So many times I have spoken at events where other speakers have spent all their time explaining that they’re not actually racist hatemongering bigots. The impulse to do this is understandable, and I’ve done it myself, since the mainstream media so relentlessly defames those who speak honestly about the real root causes of jihad terror. At the same time, it is important not to be defensive, and never to accept the mainstream media paradigm. We are standing for human rights, for the freedom of speech, and for the equality of rights of all people before the law. “Journalists” who refuse to acknowledge that or give us a fair hearing should always be challenged. Hence this email exchange I had this morning:
“Journalist” to Spencer:
Dear Mr Spencer,
I am a trainee journalist at City University London and my colleagues and I are doing a project on anti-Muslim rhetoric. We are focusing on the rise of this in the UK and beyond and the factors influencing this by looking at the police force, right-wing activism groups and the media.
Your organisation is an intrinsic resource in learning more about this area and we would love to speak to you about the ethos of your group.
Therefore, we were wondering whether it would be possible to speak with you or a representative from Jihad Watch and discuss this issue.
We would not take up too much of your time and would just send on some brief questions via email.
Thank you very much.
Best wishes,
Marita Moloney.
Spencer to “journalist”:
I’m not interested in being demonized. If you have any interest in presenting opposition to jihad activity in a fair light, I would speak with you, but from your remarks here it is clear that you do not. I do not in reality engage in “anti-Muslim rhetoric” of any kind. Nor am I “right-wing.” I’m not interested in abetting the spread of these libels.
The idea that opposing jihad terror and Sharia oppression constitutes “anti-Muslim rhetoric” is a staple of the propaganda from groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and the mainstream media eagerly parrots it. When they do this, they inadvertently shoot themselves in the foot, because they’re implying that to oppose jihad violence, legally sanctioned beating of women, the institutionalized oppression of non-Muslims, the denial of the freedom of speech, and other violent and oppressive aspects of Sharia is to be “anti-Muslim.” So all Muslims support such things? It sounds as if they’re far more “anti-Muslim” than any counter-jihadist will ever be.

ICH says
VERY GOOD !!
The jedi mind trick flew right past me.
Robert is a pro
anthony says
I think this Moloney lady needs to define for us “anti-muslim rethoric”. Let’s give her benefit of doubts.
Or maybe this lady needs to read koran or even hadits first, then comeback to discuss with Robert about other “anti’s”, such as anti-women, anti-equilty, anti-kuffar,anti-homo, etc.
I believe Robert can handle her !
Keith says
I give her the benefit of the doubt, I doubt that she would recognise the truth about Islam if it jumped up and hit her in the face.
Jay Boo says
The journalist assumes:
— the ‘problem is “anti-Muslim rhetoric”
The journalist assumes:
— “the factors influencing this by looking at the police force, right-wing activism groups and the media”
(Nothing to do with Islam syndrome)
mortimer says
JB wrote: The journalist assumes: — the ‘problem is “anti-Muslim rhetoric”
Exactly. Scholarly analysis of Sharia law, Islamic history and jihad supremacism is not mere ‘rhetoric’. It is fact-based evidence of something inherently wrong with the philosophy and practice of Islam.
Islam’s falsehood is demonstrated by its 1) lack of historicity 2) opportunistic moral code 3) contradictory stories in the Koran and hadiths 4) lack of a version of the Golden Rule 5) opposition to the use of reason.
To test Islam’s veracity or examine, study, investigate, scrutinize, evaluate, consider, question, dissect, explore, look into, check out, query, survey, poke through, search, delve into, walk around, peer into, appraise, sift, weigh up, assess, assay, inspect or deconstruct Islam is to do the thorough work of proving or disproving Islam’s claims. Islam claims to be ‘complete, perfect, and eternal’. If Islam fails on any of those points, it is false.
As I have stated above, there are FIVE very solid reasons for believing that Islam’s claims cannot be supported. It is reasonable to conclude that therefore Islam is false.
