• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Huckabee: “Democrats seem determined to defend Islam more than America”

Nov 22, 2015 8:05 pm By Robert Spencer

Republican presidential candidates respond to the ridiculous Democratic National Committee ad you can see here. Huckabee’s comment is most apposite, and is true not just of the DNC, but of the Obama Administration and the mainstream media — as well as much of the Republican establishment.

Republican National Convention“EXCLUSIVE: Republicans Slam DNC Ad Attacking Them for Using Term ‘Radical Islam,’” by Patrick Howley, Breitbart, November 21, 2015:

WASHINGTON -Republicans are slamming the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) new attack ad criticizing the GOP for using the term “radical Islam.”

After radical Islamists carried out deadly terrorist attacks in Paris, the DNC released an ad hitting Republicans from George W. Bush to Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) for even using the word “Islam” while talking about terrorism.

The GOP is outraged.

“Democrats seem determined to defend Islam more than America,” Gov. Mike Huckabee told Breitbart News. “No one in the GOP blames all Muslims but no one in the DNC blames any Muslims, even the ones who shout Allah Akbar just before cutting off the head of a person who professes being a Christian.”

“You can’t defeat the enemy if you are unwilling to even call it by name,” Jeb Bush campaign spokesman Tim Miller told Breitbart News.

“The Democrat ad is a poignant reminder of why the world has become less safe under an Obama administration: denial and political correctness have become the default strategies. That’s not how you lead, that’s not how you win and that’s not how we are going to keep America free and safe,” said Ben Carson spokesman Doug Watts….

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, Useful idiots, willful ignorance Tagged With: Democratic National Committee, Mike Huckabee


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Jaladhi says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 8:11 pm

    Huckabee is only stating the obvious!

    • jihad3tracker says

      Nov 22, 2015 at 9:45 pm

      Please send a thank-you “reality check” to him at whatever web path there is for contact.

    • quotha raven says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 5:17 am

      to Jahladi – Too true. Good that he speaks, by my original reaction was “well, DUH!” Talk, as they say, is cheap.
      Cheers! quotha raven

      • quotha raven says

        Nov 23, 2015 at 5:54 am

        Typo – I meant “but”, not “by”…qr

    • manuel paleologus says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 8:23 am

      The Democrats were are still a plague in the American fabric. They are pro Muslim, anti-Christian, pro-abortion, pro-same sex ‘union’ and anything else under the disguise of freedom.
      I wish the general election to be here today to vote out all these false Americans.

    • Spot ON says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 3:10 pm

      Democrats want us dead and Muslims are happy to oblige. That is the only way the Dems can get us to vote Democrat. Dead votes count with Dems.

      • quotha raven says

        Nov 23, 2015 at 3:40 pm

        Hi, Spot – I always read your comments with interest. Here’s a little bit of verse by anonymous that I like a lot. It seems relevant to yrs above:

        Who is in charge of the clattering train?
        The axles creak and the couplings strain,
        The pace is hot and the points are near,
        And sleep has deadened the driver’s ear –
        And the signals flash through the night in vain,
        For death is in charge of the clattering train.
        – Anon

        Cheers!

        Quotha Raven

  2. mortimer says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 8:15 pm

    Huckabee: “Democrats seem determined to defend Islam more than America”

    And Canada’s Liberals seem determined to defend Islam more than Canada. They heedlessly plan to thwart 60% of Canadians who don’t want more Muslims.

    • john spielman says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 6:36 am

      As important, 60 % of Canadians don’t want the Liberal govt( only got 38% of the popular vote)

  3. Jay Boo says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 8:27 pm

    Prez Obama voted to allow the burning of the American flag when he was a senator.
    — See how he reacts to a Qur’an being roasted

    • manuel paleologus says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 8:25 am

      Because he is not an American born. he does not give a pup on Americans. His deeds as American ‘president reveal exactly what he stands for.

  4. Jay Boo says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 8:32 pm

    Predictable
    The worse Muslims behave the more defenders of Islam try to deflect all blame to hide Islam’s unbearable STINK.

  5. mortimer says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 8:34 pm

    “WASHINGTON -Republicans are slamming the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) new attack ad criticizing the GOP for using the term “radical Islam.”

    What’s wrong with the word ‘radical’ when applied to Islam? Are they INSANE or SIMPLE-MINDED MORONS…or both?

    ‘Radical’ simply means ‘thoroughgoing, thorough, complete, total, comprehensive, exhaustive, sweeping, far-reaching, wide-ranging, extensive, across the board, profound, major, stringent, rigorous. Example: “radical reform”.

