mayor is professing exactly the opposite of Sharia.
chumeister says
Oye , I don’t see any simple answer . If we’re being honest most Muslims would never leave their faith , because of the indoctrination they have been relentlessly exposed to ; or maybe they have really found God , or more accurately maybe God has found them through Islam ..?
But , the elephant in the room is and remains so , Muslims ‘ are ‘ propagating , and Westerners are not …We’ve allowed ourselves to become dependent on foreign immigration ..I suspect , It will be we who are forced to adapt and not them ..
Judi says
Seems to me the only way the Dutch will rid themselves of the scourge that is pisslam is to vote in Geert Wilders as their leader.
Denis MacEoin says
The mayor i clearly not a bigot. Buut you are a bigot. What does that tell us about Western or Christian values, neither of which you share but which you claim to represent. Why shouldn’t a good Muslim be mayor of any city?
gerard says
Read the Koran.
E. Alexandra Pierce says
Denis – agreed.
gerard – if people’s values were always shaped only by the scriptures of whichever religion they were raised in, then no one would be fit for public office.
Hummer says
I don’t think he’s practicing taqiyya with his consistency politically but I don’t see how that is consistent with what he professes to believe. Anyway he has made it clear and I hope many clear out soon. The backlash coming from the Paris slaughter is just beginning and the anti-islamization of Europe will grow hugely and in time it will be here in the US.
voegelinian says
“I don’t think he’s practicing taqiyya ”
Yes, you’re right; you don’t think.
Allan Mandrowski says
You’re as bad as the Islamists are.
I’m counter-Jihad, but I won’t be on your side.
Seeing taqiya in everything is not going to help. We must support muslims who are vocally against certain tenets of Islam.
Abouthaleb is not professing taqiya, he means what he says. And he puts his life at risk for doing so on live television.
Please stop seeing things that aren’t there.
PGuud says
Whatever everyone may think of voegelinian–for all the negative comments directed at him in this thread and every other thread; despite the arguments; despite everyone’s history with him; despite all of that–the man is absolutely correct in his assessment of the Muslim: that not any Muslim is ever to be trusted.
We can mock him. We can chide him about his tack. We can dismiss him. Nevertheless, he is spot-on about the Muslim.
“War is deceit.” Keep that in mind.
Islam: where freedom ends and slavery begins.
voegelinian says
“You’re as bad as the Islamists are.
I’m counter-Jihad, but I won’t be on your side.”
Wow, you sure crumpled like a wallflower. I made one derogatory statement and now you’re “not going to be on my side”. Are you sure you’re ready for the long hard road ahead? Also notice the priorities here: wounded personal feelings seem more important than condemning a Muslim who claims to be reformist.
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“Also notice the priorities here: wounded personal feelings seem more important than condemning a Muslim who claims to be reformist.”
I thought the idea was to support muslim reformists, not condemn them…
voegelinian says
Thanks PGuud. And yes; apparently, for some Jihad Watchers, my repellent personality is a more important issue than the content of my arguments against Islam-cum-Muslims (now watch Phillip Jihadski and Angemon come out of the woodwork to merely claim, without backing it up with any cogent evidence, that “Voegy has no arguments” — followed forevermore by the silence, wind whistling, and tumbleweeds of all my former friends here).
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“(now watch Phillip Jihadski and Angemon come out of the woodwork to merely claim, without backing it up with any cogent evidence, that “Voegy has no arguments””
Hi voeg. Listen, I don’t want to get in the way of your carnival psychic act, but it’s been over a week I called your bluff:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/01/author-of-islamophobic-french-novel-jihadists-are-bad-muslims/comment-page-2#comment-1172978
Where are the “scores of essays analyzing the problem of Islam and history” in Jihad Watch Watch, a blog you created to attack JW contributors and commentators?
E. Alexandra Pierce says
Allan – agreed.
PGuud – Voeg brings the criticism on himself. He launches unwarranted personal attacks on commenters as opposed to defending his own point of view, and beneath the veneer of his florid, narcissistic prose is a raw bigot. And you’re just as bad, if not worse. Even the way you talk about them (“the Muslim”). If I went around hissing antisemitic remarks about how no Jew is to be trusted and referring to them as “the Jew” I’d be branded a bigot – and I’d deserve it.
Champ says
E. Alexandra Pierce wrote:
If I went around hissing antisemitic remarks about how no Jew is to be trusted and referring to them as “the Jew” I’d be branded a bigot – and I’d deserve it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I respectfully disagree …
Please, lets be fair …Jews do not follow an evil ideology which mandates lying, murder and mayhem, such as islam does. So if you’re smart, you will not trust *any* muslim; since they are not trustworthy, and you would encourage others to do the same.