Angemon says
I certainly hope this is not demonstrative of the state of investigative journalism. Maybe she’ll pull an Allen Bell?
Jay Boo says
Very informative video on Documentary Film Maker Eric Allen Bell
WorkingClassPost says
This is a big part of what JW is all about:- making sure that stuff like this gets noticed.
Thanks for the link.
livingengine says
More info on Eric Allen Bell
Mo says
@ Angemon
@ livingengine
I first appreciated the work of EAB in speaking out about Islam. Then, somehow or other, things changed. The website changed so much that at first I thought it had been hacked! It started promoting some sort of New Age stuff. That’s fine, except that he had come across at first as some type of secular person. Then he started treating Christians as the enemy! I couldn’t believe it as I exchanged emails with him. I finally had to give up. I have no idea what his views are on anything anymore.
livingengine says
I made these videos for you.
Here is EAB’s reaction to the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY381jTntmc
Thank you for your comment, it is more gratifying than you may know.
Angemon says
For the record, when I mentioned EAB I was merely referring to how he went to have a saying at the “bigoted islamophobes” who were protesting against the mega-mosque and ended up concluding the “bigoted islamophobes” were right. Not his descent into new-age-ism.
David Pryce says
she has written for the Guardian…
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/dec/29/readers-suggest-the-10-best-vicars-father-ted-im-jolly?CMP=share_btn_tw
No doubt the BBC contract is in the post..
Great to see objective, well infomed, non biased journalist ‘academics’ graduating from the s*itty university London…
John Thomas says
London? Ask her to research as to why there was an armoured car outside the Regents Park Mosque?
Jerry says
Yeah, right, “best wishes.” In a slimy, snaky, passive-aggressive sort of way, “Best wishes.”
My response to that would be, go choke on some halal.
David says
Good answer, you could have said that in the UK, it is far more likely that a Muslim will kill a Muslim than a non Muslim, why not investigate that?
BTW there is a petition to ban Sharia in the UK can you please publicize it
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/107864
Linde Barrera says
How about doctrinal rhetoric as respects violence and hatred toward non-Muslims advanced by Muslims? What about left-wing propaganda and activism? Let’s not forget the main stream media’s refusal to call out the evils of Islam to all who aren’t “Muslim enough” as well as to all non-Muslims? I swear, some “journalists” are really just “bots”.
jihad3tracker says
The weekend is coming soon, and for those readers here who have Saturday and Sunday as the slot with some free time off our jobs, please consider contacting Miss Moloney, for YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON “ANTI-MUSLIM RHETORIC”. There is so much you could discuss, my ancient mind boggles — as an old expression goes.
When I write to her, my first point will be to stress that ALL persons, be they of whatever “faith”, are worthy of respect until they say or do something which is “ANTI-HUMAN”.
My second point: in contrast to persons, books and ideas are NOT necessarily worthy of respect UNTIL THEY HAVE BEEN EXAMINED THOROUGHLY.
Meticulous inspection of the Qur’an and Islam indicate —- you know the rest of this sentence. If she wants evidence for that, cite Qur’an verses and Hadith passages. And, anticipating the “but those are taken out of context, be certain to let her know about abrogation.
Also, since you are a complete stranger, here is a superb item about the 2nd to final chapter — CHRONOLOGICALLY — of Allah’s message, titled Taubah, which means “ultimatum”: Visit http://www.citizenwarrior.com, and in its search box, type “The Qur’an’s last word on non-believers”.
Send the link, along with an invitation to poke around that website, along with others in your own arsenal of Truth. FINALLY, LET HER KNOW THAT, BECAUSE CAIR AND ITS ALLIES READ EVERYTHING ROBERT POSTS, SHE MAY GET A LOT OF TAQIYYA FROM THEM.