    ‘Radical Islam’ is all the above. It is Islam taken to its furthest, logical conclusion.

    • Jay Boo says

      Nov 22, 2015 at 8:46 pm

      Islam has shown its ass.
      Even liberals are questioning Islam so the (DNC) has decided to Double-Down and go after “Radical”

      • Dr. Divinity says

        Nov 23, 2015 at 10:22 am

        I see many different avenues of the questioning of islam today. But just questioning is not enough. Too little and maybe too late many more, since,Paris, have stood up Except Obama he still thinks isis is just a bunch of thugs using social media..What is it going to take….A nuke in the middle of Manhattan?????

    • RonW says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 3:27 am

      Actually, the ‘radical’ muslims are those who will stand up and denounce the violence. _They_ are truly a tiny minority…

      • Howard Pond says

        Nov 23, 2015 at 10:00 am

        Ron, you are correct.

        I would like to see the dictionary reference to Mortimer’s above comment defining “radical.” This is probably the one significant area of confusion among those who are otherwise very knowledgeable about Islam’s threat.

        Here is a definition for “radical” from the Oxford Dictionary: “In favor of thorough and complete political or social change.” True, if we contrast Islam with other world RELIGIONS, we can correctly say that ISLAM is radical. Also, we can describe its adherents as members of a RADICAL organization; however, as for the individual faithful followers – they are FUNDAMENTALIST members of a radical religion – not radical members. Thus, it confuses the conversation to identify the individuals as Radicals.

        As readers of JW, we know that examples of Radical-Muslims are hard to come by, largely because in Islam-dominated cultures, such radical thinkers are routinely imprisoned and executed. One possible Radical in America is Zuhdi Jasser. Conversely, Osama bin Laden was a perfect example of a Fundamentalist-Muslim.

        When we apply the test of WWMD (What Would Muhammad Do), each jihadi is just living the fundamental life as taught by its founder. Thus, using phrases like “Radical Jihadist Terrorist” is nonsensical. More accurate would be “fundamentalist jihadist terrorist.”

  6. Wellington says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 8:41 pm

    Here Huckabee is eminently correct. If Republicans were smart (a very “iffy” if), they would exploit this extra egregious idiocy by the Democrats———but they probably won’t. Republicans are “masterful” at not exploiting a handed-to-them advantage. Doubt me? Well then, just look at the McCain campaign of 2008 and, even worse, the Romney campaign of 2012. Romney should have hammered home the ineptness and lies of the Obama Administration respecting Benghazi——-but he didn’t, now did he? The last truly shrewd Republican candidate for President was Ronald Reagan and by now one knows this or should know it.

    Republicans like Kasich and Christie will still say nice things about Islam. Carson will get things better here but I don’t think he’s “the real deal.” Trump, as is his wont, will stumble into the truth about Islam at times without really understanding the big picture or presenting it in a statesmanlike way which is imperative when you’re speaking uncomfortable truths.

    Ah, no one vying for the Presidency right now really “gets it.” I wish someone did but the truth is that no one does. And then, OMG, waiting in the wings to be anointed by the excessively foolish Democratic Party is the mendacious, inept, corrupt and obnoxiously victim-minded Hillary.

    America is drifting. The West is drifting. Islam, in full parasitic mode, is licking its chops (though I don’t believe pork chops). It’s a perfect storm for evil to succeed and to thwart this storm we need Lincolns or Washingtons or Trumans or Reagans. None in sight I believe unless Allen West enters the contest, which is a high unlikelihood.

    Exigent times call for exigent solutions by great men and women. Few around right now. Exceedingly few.

    • jihad3tracker says

      Nov 22, 2015 at 10:12 pm

      Hello again Wellington — I am a cast-in-stone cynic, but the ISiS train is now going at top speed, with A VERY LONG year until our national election. Week by week Allah’s bloodthirsty relentless pathology appears

      What is a reasonable forecast for the MAJORITY AMERICAN ELECTORATE opinion about Islam in the next three or six or nine months? Even the most entrenched privilege-guilt idiots will understand when new slaughter happens.

      My ancient 67 year old DEMOCRAT predicts a very rough ride — but eventually Hillary or any other Dem will have no chance against yet-to-come jihad. And Repubs who don’t stand clearly against Islam are going to irreversibly sink.

      • Wellington says

        Nov 22, 2015 at 10:48 pm

        Agreed, jihad3tracker, respecting the forecast. After all, and how deeply ironic, just about the best ally of those of us who detest Islam is Islam itself, which can’t help manifesting what it ultimately stands for, i.e., the eradication of liberty and the installation of a Jim Crow system based not on race but on belief.