Not trusting someone–for *whatever* reason–is not being bigotted towards them. Please learn the difference, here. Wow for some reason people throw around the term “you’re a bigot” at the drop of a hat, when other reasons are at play. Again, if someone is not to be trusted–and with good reason, then you are NOT a bigot for setting up healthy boundaries with that person. Or in this case, with anyone who identifies themselves with probably the most evil criminal known to man: muhammad. Give me ONE good reason why I should trust such a person. If you can.
Take care.
Champ says
“…and you would encourage others to do the same.”
correction: and you SHOULD encourage others to do the same.
E. Alexandra Pierce says
Champ,
You wrote:
Please, lets be fair …Jews do not follow an evil ideology which mandates lying, murder and mayhem, such as islam does.
****
I agree. Jews don’t adhere to this:
“If anyone secretly entices you—even if it is your brother, your father’s son or your mother’s son, or your own son or daughter, or the wife you embrace, or your most intimate friend—saying, ‘Let us go and worship other gods’, you must not yield to or heed any such persons. Show them no pity or compassion and do not shield them. But you shall surely kill them; your own hand shall be first against them to execute them, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Stone them to death for trying to turn you away from the Lord your God.”
or…
“Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him. But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves.”
or…
“If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.”
or…
“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”
or…
“And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him. And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.”
I don’t think many Jews take this seriously, either-
“And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou hast mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee. And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee?”
So, let’s see… we’ve got death sentences for working on the sabbath and for homosexuality, an admonishment not for keeping slaves or beating them, but beating them to death (unless it takes ’em a couple days to die; then it’s okay), a command to slaughter every member of a neighboring tribe but to take the young virgins females for themselves (sex slavery), and an open-ended command to stone apostates, and/or those who tempt others to apostatize, to death. And a talking donkey. And it’s just a tiny sampling of the lunacy, evil and mayhem perpetrated by the god of the Old Testament, and his followers.
I would denounce anyone who followed such things. Jews, obviously, don’t follow them – not even the ultra-orthodox (although there’s still some troubling misogyny, anti-homosexuality and whatnot among the orthodox). And yet the Old Testament is the basis for Judaism (except where it was later altered by Christians to conform to Christian prophecy), its god is a bloodthirsty monster, and his followers were horrendous. By your lights, not a single Jewish person should be trusted, regardless of how they behave or what they say, because of the Old Testament. Just like the Quran, a literal reading of the OT leads one to believe that its word is immutable, unchangeable, and that any deviation is akin to apostasy.
The Islamic world is much closer to its founding, barbaric scriptures than its fellow Abrahamic faithful. But if Judaism and Christianity can (and did) re-interpret their way out of the darkness, so can Islam. Many Muslims are trying to do just that.
.
I agree they’d be better off just dropping it altogether. But I’m also keenly aware that people are extremely good at maintaining a state of cognitive dissonance which permits them to go on insisting their religions are peachy, regardless of how much you point out that their scriptures suck. Muslims are no different, and so I’ve accepted that sustained, voracious criticism of Islam is going to lead to its reform long before the religion eventually phases itself out. And, for the sake of humanity living in the here and now, its reform is at least a step in the right direction. Sneering at genuine reformists, or throwing shade on every instance of a Muslim saying something anti-Islamist, is not just wrong on its own, but fuels the Islamists themselves.
I know the difference between the smarmy, underhanded likes of CAIR, Reza Aslan and other Islamists, and reformist Muslims like Zuhdi Jasser, Tarek Fatah and Maajid Nawaz – honest people who want to drag their kicking and screaming religion into the 21st century, relegate it to a spiritual path, and permanently leave behind supremacist, conquest-driven, barbaric interpretations. They risk their lives to do it, and often lose them.
In light of the risks they take and the western values they try to pass on to their fellow Muslims, it’s sad to see so many in counterjihad thoughtlessly denounce them, apparently driven by their own conquest-driven bigotry. It’s as if you’re blind to progress in your own cause.
And as for this earnestly-toned nugget you wrote:
“Not trusting someone–for *whatever* reason–is not being bigotted towards them. Please learn the difference, here. Wow for some reason people throw around the term “you’re a bigot” at the drop of a hat, when other reasons are at play. Again, if someone is not to be trusted–and with good reason, then you are NOT a bigot for setting up healthy boundaries with that person. Or in this case, with anyone who identifies themselves with probably the most evil criminal known to man: muhammad. Give me ONE good reason why I should trust such a person. If you can.”
All you’ve done is make a clumsy, nonsensical attempt at justifying bigotry by likening it to one individual distrusting another. Bigotry isn’t about individuals… but I think you know that, since you tried so hard to warp it into those terms. Not comfy with your own conscience, Champ?
Take care.