Adrian says
SCARY that this “journalist” didn’t even bat an eye, calling Robert Spencer a “right-winger… spreading anti-Muslim rhetoric”.
Prejudices and trendy PC are blithely accepted and regurgitated by “journalist trainees” – the very people who our free society relies on to be impartial and intelligent…
and this one, at least, revealed her spin… as opposed to the hundreds of stealthy media drones
John Thomas says
Your “journalist student ” should take a short walk along to the Regents Park Mosque on a Friday and there discuss her views. The police are there Just in case!
Emilie Green says
Well, they certainly have learned how “to do” investigative journalism, from the lefty point of view.
Start with your PC-approved conclusion.
Find evidence, however flimsy to support the pre-arranged conclusion. Ignore anything that might suggest that the pre-ordained might not be the truth.
You’re done.
Receive an “A” for the course.
No Fear says
I do not dislike or hate muslims. I hate and dislike their deceptive “prophet” Mohammed. He was the worst example for mankind. Murderer, liar, rapist. He killed Jews, Christians and pagans. All this is described in the Islam source texts.
mortimer says
NF wrote: ” I hate and dislike … Mohammed.”
Exactly so. Mohammed’s vile character (as described by Muslim writers) is the greatest liability for Muslims to believe…and they realize it, since few Muslims actually want to act as evil as Mohammed! They do not really believe in their hearts that Mohammed is the best example to follow or they more Muslims would act like Mohammed, rather than nice Westernized people.
We become what we admire. Muslims say they admire Mohammed, but they actually admire ‘nice people’, and Mohammed wasn’t ‘nice’.
Muslims are usually much, much nicer than Mohammed, but that is because they do not believe in Islam enough to be that evil. Muslims show they are going through the motions, but actually believe Islam is false, even though they are afraid to say so.
Ian H says
And yet Mohammed is what they call their sons. They don’t have to. If secretly many think Mohammed was really not all that nice, why do they?
Marty says
In the UK our unprincipled rulers are ensuring that there will
be plenty of anti mohammedan talk as the truth of islamic colonisation emerges.
From today’s Daily Mail re the much loved Admiralty Arch & its
associated buildings.
18th century Admiralty House and property in Southwark takes total to five
buildings governed by sharia law in order to sell sharia compliant bonds
Ministers accused of hiding truth on properties owned by Islamic financiers
Buildings were quietly transferred to finance Sukuk bond scheme in 2014 ”
These buildings have been sold by the prostitute UK government to mohammedan
interests & are completely bound by sharia law.
This includes a complete ban on alcohol & non halal products.
Whether sharia compliant floggings, rapes & killings go on inside these
buildings with their quasi embassy status we are not told.
These properties are bought with our money by third world heathens
who just happened to have oil under their tents
Our country is shamed by its rulers.
DFD says
Marty says: “………..Our country is shamed by its rulers.”
No, not shamed but humiliated! Remember: “… Britons never, never shall be slaves!”? Was jingoism, obviously. But it’ll soon be banned, like Christmas trees.
BTW, go to Britainfirst.org & PEGIDA (https://www.facebook.com/pegida.uk/) Caution advised: Facebook. That means Merkel & Co are reading, listing and collecting, courtesy of Mark Zuckerberg
Regards
linnte says
It’s true what you said about Merkel and all, watching this account!!! I went there via the link, “liked” the page and a notice popped up in red “the account you have entered doesn’t match the account listed” or some puckie like that. It required my email and fb password! Maybe it’s just the group making sure I am not a Muslim. Who knows!
DFD says
linnte says : “…. It required my email and fb password! Maybe it’s just the group making sure I am not a Muslim….”
Sorry, but it’s the other way round.
At the end of 2015 Merkel asked Zuckerberg if he is able to scan and provide the names and details of ‘Islamphobes’ and other ‘Nazis’. He said yes. Since then, it seems to be that anything critical about Islam is passed on to the Verfassungschutz (Protection for the Constitution, essentially political police). And to some newspapers, which regularly publish the names and contact details of (FB) participants critical of Islam. The papers publishing their details change.