        May and yours have a Happy Thanksgiving and a Muslim-free one at that.

        • jihad3tracker says

          Nov 23, 2015 at 12:51 am

          I will brazenly steal your idea — printing up some self-stick 12 inch by 12 inch signs: “This is a Muslim-Free Zone” for placement on either side of my apartment building entrance.

      • KnowThyEnemy says

        Nov 23, 2015 at 3:09 am

        It is always good to be optimistic but as voters we must also consider the worst case scenario- What if no new attacks happen [in the west] in the next year and Democrats win? Given their standing on Islam, and given that at least two of them are Leftists, we do NOT want to be stuck with any of them for four more years.

        We must vote a Republican into office. However as Wellington points out, none of the Rep. candidates really “get it” about Islam. In such a situation, we have to analyze things somewhat differently.

        For example, one of the things we can consider is which candidate is most likely to name the enemy correctly if a jihad attack happens in the US under his watch.

        As for me, I am not prioritizing Islam at the moment. The ball is already moving, however slowly, against this cult. It is the Left that concerns me more. They are the ones who are not only strengthening the enemy, but are weakening our society, rendering us incapable of standing up to the beast (Islam). And so I am looking for the candidate who is going to counter the Left, if s/he becomes POTUS.

        The above are only two examples, but my point is that it is possible to find the right candidate even if none of them are explicitly going after Islam for now!

    • Westman says

      Nov 22, 2015 at 11:13 pm

      Looking at all the running candidates I see only politicians that require holding one’s nose while voting. I hope someone finally appears as a real leader who recognizes the reality of Islam yet is not a slave of moneyed interests.

      Tracker may be right, time may well run out on POTUS’ declaration of Islamic innocence before the 2016 election for the Presidency. This could be an election changer.

    • RonaldB says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 9:56 am

      I want to comment on a thread begun by the always interesting and knowledgeable Wellington.

      In a country of 350 million, you will never get a presidential candidate who reflects your own strongly-held views to a satisfactory degree. It’s virtually impossible.

      Jihad Watch focuses on Islam exclusively, but there are websites, and patriots, who focus on immigration in general. They make the point that the indigenous (British and Northern European settler) stock votes conservative and supports the traditional framework of the US government, including the ability to defend itself and protect its own culture.

      The case against Islam has already been made and won. Any rational person understands that Islam is a threat and that importing more Muslims is an invitation to terrorism. By “rational”, I mean not only a person who is capable of compartmentalized logic (like university professors), but a person who is willing to apply he results of reasoning to his actual actions.

      But, the US is a government based on the people as the ultimate foundation. If you import illiterate, non-rational, present-oriented people not familiar with the US foundations of government or worse, hostile to the traditional US, it doesn’t matter how strong your reasoned arguments are.

      Therefore, I am voting for the Republican most likely to control our borders, protect against illegal aliens, and who is at least open to the arguments on the dangers of Islam specifically. Do these reflect my views exactly? No!!! I don’t think we should be admitting any immigrants at all, to any degree. This includes Christians. I think immigration should be based on the benefits to the US, rather than to the immigrant. I support helping to arm Christian militias, giving them air support, and diplomatic support, but I do not support the massive importation of people just because they’re Christian. My thinking is, we have enough people in our boundaries already.

      It is very unlikely we will get a candidate who understands Islam to the degree that a regular reader of Jihad Watch does. Ted Cruz has the intellectual heft for it, and definitely has led battles against Islam specifically…but, I think Trump has the most independence and ability to act on his platform, due not least to his independent financing.

  7. mortimer says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 8:51 pm

    ‘Radical Islam’ is opposed to and different from ‘slack Islam’, ‘lax Islam’, ‘negligent Islam’, ‘careless Islam’, ‘loose Islam’, ‘nonchalant Islam’, ‘free-n-easy Islam’, ‘slapdash Islam’, ‘relaxed Islam’, ‘inattentive Islam’, ‘sloppy Islam’, ‘relaxed Islam’, ‘inattentive Islam’, ‘slipshod Islam’, ‘happy-go-lucky Islam’.

    ‘Radical Islam’ is thorough Islam…therefore ‘pure Islam’ and ‘real Islam.

    • Michael Copeland says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 6:33 am

      Hear hear!
      “Radical” is from Latin “radix”, root.
      Radical Islam is root Islam.