Champ says
E. Alexandra Pierce wrote:
All you’ve done is make a clumsy, nonsensical attempt at justifying bigotry by likening it to one individual distrusting another. Bigotry isn’t about individuals… but I think you know that, since you tried so hard to warp it into those terms. Not comfy with your own conscience, Champ?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh brother. There’s nothing remotely “clumsy” or “nonsensical” in what I was pointing out, so marginalizing my comment is not going to work. My comparison between distrusting an individual and muslims on the whole, perfectly describes my perspective–and my conscience is quite clean, thank you. BTW, you are a terrible mind reader.
And your response to my comment only reveals a lack of intelligence and insight–on your part, since you fail to see the deeper meaning behind this comparison. Ironically you chose words that clearly describe you: clumsy and nonsensical. And you sure are a know-it-all when it comes to defining bigotry. What, are you a walking dictionary? No, you certainly aren’t even that!
Here, let me educate YOU since I have a dictionary at my disposal …
big·ot
ˈbiɡət/
noun
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
See, there is no mention of what you claim: “Bigotry isn’t about individuals”. Your claim is false and stupid, so who’s the clumsy and nonsensical one, now? Where on EARTH did you get the false idea that bigotry does not apply to individuals? That’s a hoot!
As to the rest of your longwinded comment I shall not respond to that hot mess since it’s a bunch-of-nothing with no point AT ALL worth addressing.
Wanna go for another round …
Champ says
Hey “E. Alexandra Pierce” you can go ahead and trust muslims to your hearts content and at your own risk, be my guest …
But I will continue to warn others and make wiser choices with my life and protect my family and friends from danger; and your *stupid* reply did not persuade me to rethink my position even one iota.
That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it. Yeah I am firm in my beliefs.
Champ says
Guys, notice that “E. Alexandra Pierce” has referred to several posters here as bigots? …and yet she fails to see her own bigotry towards Jews noted in her last comment.
“E. Alexandra Pierce” needs a mirror and stat.
E. Alexandra Pierce says
Champ –
Ya know, as I posted that, I thought, “It’s too bad, but if he responds at all, it’ll probably just be a hysterical reaction to the bit about bigotry and his conscience. And maybe some ‘protect the innocent’ excuse for keeping his narrow intolerance intact.” *snicker*
Hysterical doesn’t even begin to cover it. You actually tried to cherry-pick a bigotry definition? Good grief. Wipe the spittle off your screen. Here’s Merriam-Webster’s primary:
bigot: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)
That’s the commonly accepted definition, and you know it. If you honestly thought it was about one individual rejecting another individual’s opinion, you’d have no problem having the word applied to you, but you clearly do. You’re a bigot, Champ. Deal.
Unless, of course, you care to explain why you hold every member of one group in contempt for having barbaric scriptures, regardless of the actions and statements of various individuals within that group, and not another group with equally barbaric scriptures. But I won’t hold my breath. After all, it took you two posts of ranting in order for you to say how little you have to say to me.
Angemon says
E. Alexandra Pierce posted:
“Unless, of course, you care to explain why you hold every member of one group in contempt for having barbaric scriptures, regardless of the actions and statements of various individuals within that group, and not another group with equally barbaric scriptures.”
Huh, you do know that the barbarity in the OT is descriptive, not mandatory, right? Jews and Christians aren’t told “go and act like this”, as opposed to muslims, whose scriptures mandate them to war warfare against non-muslims until islam is the reigning religion in the world – you wouldn’t say that a witness describing a murder in a court of law is just as bad as the murderer or the person who hired the murderer and told him how the victim should be killed, would you?
E. Alexandra Pierce says
Scratch that – you couldn’t stop ranting at two posts, evidently. Now it’s three posts, and this time you’re trying the Islamist tactic of the third-person smear, lol.
Well, you’re right about one thing, Champ… when someone openly declares contempt for an entire group of people based on their nationality, race, religion, political wing, what have you, I do, indeed, think they’re bigots. Boy, you really got me there!
E. Alexandra Pierce says
Angemon –
“Huh, you do know that the barbarity in the OT is descriptive, not mandatory, right?”
Erm, did you actually read the OT scriptures I quoted in my post? The OT is absolutely full of the Hebrew god commanding them to commit genocides, setting forth barbaric laws, etc. Yes, there are even general commands to kill anyone (not just people of that time and place, but anyone at anytime) who decides to worship other gods. It’s no better than Islamic injunctions of death for apostasy, and reads as every bit as open-ended. I realize that it’s a pet canard of many in counterjihad that the horrendous violence of the OT is purely “descriptive,” but it’s just not true upon a literal reading. Apologists have to do a lot of theological tap-dancing to wiggle out of it – which is fine. But they don’t then get to turn around and say that Muslims must always be held only to a literal reading of the Quran and Hadith.