I wouldn’t use FB for anything in reference to Islam. I am rather surprised that PEGIDA is using FB. Well, may be I don’t really understand those things…
linnte says
DFD, I am not afraid to have my FB account tagged as islamophobic. Nor am I afraid to be confronted by anyone about my knowledge of Islam. If I get murdered by a Muslim “extremists” so be it. If I shut up now out of fear, my grandkids will suffer the consequences. I have lost many friends over this issue and am slowly being ostracized from the people that frequent our local hangout too. It’s OK. I have my family!! A car accident could take me out tomorrow. I will endeavor to persevere! (My favorite redundant saying) ? Blessings to you and yours!
WorkingClassPost says
‘Your organisation’ and the ‘ethos of your group’
Sounds like one of those little muzzie terror cells, where do these people get their ideas?
They really don’t know that they’re seeing things backwards, and no mention of having viewed the site/s or read any of the books.
No research, just bad journalism.
Salome says
I’m trying to work out what an ‘intrinsic resource’ is. Perhaps journalism school would do better to teach English.
linnte says
HOT damn! 100% pure integrity!
mortimer says
Would I be called a ‘racist’ if I opposed Hitler’s Master Race Theory or if I opposed the Japanese Shinto-Bushido-Emperor-Worship combo that created Japan’s delusional cult?
No. Certainly not!
Many Germans opposed Hitlerism and many Japanese opposed the racist Emperor-worship cult that gave their country the right to abuse and dominate ‘Untermenschen’ and all ‘lesser races’.
Not all Arabs, Pakistanis, Indonesians or Malays are Muslim…in a similar manner and oppose the normative Master Religion Theory of Islam.
Islam’s Master Religion Theory gives Muslims the right and the duty to subjugate and enslave all peoples on earth to their fascism.
Is it ‘racist’ to oppose fascism, even if it is THEOCRATIC FASCISM? It is not ‘racist’, but common sense.
By the way, the Japanese Emperor-worship cult was also THEOCRATIC FASCISM just as Islam is, but we certainly opposed the Japanese theocratic fascism all the way to a two A-bombs. The Japanese were convinced and entered modernity.
There is no way that Islam’s theocratic fascism can be permitted to continue to exist. We must convince Muslims that our reasonable, Enlightenment-based culture is superior to the backward, delusional Death Cult of 7th century Arabia.
marty says
Flawless argument.
Completely ignored by the dominant political classes & media liberals in
the UK & most Western countries.
mortimer says
Let’s compare!
Robert Spencer wrote:
“The idea that opposing jihad terror and Sharia oppression constitutes “anti-Muslim rhetoric”.
Compare that with:
“The idea that opposing NAZI terror and UNTERMENSCHEN oppression constitutes “anti-German rhetoric”.
No Fear says
Exactly. Well said.
mortimer says
British politicians and detectives should look into this IMMEDIATELY to find whatever covert JIHAD-TERRORIST SUPPORTERS are running this class or classes and investigate them and audit them to see where their money is coming from.
This is purely seditious and someone should be pulled on the carpet or kicked out of the school.
Members of Parliament, do your duty and protect your country from jihadists.
DFD says
mortimer says: “….British politicians and detectives should look into this IMMEDIATELY to find whatever covert…”
To find whatever? They probably take lessons from them.
Mortimer, you aren’t British, are you?
TamIAm says
“The idea that opposing jihad terror and Sharia oppression constitutes “anti-Muslim rhetoric” is a staple of the propaganda from groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and the mainstream media eagerly parrots it. When they do this, they inadvertently shoot themselves in the foot, because they’re implying that to oppose jihad violence, legally sanctioned beating of women, the institutionalized oppression of non-Muslims, the denial of the freedom of speech, and other violent and oppressive aspects of Sharia is to be “anti-Muslim.” So all Muslims support such things? It sounds as if they’re far more “anti-Muslim” than any counter-jihadist will ever be.”