      • PRCS says

        Nov 23, 2015 at 9:47 am

        The problem, Michael–despite what you’ve noted many times and what many of us know–is that politicians, “journalists” and the chattering class regurgitate the “radical Islam” meme not to describe Islam’s core, but rather as bad Islam, twisted Islam, perverted Islam, the Islam of “radicals” and “extremists”.

        The lairs among us aggressively sell that, and the clueless among us–particularly low information voters–buy it.

        But, hey, it looks like the term “radical Islam” is sooo last week.

        Now that style guide tyrants have apparently ordered conservative politicians, journalists and pundits to replace that idiotic meme with the new, better, faster, cooler “radical Islamic terrorists” mantra, the truth becomes ever more distant from the approved narrative.

        During his appearance on a “news” program yesterday, I was so dismayed to see a retired American general’s obviously reluctant regurgitation of that nonsense at least twice.

  8. R Cole says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 9:29 pm

    Highly offensive ad tactic – this is not simply about which end to crack the egg – people are actually being killed – not just killed – slaughtered.

    You think about Hilary – I think she wants people to play PC pattycake – while guns and bombs are going off around us.

    The Democrats should just admit – in this instance – with this terrorist army poised against us – they are not fit to lead.

    We can talk about the importance of climate change – but when people are being gunned down in major western city streets – their priorities will change.

    And the Democrats just don’t get it!!

    • Edward says

      Nov 22, 2015 at 10:55 pm

      “And the Democrats just don’t get it!!”

      Yes they do…..for they are the portal openers to all that causes chaos to America. That’s why the Saul Alinsky protégé, Hillary Clinton, continues to be their poster child in the DNC polls.

      They are willing to ally/convert to Islam just to share the booty, but they are fools for once Islam has a substantial grip of America the very Liberal DAMN-O-CRATS will face a “surprise, surprise”. Taqiyah in action next: ‘Zip’, heads will roll off literally! The question arises: are all liberals under a spiritual mesmerizing source or their maligned mindsets have an innate beginning?

      • Edward says

        Nov 22, 2015 at 11:05 pm

        Lets face it: Liberals are our in-house enemy’s! They are welcoming Islam to snare Christianity and other beliefs that hinder their secular mindset.

  9. Mathew Solo says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 10:19 pm

    “ A man can of course hold public office, and many a man does hold public office, and lead a public career of a sort, even if there are other men who possess secrets about him which he cannot afford to have divulged. But no man can lead a public career really worth leading, no man can act with rugged independence in serious crises, nor strike at great abuses, nor afford to make powerful and unscrupulous foes, if he is himself vulnerable in his private character. There are plenty of decent legislators, and plenty of able legislators; but the blamelessness and the fighting edge are not always combined. Both qualities are necessary for the man who is to wage active battle against the powers that prey. He must be clean of life, so that he can laugh when his public or his private record is searched; and yet being clean of life will not avail him if he is either foolish or timid. He must walk warily and fearlessly. No man can render the highest service unless he can act in combination with his fellows, which means a certain amount of give-and-take between him and them. If efficiency is left solely to bad men, and if virtue is confined solely to inefficient men, the result cannot be happy. “

    Theodore Roosevelt

    • quotha raven says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 5:43 am

      To add to Matthew Solo’s contribution:

      “Speak softly and carry a big stick.”

      Theodore Roosevelt

      Cheers!

      quotha raven

    • RonaldB says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 10:18 am

      That is a simply wonderful quote. It emphasizes the overall character of the political leader, including virtue, intelligence, and courage.

      Note that the prescription does not require an angel, a person who never did wrong. However, it requires that a leader is willing to have his past life, including his mistakes of judgement and even of morality, revealed to general scrutiny.

  10. Don McKellar says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 10:20 pm

    I propose the term: Hard Core Islam.

    That’s what they are. They’re Hard Core. Not Soft Core like most moslems, playing at Islam. They are all in Hard Core.

    Conveniently, it also describes the fantasy paradise of most jihad muderers’ dreams.

    • Baucent says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 1:01 am

      I prefer the term “Islamic Fundamentalists” as a indication they believe the literal interpretation and teaching of the Koran and Hadiths. It’s also nice to use the “Fundamentalist” term on muslims as the Left is always throwing it at Christians.

      “Radical” is not actually correct when used of Islamists. These people are orthodox literal believers. There is nothing radical in their interpretation of Islam, its pure “old time” Islam. I can feel a song coming on..”Gimme that old time Islam!”