Angemon says
E. Alexandra Pierce posted:
“and reads as every bit as open-ended.”
That’s the sign that nothing you posted should be taken seriously…
E. Alexandra Pierce says
Angemon –
“That’s the sign that nothing you posted should be taken seriously.”
I posted OT scripture which backs up my statements. You have a dismissive slur with no argument at all.
Angemon says
E. Alexandra Pierce posted:
“I posted OT scripture which backs up my statements.”
While leaving out the ones that dismiss your case. And notice the specificity: “OT scriptures”. For Christians, the OT is not the final word, is it? What is your statement anyway? That the OT – which is not the whole Bible – states that God ordered a specific set of people to commit horrific acts on another specific set of people for specific reasons on centuries ago and therefore is as bad as the quran, which mandates that until the end of times all muslims are to wage warfare against non-muslims? Are you trying to say that both are equally bad, but one is worse than the other? It simply doesn’t add up.
“You have a dismissive slur with no argument at all.”
That’s all you’re entitled to when you’re ignorant of the subject you’re trying to discuss.
E. Alexandra Pierce says
Angemon –
“For Christians…”?
Who’s talking about Christianity? The comparison Champ ran with, which I’ve been responding to and you’ve incompetently tried to pick up, was to Judaism.
No wonder you don’t think there are open-ended injunctions to violence in the OT. Your reading comprehension is so poor that can’t even follow a small thread on a website.
Angemon says
E. Alexandra Pierce posted:
“Who’s talking about Christianity? The comparison Champ ran with, which I’ve been responding to and you’ve incompetently tried to pick up, was to Judaism.
No wonder you don’t think there are open-ended injunctions to violence in the OT. Your reading comprehension is so poor that can’t even follow a small thread on a website.”
Alexandra disingenuously picks up on the small remark I added about Christianity and pretends that’s what I was talking about all along, hoping she wouldn’t have to deal with what I said: that the horrific acts in the OT, although ordered by God, were clearly meant to a specific set of people against another specific set of people in a specific moment in time for specific reasons. That much remains true to Jews and Christians alike, and nothing that Alexandra posted so far challenges it. But since she took offense when I dismissed her “statements”, here’s a couple of examples:
Alexandra posted:
““If anyone secretly entices you—even if it is your brother, your father’s son or your mother’s son, or your own son or daughter, or the wife you embrace, or your most intimate friend—saying, ‘Let us go and worship other gods’, you must not yield to or heed any such persons. Show them no pity or compassion and do not shield them. But you shall surely kill them; your own hand shall be first against them to execute them, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Stone them to death for trying to turn you away from the Lord your God.””
As far as I can understand with my “poor reading comprehension”, that seems to be the rule of law for Jewish people. Meaning, that’s how Jews are supposed to run things in their country. I don’t have to like it, but it’s clearly not the same as saying “go out and wage war against non-jews until everyone worships your God”.
Also notice that although Alexandra made a derogatory remark about my reading comprehension, she posted that as a reply to Champ, who wrote:
“Jews do not follow an evil ideology which mandates lying, murder and mayhem, such as islam does.”
Alexandra’s answer, in context with what she was replying to, makes little to no sense.
More from Alexandra:
““Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him. But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves.””
So why aren’t Jews or Christians doing that nowadays, even the fringe groups that insist that the Bible is the word of God itself? I’m guessing that it’s because there aren’t any Midianites around nowadays, since they were on the receiving end of that declaration, as it should be obvious from the surrounding verses to anyone who, you know, actually read the whole thing – which I’m more and more inclined to believe that Alexandra didn’t.
I could go on, but I believe I made my point clear enough: Alexandra’s attempts of proving moral equivalence between the Bible and the quran require the recipient to be ignorant and unwilling to check facts – Midianites versus polytheists, unbelievers, Jews and Christians; one obscure tribe long gone versus the majority of the world’s population. Clearly the same thing, right?
Champ says
Lol, PJ! …indeed it’s “Empress Alexandra” ..the Queen of Webster’s dictionary! ..who’s a pugnacious lil’ BRAT, and not smart enough to know the meaning of anything, really. Certainly not the meaning of “bigot”. And Angemon really nailed it when he pointed out that nothing she writes should be taken seriously. I completely agree. Her longwinded comments demonstrate exactly that.
And I don’t know why I attempted to be polite to this know-it-all brat in my initial comment to her. But now I regret it, and I see her for what she is: pugnacious and mean. And she has some nerve coming on JW with a huge chip on her shoulder, swinging her self-righteous hammer around at anyone, and everyone, by labeling them bigots.
Methinks she’s a muslim or a muslim apologist who’s also a hate filled BRAT.