Brilliant. Of-course Robert Spencer isn’t against the Muslim people but against the ideology of Islam or at-least central aspects of the ideology like Sharia and Jihad.
This I don’t understand though: “I do not in reality engage in “anti-Muslim rhetoric” of any kind. **Nor am I “right-wing.”.” Robert, if you’re reading these comments, I thought you were right-wing, as in conservative, traditional, a GOP supporter (not only on the issue of Islamic terror but in general). Are you not? I know some counter-jihadists like Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders get lumped in as right-wingers when they are classical liberals (so the old left-wingers) but others are actually conservatives. Anyway, when did “right-wing” become a dirty word and synonymous with bigot?
Western Canadian says
The transformation of ‘right wing’ into all that is vile and evil in the world, began on a small scale during the second world war. The primary movers were the hard left, who opted to demonize, rather than debate, as you may have noticed is about all they CAN do…. And the contrived and wholly fraudulent claim that hitler, was a right wing, conservative Christian, grew out of this dishonest basis, AFTER the war was over. The notion that hitler was right wing, had no credibility, during the war or now, but it has been repeated so man times that the less educated and less honest, have bought into it.
Lee says
Well said Mr.Spencer. It’s a damning comment on “journalists” that when bigoted, racist, fascist, misogynist Muslims – hating non-Muslim White people, democracy, and women – target non-Muslim white girls and women for sex-assaults, the journalists side with the abusers, and slander anyone opposed. This says all we need to know about the bigoted, racist, fascist, misogynist values of journalists.
In Germany, Norway, Finland etc the government actually creates *public signs* or *holds classes* for Muslims to teach them it’s wrong to assault or rape women and girls. This education campaign isn’t for Muslims they’re DEPORTING as a parting gift, but for Muslims they’re ACCEPTING.
This is a tacit *admission* by the Western governments that the “moderate” Muslims they’re importing are profoundly depraved to the extent they need to be taught en masse that a heinous crime is wrong. It is also an admission they are KNOWINGLY importing Muslims who believe in committing CRIMES against non-Muslim Western people.
I hope this means for the counter-Jihad movement no more excuses for the traitors “oh, the politicians and journalists must be blind! They must be gullible! They must have never read anything in the past 15 years!” etc. We know *they know*.
Western Canadian says
My first experience with how sickeningly dishonest the lamestream media is, on it’s better days, was decades ago, when i was still in my teens…. A few decades later, found the situation was considerably worse, when i was dealing with the so-called ‘ombudsmen’ of the same paper, when they were repeatedly printing outright falsehoods about a court case in Canada…. the issue was one near and dear to the black hearts of these so-called journalists, and the nasty, sneering contempt shown by the lamestream media in both cases, is common to ANY issue they have chosen to front for, out of ignorance, bribery, or personal bigotry.
Ho many issues would you take the media at face value at, in our current world??
vcragain says
Spot on Robert – that is what I notice happens in the comments section here all the time – your supporters fall into the same trap – some of them think that by being an Islamic Analyst you MUST hate all Muslims !
That is a trap they should be very careful of, and they should also be very wary of joining ANY hate group, because THEIR agenda is not what this newsletter is about. I read hate-filled letters all over and that is just ADDING to the problems. People need to understand that disagreeing with someone’s life-style or religious or cult beliefs does not mean you hate that person – nothing about disagreement make you their enemy – you just wish to disagree, and you wish to tell others that you have a different view. The ORGANISATION that cultivates those beliefs may or may not be something to hate, that is a separate issue altogether. Believers are merely humans who have a particular view and may change their behavior because of those views, anyone that espouses hatred/violence of any kind whether from the Muslim people, the Islamic leaders, OR those who disagree with that view of the world
are completely wrong and need to be dealt with, that is what the ‘trust-your-Islamic-neighbor’ organisations are trying to do, but they are not taking the actual teachings of the Koran into consideration, so they are missing a whole side of the cult that is not other-friendly and is actually a danger to the rest of us – not those Muslims trying to lead peaceful lives, but those who are fully versed into what the Koran tells them to do. Non-Muslims are in a very troubling situation since we WANT to allow others to live their lives as they wish, but we ALSO have to guard our civilization form the ill intent of SOME of their folks and in particular THE KORAN ! We should NOT be giving in to ANY requests or demands for changes to our way of life to accommodate their desires, there are other countries in the world who fully implement what they want, and they can always emigrate to those places.