      • Howard Pond says

        Nov 23, 2015 at 1:06 pm

        Baucent,

        What you are saying is both correct and important. As I said in an above reply to Ron, we need to realign our language to match reality. Those who are the most devout are Fundamentalists, not Radical. When we keep seeing Fundamentalist Islam referred to as being Radical, we both confuse and provide cover for terrorists. It is the Fundamental Muslim that shouts “Death to America” and “Islam will Rule the World.” Yes, the religion is Radical, but its most devoted followers are Fundamentalists.

        Also, Don McKellar’s “Hard-Core Islam” term might have some potential.

        • quotha raven says

          Nov 23, 2015 at 4:44 pm

          to Howard Pond and Baucent – You are both exactly right.

          As a lover of precise language, I agree that understanding the difference between “fundamentalist” and “radical” is critical to describing jihadists. Since reading your comments, I’ve been hyper-annoyed hearing “radical Islamists” to describe jihadi terrorists repeatedly on the radio…it’s the going phrase, popular with those who have the courage even to open their mouths, and they are WRONG. Probably a lingering PC symptom, like the vestiges of a nasty virus.

          The real “radical muslims”, as you point out, are those who speak out against Islam or the Qur’an…or leave the cult/theocracy altogether, in which case they wouldn’t be muslims at all. I don’t think, however, we’ve a chance in hell of seeing “fundamentalist” replace “radical” in popular parlance, however, now that “radical” has taken hold amongst those who present themselves as anti-jihadists.

          But we here at JW should make an effort to disseminate the distinction between the two in our conversations with those (parrots) who say “radical” when they should be saying “fundamentalist”.

          Cheers!

          quotha raven.

    • Mitch says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 1:06 am

      I like your phrase, Don.

  11. jewdog says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 10:43 pm

    The Left only has one concept of evil: racism. Although Islam is not a race, they nevertheless cast all criticism of it and Muslims as a form of racism. The weakness in their thinking is that they have forgotten that there are other ideologies besides racism that can victimize innocent people. They are thus in the unintended position of furthering an ideology that most Americans perceive as dangerous to the innocent. Jeering during a moment of silence for the victims of the Paris attacks is just as bad as cheering a lynching.

    • RonaldB says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 10:23 am

      “Although Islam is not a race…”

      As you can read in “Catastrophic Failure”
      http://www.amazon.com/Catastrophic-Failure-Blindfolding-America-Jihad/dp/1511617500/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1448292003&sr=8-1&keywords=catastrophic+failure
      the OIC (Organization for Islamic Cooperation), a group comprised of all Muslim-majority countries, embarked in 2005 on a master plan to advance Islam and stifle criticism. One component of this plan was that opposition to Islam would be termed as “racism” and that Muslims would be treated as a race for purposes of invoking concepts of “justice”. This terminology had nothing to do with logic or science, and everything to do with implementing effective political pressures.

    • Angemon says

      Nov 24, 2015 at 9:12 am

      jewdog posted:

      “The Left only has one concept of evil: racism.”

      Not all racism, mind you – just racism that fits the narrative. Where were the cries of indignation at the black people who raided a library and insulted white people?

      “Although Islam is not a race, they nevertheless cast all criticism of it and Muslims as a form of racism.”

      Because it works. All they have to do is shout “Racism!” to get decent people to shut up.

  12. somehistory says

    Nov 22, 2015 at 11:34 pm

    Have heard him several times say things with which to disagree. But this: this is truth spoken!

    “No one in the GOP blames all Muslims but no one in the DNC blames any Muslims, even the ones who shout Allah Akbar just before cutting off the head of a person who professes being a Christian.”

    Denying the truth is the same as lying outright. When people deny that one who is whacking the neck, frying on a cross, drowning, raping, hanging, stabbing, running over with vehicles, setting aflame in cages…men, women and children who refuse to be subjugated to evil, and while torturing these to death are shouting about how their devil is greater than anyone’s God and quoting their evil *prophet*…is doing so for islam’s spread…it’s one of the biggest, ugliest, most evil lies one could tell.

    They are sowing a large field of lies and they will reap the deathly results.

  13. Baucent says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 12:53 am

    It’s mind games and fantasy politics. An old propaganda tactic of the marxists and Nazis was to simply deny the obvious. And keep denying it until the uneducated masses believe it. This is a parallel tactic of the “terrorism is not a religion” slogan. Faced with a rising body count of innocents killed by obvious muslims, the Left has to turn this tide of public disquiet by saying “terrorist are not muslims” and try to break any obvious link between “religion” and “terror”. So the Dems will talk all about “terrorists” but never mention their underlying and guiding motivation and ideology.