Oliver says
E Alexander
You are taking WORDS FROM (MORE OR LESS) 3,000 YEARS AGO, WHEN JEWS WERE THE ONLY MONOTHEISTIC RELIGION.
The warnings were against the Pagans, who were much more numerous.
When was the last time that you heard of a group of Religious Jews (or even secular Jews) going to a village and murdering all women who are of age to have had sex; and taking the young children as slaves? Hint- probably last happened 2,000 or more years back. With Islam, probably two days ago. Definitely within the last few weeks. (RE: ISIS in Iraq; in Syria; etc).
gravenimage says
E. Alexandra Pierce wrote:
Well, you’re right about one thing, Champ… when someone openly declares contempt for an entire group of people based on their nationality, race, religion, political wing, what have you, I do, indeed, think they’re bigots. Boy, you really got me there!
…………………………………
These categories are *not* analogous—race is intrinsic, and does not indicate a person’s character. Nationality, likewise, is in many cases an accident of birth.
But ideology is very different. When you include “political wing”, you must realize that you are including the deliberate embrace of such horrific political ideologies as Fascism and Stalinism.
Can it really be that you consider any critic of Nazis to be a “bigot”?
Champ says
Angemon, great response(s) to “e. alexandra pierce” …Bravo!
And you are one of the brightest people posting on JW, so for the Empress to claim that *you* have comprehension problems only reveals how stupid SHE is. Yeah everything I need to know about this BRAT I’ve learned from this thread; and it seems that she is only here to defend muslims and label everyone a bigot, and next she’ll be stating that Robert Spencer is a bigot, too. Just wait …
Angemon says
Champ posted:
“Angemon, great response(s) to “e. alexandra pierce” …Bravo!
And you are one of the brightest people posting on JW”
🙂
You’re making me blush, Champ!
Champ says
You’re welcome, Angemon …and I want to state more since you’re one of JW’s brightest and *best*, and I mean that sincerely (sorry to make you blush:)
And I also must commend your patience with the Empress. You’ve dismantled her moral equivalency arguments masterfully. Oh my, her drivel gave me a headache, so I applaud your patience in weighing through her rubbish and pretzel logic–and then delivering such spot on insights. Thank *you*!
Steve Cakouros says
I am afraid of Islam, truly, but I also fear what is happening or has already happened in Holland. There is a difference between a free society and an open society. Holland is the latter. It has become a hangout for some very weird people. Holland I am told has a lot of people in it that have fried their brains on drugs who are nauseatingly tolerated. They should be asked to leave the country along with radical Muslims.
Holland boasts of its tolerance but that can be a mask, one that covers an abiding indifference to traditional mores. America is not like Holland yet, but the left is trying to change that; and Christians are obligated to call them on it.
.
voegelinian says
Ah, the Dinesh-D’Souzite wing of the Counter-Jihad, again (which may seem to blend in with the Real Problemers).
Oliver says
Steve,
I would like to be in charge of my own morals, morality and soul.
I DO NOT NEED OR WANT YOU AND YOUR CHRISTIANS TO SAVE ME, nor to tell me what i can and cannot do (as an adult).
As the late, great Senator Barry Goldwater said, ( speaking about Jerry Falwell and his ilk) “I did not start a revolution to get the government out of our pocketbooks, to get them into our bedrooms”. Goldwater, by today’s standards, would be considered by some right wingers as a RINO– he believed that sexual actions between consenting adults is none of anyone’s business, but their own.
fred says
I am dutch and live in the Netherlands. Aboutaleb is Mayor in Rotterdam. In Holland a mayor is a government job. One does not get elected and one ends his term at pension date.
Aboutaleb originates from the Labour party. The Labour party is doing very bad in the polls. They come down from 30% of the votes to 7%. More hardline parties gained. The Labour party (PVDA) needs a “tough muslim” to promote the party again, because are fed up with problems with muslims here.
Another thing is that one can say many things. The politicians tend to be talking tough here: people know that laws prevent all the taugh talk to materialize. This is why people left the Labout party. Now the party hopes to win votes back again with Aboutaleb.
voegelinian says
Any Western polity is insane if it elects (or appoints) any Muslim for any office at all. And of anyone in the Counter-Jihad who doesn’t see this, one wonders if they are fit for the movement.
John Johnson says
The idiots in our country, The United States elected a Muslim President….
White Dove says
Tell that to Crazy Nancy Polosi who just appointed a Muslim to Wash. Government office!
squeezethejuice says
I agree with this man who is my brother in ISLAM. But I would also add, that a lot of the Westerners should also leave their countries because they are hypocrites and actually hate freedom. For example, in countries like Germany or France you can go to jail if you say that you don’t believe that more than a million Jews died in the holocaust. Where are the cartoons that stand in favor of free speech? Or is it only allowed for you guys to mock our Prophet (PBUH) and that is considered proof of free speech?