  14. james collinsj says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 3:41 am

    While the 9/11 attacks produced the highest number of casualties, you can’t help but notice that some areas of the world endure these incidents constantly. And they have since long before the beginning of this century. It’s a sad sequence, beautifully presented. -Thanks, Milan! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHbYk2l9w-E&feature=youtu.be

  15. duh_swami says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 4:46 am

    Allah will reveal the true meaning of ‘radical’ if Hillary is elected…
    Islam has one name not twp… There is only Islam and the pious…

  16. Lloyd Miller says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 5:24 am

    And just why won’t Jihad Watch reveal WHY the DEMS and their media supporters won’t use the word Islam or Muslim anywhere near terrorism? FOLLOW THE MONEY! The Rockefeller Establishment which controls both are inalterably interlocked with Muslim moneybags. It all started with “innocent” recycling of Muslim “petro-dollars”. David Rockefeller explains all this in his Autobiography. Check who contributed megabucks to the Hilary and Bill Foundation, etc. Please! It is all obvious!

    At least Murdock doesn’t outlaw the phrase Islamic Radicalism in spite of taking on Prince Alaweed as a major stockholder!

  17. Raymond says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 5:50 am

    The Democrats should know that so far every terrorist is a moslem.

  18. jimmy says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 6:51 am

    Obama: “Islam has always been and will always be a part of America”.

  19. Jeremiah says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 10:10 am

    Islam and Democrats have treason to America in common. Those who love the Flag and the Constitution are at war with those who cannot sing the National Anthem and do not know the Pledge of Allegiance. We are in the midst of a civil war. Democrats accuse us of being politically incorrect so we hide. They discipline us instead of us disciplining them. Remember we have guns, not them.

  20. Ric says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 12:33 pm

    Nothing new here, no shock and awe over this utterance. Obama and his comrades are a contagion that has swept this nation among the leftists, so-called progressives… simply, the loathing of America. They have been whittling away at the foundation of that which made this nation great and they are far from finished.

    Broom Hillary if elected will carry on undermining the nation. If the electorate fails to see this, then we, the people, especially those of right of center bent will be ostracized and criminalized by leftists, be they Democrats or not.

  21. YourMOM says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 3:16 pm

    I was going to place an educated comment, till I noticed the domain name JihadWatch. Go figure… not worthy of any discussion here.

    • quotha raven says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 5:07 pm

      To Your Mom –

      Leaving a vacuous, impenetrable comment like yours says volumes, Mom. Good on ya.

      Just curious – how did you come so close to bestowing your wisdom upon us readers here without even noticing what you were reading?

      Seems like you caught yourself just in the nick of time – WHEW!

      Cheers!

      quotha raven

    • RonW says

      Nov 28, 2015 at 8:09 pm

      So, you think it’s infra dig, beyond the pale, loon-territory, etc, etc, to be wary of jihad?

      Well, a holiday at Raqqa Resort seems the ticket for you!

      Just Do It.

  22. Kepha says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 6:58 pm

    To Quotha Raven, Baucent, and Howard Pound:

    I dissent on the use of the term “fundamentalist” for anyone but a Christian who owns the title (and those who do own include not a few pacifists).

    The term “Islamic fundamentalist” was coined during the Iranian Revolution of 1979, and one of the transparent follies behind the use of the term was that the MSM wanted to smear America’s theologically conservative Christians as un-American and supposedly in cahoots with the crazies in Tehran. Back then, when I was a callow divinity student at a very conservative Christian institution (they even made us study Hebrew and Greek!), someone near and dear who should’ve known me a lot better asked for my take on the Ayatollah Khomeini because, “After all, he’s also a man of religion”. Another said, “C’mon, they also believe in God and life after death!” And, of course, “it’s all organized religion!”

    And once, I made a facetious comment that my real job was to procure a brace of liberated lesbians to live-stew at a joint dinner meeting of the faculties of LIberty University and Qom in a secret connecting tunnel under Africa, where the shade of R. Meir Kahane intoned a brokhes. My listerner, of all crazy things, thought I was in earnest! That’s how ignorant and ready to believe the worst of any “fundamentalist” (especially Christian) the people who so casually bandied about the term are! Well, I learned my lesson, and here’s the disclaimer: no, we are not cannibals who eat liberated lesbians, for we only pray for their repentance and conversion (and, BTW, Khomeini would never eat with najis kufr like us, anyway).