I also have to say that I’m really annoyed with the `I am Charlie` campaign. Recently, a French cartoonist who refused to be a sheep for those in power in the West and pointed our their hypocrisy was thrown in jail. He said `I am Charlie Koulybaly`. But since freedom of speech is only allowed in France for slandering our Prophet (PBUH), he was thrown in jail.
So I say, that I support free speech and I am also Charlie Koulybaly. And my wife is saying from the other room that she is Charlize Boumeddienne. You know, now that I think about it, it would be nice if the wife of the terrorist was named Hayat Theron, that way I would have a blonde wife too (hope my real one doesn’t read this).
Anyways, we are against hypocrisy: if you ban criticism of Jews, you should also ban anything offensive against our Prophet (PBUH)
john spielman says
freedom of speech does allow you to sput your filth , so I agree with you about that. But islam IS a doctrine of demons and muhammed -pbuh* WAS demon possessed mass murdere thief liar misogynist and peophile pervert. It also sounds like you and your wife are both fascist pigs.
pbuh* perpetual banishment unto hell
Champ says
Anyways, we are against hypocrisy: if you ban criticism of Jews, you should also ban anything offensive against our Prophet (PBUH)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And no one would ever accuse YOU of being a hypocrite, right? Hey, here’s an idea: lead the way by changing *your* moniker–set the example and let the change begin with YOU!
…a millions dollars says squeeze has NO idea what I’m talking about :/
Kenny says
If you are someone taking the piss then stop being silly and attention seeking.
If you are a real Muslim struggling with the concept of freedom, then please take the advice of the Mayor of Rotterdam and do indeed fuck off!
As for Jews, they really were persecuted, at least 6 million of them. So, as you and your kind have never faced real persecution such as that, then shut your whining, taqiyya, victim mentality mouth and return to the Islamic paradise you came from and were probably so desperate to leave in the first place.
fred says
This whole thing about the tough Mayor of Rotterdam is a media hype. People in the Labout Party want to believe in it in Holland. Other people remain sceptical.
When I lived in one islamitic no go area before, muslim people told me how bad it is among their people because of the “Great Prophet” and the religious idiots that suppress everybody with this idea.
In the mean time tensions are growing and also parallel societies within the country thanks to the “Great Prophet”. Personally I think the “Great Prophet” is the biggest schemer you can introduce into your society at this moment in recent history.
But then, it is a static idea from someone who lived 1400 years ago, that longed for a society during Abrahams old times 4000 years ago.
Western Canadian says
You are the only hypocrite here…… You insist on your freedom to speak lies, vicious lies and hatred, while you object to people telling the truth about the sick and sub-animal filth that was your so-called ‘prophet’, if he even ever existed.
Jack Diamond says
Since you support the freedom to murder I support you and your wife sharing that jail cell,
losing whatever phony citizenship you have, and being deported where you belong and will be most happy–in countries where they freely print vile incitement- to-hate-& murder cartoons about the JOOZE
week in and week out without a smidgen of protest from any Muslims.
Angemon says
squeezethejuice posted:
“For example, in countries like Germany or France you can go to jail if you say that you don’t believe that more than a million Jews died in the holocaust. Where are the cartoons that stand in favor of free speech? Or is it only allowed for you guys to mock our Prophet (PBUH) and that is considered proof of free speech?”
Huh, there are records of how many people died. You can tally up the numbers and it comes up to much more than one million. No one’s stopping you from spreading a lie and calling ti free-speech, but you’re punished because, well, you’re lying.
“I also have to say that I’m really annoyed with the `I am Charlie` campaign. Recently, a French cartoonist who refused to be a sheep for those in power in the West and pointed our their hypocrisy was thrown in jail. He said `I am Charlie Koulybaly`. But since freedom of speech is only allowed in France for slandering our Prophet (PBUH), he was thrown in jail.”
Are you talking about the rabidly anti-semitic quasi-nazi Dieudonne Mballa?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/quenelle-comedian-dieudonne-arrested-for-apology-for-terrorism-9976667.html
http://www.timesofisrael.com/french-comedian-dieudonne-arrested-over-facebook-post/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11344192/Comedian-arrested-for-comment-on-Charlie-Hebdo-attacks.html
“Anyways, we are against hypocrisy: if you ban criticism of Jews, you should also ban anything offensive against our Prophet (PBUH)”
Huh? What criticism of Jews are you talking about? Your belief that no more than one million died in the Holocaust? As we established before, that’s a lie. Charlie Hebdo also published cartoon criticizing Jews.
Oliver says
Charlie Hebdo has also published cartoons criticizing Jews. And Christians. And, I believe, other religions, also.
Yet ONLY Muslims went and killed people for it.
Some Jews and some Jewish organizations wrote letters, complaining about the anti-Jewish cartoons, and that was it. I am not sure, but would guess the same was done by Christians.
I do know, no other religions killed for a cartoon or two. (Recall the riots over the-I believe it as a Danish newspaper–cartoon/cartoons a few years ago?).
And, as best I know, in Germany IT IS A CRIME TO DENY THE HOLOCAUST HAPPENED, NOT TO CHALLENGE THE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE KILLED. ( although I could be wrong here).
pumbar says
The good thing about freedom of speech is that you get to post that crap on here and I get to ignore it and not read it. See how it works?
john Lord says
Stop with the obfuscations Haji!! All one has to do is look at many of the premier papers of the west( ex: The Guardian, New York Times, and read the articles depicting those eviiil Jews as subhuman aggressors persecuting the poor downtrodden Palestinians. Not mention the various cartoons depicting various Jewish leaders as blood sucking vampires, with the same hook nosed Jew features that were featured prominently in the pages of Der Sturmer. I don’t see their lives put in jeopardy. I only see one religion being pandered to on an everyday basis for fear of giving offense.
Oliver says
Mr. Lord, I agree with you.
And over this past weekend, that great statesman (sarc.) JIMMY CARTER, said that Israel (and Jews) are to blame for the Paris murders. (JTA- a few days ago-I beleive Tuesday).
But where is there an outcry and the thought of killing thaat POS?
But, if one said the same ( which is true- that Muslims are responsible_)– theeeir defenders, like roaches and rats, come out of the woodwork.
gravenimage says
The vicious “squeezethejuice” (squeeze the Jews) wrote:
I also have to say that I’m really annoyed with the `I am Charlie` campaign. Recently, a French cartoonist who refused to be a sheep for those in power in the West and pointed our their hypocrisy was thrown in jail. He said `I am Charlie Koulybaly`. But since freedom of speech is only allowed in France for slandering our Prophet (PBUH), he was thrown in jail.
…………………………………
Saying “I am Charlie Koulybaly” (sic) is not a simple difference of opinion; it is an open declaration that he stands with the Jihad terrorist Amedy Coulibaly in his murder of Jews at a Kosher supermarket, and wants to see more of the same.
And Dieudonné M’bala M’bala is not a cartoonist—instead, he is an alleged “comedian”, who has said such hilarious things as it “being a pity” that a Jewish journalist was not sent to the gas chambers.
He speaks glowingly of the Nazis, and has popularized a Nazi salute—the “quenelle”—used by antisemites and neo-nazis.
While it is unclear whether he is actually Muslim, he has said that he “prefers the charisma of bin Laden” to democratically-elected figures such as George Bush. He has met with Hizb’allah Jihadists. He is—not surprisingly—also a 9/11 “Truther”.
And is anyone surprised that the vile “squeezethejuice” is “really annoyed” with the outpouring of support for freedom of speech? I’m not.
More:
So I say, that I support free speech and I am also Charlie Koulybaly.
…………………………………
Is anyone here surprised that “squeezethejuice” sympathizes with those who murder in the name of Islam?
More:
And my wife is saying from the other room that she is Charlize Boumeddienne…
…………………………………
Hayat Boumeddienne was the girlfriend of one of the Jihad murderers, who has likely fled to the sanguinary Islamic State.
More:
You know, now that I think about it, it would be nice if the wife of the terrorist was named Hayat Theron, that way I would have a blonde wife too (hope my real one doesn’t read this).
…………………………………
Why should he care? If Islam comes to full power, as he hopes, he can not only marry up to three other “wives”—including prepubescent girls—but can also take as many of “those his right hand possesses” (Infidel sex slaves) as he can manage.
More:
Anyways, we are against hypocrisy: if you ban criticism of Jews, you should also ban anything offensive against our Prophet (PBUH)
…………………………………
I am, actually, not a fan of European laws criminalizing Holocaust denial—I much prefer the more expansive First Amendment in the US, which I believe is much more comprehensive.
That being said, though, look at what a pious Muslim like “squeezethejuice” considers comparable: apologia for the genocide of the Jews, and any criticism of the horrific violence of Islam and the “Prophet”.
He is not actually opposed to “hypocrisy”—he is a thoroughgoing Muslim supremacist and supporter of Jihad terror. He is just—like so many of his Taqiyya spewing fellow Muslims—hoping to use civilized Western concepts like freedom of speech to crush that very thing.
One small difference between “squeeze the Jews” and so many of his murderous coreligionists—he doesn’t believe that Jews should be mass slaughtered.