    The Left shied away from using the term “Islamic fundamentalism” because (a) it became clear that their beloved Iranian Tudeh wasn’t going to rise from the dead and rescue the Iranian Revolution any time soon and (b) “fundamentalist” was a smear on noble Third Worlders. Later, while serving as a US Foreign Service Officer (what we call our diplomats, for the benefit of any sympathetic foreigners here), I saw how this “fundamentalist” meme skewed and warped our official discourse, and perhaps made a few enemies for us when it didn’t have to (ironically, among Muslims with American graduate degrees who earlier were known to have a favorable view of our country).

    Further, for the life of me, I cannot see any movement among the Islamic ‘Ulema comparable to the early 20th century theological Modernists against whom our Christian fundamentalists protested. Who’s the Muslim Shailer Matthews, Harry Emerson Fosdick, Paul Tillich, Shelby Spong, or Vicki Gene Robinson? I don’t think you can identify a single one. I suspect even someone like Zuhdi Jasser (and he seems to be a layman) would, if pressed, probably say something like, “You don’t declare Jihad on people who are decent to you” or something like that (while accepting jihad as a central tenet of his religion). But I don’t see anyone in the Islamic world trying to relativize every traditional Islamic tenet or dissolve their faith into a vague, deistic (or pantheistic) moralism.

    These are also reasons why I respect Huckabee and probably won’t vote Democratic until they cart my corpse away. The Dems are the ones who insinuate whenever they can that I’m a Taliban or Khomeini-ite in mufti and throw the “racist!” cavail at me whenever I get critical towards Islam.

    • Howard Pond says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 9:02 pm

      Hello Kepha,

      I understand and respect your affection for the use of “fundamentalist” as an adjective for “Christian.” What many of us are striving to change is to no longer allow the faithful followers of Islam to be hidden by the word “Radical.” Everything the jihadi does is perfectly in harmony with the teachings of Mohammad, hence the use of the word “Fundamental” seems to apply.

      I haven’t found any dictionary definitions which grant exclusive use of the word “fundamental” to devout Christians. The Cambridge Dictionaries’ Online definition for Fundamentalist, reads: “The belief that the traditional principles of a religion or set of beliefs should be maintained.” I think this thought would be in line with the teachings from Mecca.

      If Muhammad were alive today, and we could ask him:

      “Who are the Radical-Muslims?”

      He would never name the jihadis. He would point his sword at what the western world mistakenly calls, Good-Muslims. He then would call them to repentance, or collect their heads. If our next question of Muhammad was:

      “Who then do you call Good-Muslims?”

      He would smile and then embrace the participants of the Paris massacre along with all the other blood soaked soldiers of ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Loan-Wolf attackers, and every other militant Islamic group. When viewed against the yardstick of What-Would-Mohammad-Do, these terrorists are neither radical or bad. These Good-Muslims are following the fundamental tenants as taught by Mohammad. Our problem is that Good-Muslims are terrible human beings.

      • Baucent says

        Nov 24, 2015 at 2:02 am

        I agree.

    • quotha raven says

      Nov 23, 2015 at 9:14 pm

      Hello, Kepha – What a great response to me and Howard Pound! Are we a chatroom yet)))

      Your comment interests me greatly, and I intend to respond, but probably not tonight. I have to read it again, and thoughtfully, and I have to look up Tudeh, Qom, and cavail. I also want to find out how many liberated lesbians there are in a brace.(is it 2, like a brace of quail?).

      For now, all I have time to say as a lapsed and mildly desultory low Episcopalian is that you’d probably have made a very amusing and naughty conservative Christian minister, had you pursued that calling.

      Cheers!

      quotha raven

      • quotha raven says

        Nov 24, 2015 at 3:03 am

        How did Baucent get edited out of my first line above – Kepha was responding to Baucent as well; that’s why I asked whether we were a chat room yet. Didn’t mean to leave you out, Baucent!

        Cheers!

        quotha raven

    • quotha raven says

      Nov 28, 2015 at 10:46 am

      To Kepha – I have to respectfully disagree with your thoughts about the use of “fundamentalist” versus “extremist” in describing jihadis. I don’t think Christians “own” the moniker “fundamentalist”, even while it was foisted upon the faithful in an effort to demean Christianity. Your observation that the Left eschews the term because ““fundamentalist” was a smear on noble Third Worlders.” made me laugh out loud just when I needed it. I’ll bet you’re right about that.