Instead—as he has said quite openly here—he believes that Jews should be used as forced labor for their Muslim overlords—hence his appalling username.
No wonder he sympathizes with Nazis. *Ugh*.
F.Costa says
They will just say that he is not a true Muslim. Case closed.
voegelinian says
But we must assume he is (since taqiyya forever ruins our ability to distinguish any truly assimilable Muslim). And what better taqiyya than the form that is deployed in a context by which the Good Cop (or, better yet, the Better Cop) distinguishes himself from all the “bad Muslims” (“Islamists”) in order to fool the gullible Westerners (which, alas, seems to include quite a few even in the Counter-Jihad).
gts58 says
We need more Muslims to speak out as the Mayor of Rotterdam has done! Kudos to him!
voegelinian says
Speak of the devil (one of the “quite a few” in the Counter-Jihad I just mentioned above)…
Henry says
Bravo! Will any other Muslims stand with this brave man?
voegelinian says
And another. Hm, I’ve been “taking the temperature” of the Counter-Jihad in a series on my blog. I think I may well use this thread as a test case (if, that is, my continued survey keeps bumping, to my dismay, into comment after comment expressing cheerily gullible Little-Red-Riding-Hood-fooled-by-the-Wolf-in-Grandma’s-Shawl naivete).
duh_swami says
When you take the temperature, where do you place the thermometer? Never mind I don’t really want to know…
Angry says
“The Muslim mayor of the Dutch city of Rotterdam has told Muslims who turn their back on freedom to “pack your bags” and “f**k off”, live on television.”
Geezz.. I’d love to see that (giigling while writing this, lol)
voegelinian says
Thank you for that sweet — and, alas, all too rare here in Jihad Watch comments — morsel of Manna!
Champ says
Muslim Mayor of Rotterdam: “If you don’t like freedom…leave”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Imagine if he had said “leave islam!” …yeah that’ll never happen but it’s great to imagine.
That said, leaving islam would do us all a world of good!
Angemon says
Champ posted:
“Imagine if he had said “leave islam!” …yeah that’ll never happen but it’s great to imagine.”
Yeah, that would never happen: I know of (at least) one person quite intelligent, educated and cultured, who converted to islam. When I asked him why, the reply was “it’s easier, I have rules laid out for everything and all I have to do is follow them”. Islam is the religion of choice for those who don’t like freedom.
Champ says
Thank you for sharing that story, Angemon. Boy it’s hard enough getting my mind around islam’s *appeal* (sarc) and it’s even harder for me to understand why an adult would choose to follow this evil ideology–unfathomable, really.
Alex says
This is a classic example of Lying (Taqiyya and Kitman).There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam – in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.
Mirren10 says
”All those well-meaning Muslims here will now be stared at”.
**Stared at** ? Oh no !
How horrific ! How islamophobic ! This is just as bad as murdering sixteen people for drawing cartoons of mohammed.
Personally, I think this mayor is full of crap. There is no possible way he can reconcile the tenets of islam with Western values. The fact that he is trying to makes me vomit.
What is really going on here ? If you google this creep’s name, he insulted Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and has never rejected any of his religion’s foul tenets. He’s full of shit, and is just trying to take some of the heat off his mohammedan bros. Faugh.
This isn’t an example of a ‘moderate’ muslim, or an ‘assimilated muslim’, this is just a chancer who is trying to shore up support for the increasingly unpopular Labour party.
Believe him at your peril, Dutch people.
Ernie says
Dear Mirren 10 , you are on spot ! Your insight is phenomenal ! : A very angry Dutchman .
gerard says
My thoughts exactly. If he’s so moderate, why is he still Muslim? Stinks to high heaven! There is something rotten in the House of Holland.
gerard says
Something is rotten in the state of Holland.
Champ says
Hear, hear, Mirren10!!!!
jeff says
I applaud this man. Really glad to learn that there are actually Muslims out there who respect the western societies that they live in and share the same values as freedom-loving people.
Dave says
This is how I want my elected officials to speak. A person like this brings integrity to his belief and restores confidence in political character. I am willing to tolerate provided I too am tolerated….particularly in my own country. I don’t want a backwards cult thinking it can subdue and subjugate me by hijacking my traditional Western way of life.
Islamists will adapt to and will adopt Canadian values or else they too can “FUCK OFF”.
Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
Canada
Danny says
He still believes all unbelievers should be killed or enslaved eventually, just not yet. How does that ‘bring integrity’ to his belief?
When there’s enough of them, history, and the Koran, tell us exactly what will happen.
This is how they defeat a more powerful enemy, slowly and from within.
Bukhari (52:269) – “The Prophet said, ‘War is deceit.'”
oaths”
Qur’an (3:54) – “And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.”