      In fact, jihadis are following the Qur’an in the way their religion, (unlike Christianity, a theocracy) dictates. They are not editing the hadith, choosing to follow some of the dictates and not others.Therefore, it is in my view more correct and precise to call violent (and other kinds of) jihadis “fundamentalists”, and those few who speak out against jihadi, “extremists” – because the latter have elected to veer away from jihad, a central premises of Islam prescribed to establish and expand a global caliphate and dominate (and punish) dhimmi like me and you. They are essentially “picking and choosing” what they will and will not follow, which hardly qualifies them as “fundamentalist”, which implies that one slavishly follows the fundamentals of the religion. Given that jihad is supported and encouraged by the Qur’am, indeed it is arguably required in that terrible book, and given the punishment for apostasy and questioning or criticizing Islam, no fundamentalist will go there.

      I should add that I am completely unaware of any significant “counter-jihad” movement or expression within the community that calls itself “Muslim”. I’m not well-read enough in religious theory and theosophy to know whether or not there are any Muslim theologians who demand or even suggest reform in Islam; I’ll take your remarks in that regard at face value. After some years of reading JW and other articles on current events and jihad, however, I haven’t encountered any such theologians surfacing in the articles or the comments.here or elsewhere.

      Thanks for a thought-provoking comment, Kepha. Amusing, too!

      Cheers!

      quotha raven

      .

  23. James Thomsen says

    Nov 23, 2015 at 10:27 pm

    My paradigm has shifted, and it’s long about time.
    This will be thick, because I was a dedicated liberal, of decades, less than two weeks ago, ye Kafir (unbeliever) / Atheist as well. But, half of that equation changed on 11/13/15, when I was told by many of those liberals I was ‘following’ and watching, that not only was it somehow racist to be critical of any religion, or its practices (what ~the Klan), but that we should accept all the blame ourselves, for creating a persistent and religious fanaticism that’s over a thousand years old. It was, I admit, exacerbated by the invasion and de-Baathification process and other costly mistakes, but, the tensions were already there between each other, before we even arrived and it’s near the time we left that Daesh made a choice, and ruthlessly swept across Iraq and elsewhere, with a stated goal of the world. Here’s a list just from so far in 2015: https://tinyurl.com/p3vkbjc
    Throwing acid in the faces of Christians, shooting young girls like Malala Yousafzai in the face, for the crime of wanting to go to school, or planning and carrying out religiously and politically motivated Jihad attacks to ‘convert-or-kill’, each is absolutely unacceptable. But put together they are the clear and present enemy. Other religions like Christianity have already gone through their required ‘reformation’, after the Inquisitions that lay in the past, that Islam requires before the world can even move forward.
    I hadn’t woken up on 9/11/01, because I hadn’t studied enough yet about the religions I should have known about. I had just recently finished learning about the Roman Inquisition (after some others), and had just watched Sam Harris in conversation with Maajid Nawaz: https://tinyurl.com/ns2j8jm within days, prior to 11/13/15. The next day I was hearing from those I was used to reading, watching, not only that somehow we were responsible for 1,400 y/o political goals, born out of a pretty nasty religion (from what I have read so far of the Quran and Hadith, while also still being so far behind I’m just now grasping the Sunni – Shi‘ah split enough to know there’s a lot of Sunni headed our way right now).
    I don’t know all the answers, just like you. But we have some choices of our own it would seem. I also think it boils down to something like this as well: 1). We can choose to hunt Children, Kafir (apostates), Homosexuals, Women, young Boys and other innocent people. 2). We can accidentally kill some of these very same people, in far less numbers obviously, while hunting those who hunt Children, Kafir, Women, Gays, and other innocents ceaselessly 3). We can do nothing (or just attempts at dialogue, which are also required), and watch as the hunting of these people continues indefinitely. Even if the world were conquered for Islam, it’s only then that the institutionalized rape and abuse , like this:

    would begin.
    I can’t stand that I’ve held off for so long on learning about what many unknowingly referr to as; “The religion of peace”, And, as an example, I highly recommend this piece by, Ayaan Hirsi Ali : https://tinyurl.com/qxlkxw3 Call her a racist or unread or inexperienced. I think she has the right to criticize Islam for some very valid reasons. It’s a keeper because it’s clear and honest. I’m glad I found your site. Thanks for the time. I’m @sparhopper too.
    Cheers Kafirs!

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • Hoi Polloi on Why so many Muslims can’t wait for Biden to get inaugurated
  • Hoi Polloi on EU Parliament members call for firing of border agency director for preventing illegal migrants from entering Europe
  • jacksonl03 on India: Police make first arrest for ‘love jihad’ under new law
  • Yogi on Canadian Mental Health Association studies Muslim women’s mental health due to ‘discrimination’ and ‘hate crimes’
  • Walter Sieruk on Iranian Kurdistan: Muslim brothers behead their sister in honor killing over her romantic relationship

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.