Wildbill2u says
The amazing thing about her letter is that she doesn’t even realize that her tone and ‘facts’ about the “intrinsic” nature of Spencer’s supposed Islamaphobia would certainly offend him. She wants to interview and/or correspond with him, but she is approaching him in a manner in which she shows her bias and non-objectivity.
Not too smart for a budding ‘journalist’. But that is the very nature of liberal journalists today. They simply can’t understand that other people have reasoned beliefs that are different from their own prejudices.
watling says
A far more useful project for Miss Moloney and her colleagues would be an investigation into how and why the police and social services in Rotherham tried to cover up the sexual abuse by a Muslim gang of over 1000 girls in the area.
John Thomas says
Rotherham? Good Lord, can’t do that, that would be racist!
UNCLE VLADDI says
Who and what defines what a muslim is and is not, how they are to act and to think, and not act and not think, Robert?
Muhammad, in his Qur’an – which is a micro-managing rule book which clearly distinctively and repetitively sets out exactly those parameters for his “muslim” followers, not me!
AND HERE THEY ARE:
Islam’s Qur’an only lists and sums up all the bad criminal acts everyone might become tempted into committing in the course of their lives anyway, and gives them the endorsement of “God” himself! So everyone already prone to indulge their criminal desires and turn them into criminal actions, will eventually embrace it (in prison, if not before)!
The Qur’an is exactly what you’d get if the spiritual ancestor of Adolf Hitler had written the bible.
The Qur’an is a clearly-written hate-crime expressing a permanent death-threat: it tells it’s muslim mind-slaves that they are in fact SO “superior” to all the non-members of their war and plunder cult, that it’s not only their right, but also their holy duty to their god, to extort, enslave, and murder all the non-muslims in the world, simply for the “crime” of not being muslims!
So “muslims” are nothing more than criminals, pedophile murderers who dress up in the robes and beards of religious men, waving fake bibles, yelling about “god” to cover up their criminal natures to get closer to their victims.
Islam has a standard: Qur’an & Sunnah. Its what Moe said and did according to the oral traditions of his companions. 2.85 prohibits dividing the Qur’an, its all or nothing. 2.216 ordains Jihad for Muslims. 8.39 commands perpetual war against pagans until Allah has a global monopoly. 8.57 & 8.60 command terrorism. 8.67 requires “great slaughter” as Moe’s price of admission to Allah’s celestial bordello. 9.120 promises Brownie Points for any “step” taken to “injure or enrage” disbelievers. 9.111 & 49.15 define believers as those who fight in Allah’s cause. 33.21 sets up Moe as a role model for Muslims to emulate. Read the TOC of “The Life Of Muhammad” to see what he did. One attack every six weeks for the last decade of his life.
A Muslim who does not support Jihad including terror as a battle tactic, is a hypocrite, 4.89, not a believer as described in 8.1-5, 9.111 & 49.15.
3.110 makes Muslims out to be the “best of peoples for the people”. Sahih Bukhari 6.60.80 explains that they are the best as they drag us to Islam with chains on our necks.
If they sincerely denounce terror, they are hypocrites or apostates, not Muslims. I direct your attention to “Reliance Of The Traveller” o8.0–8.7 which specifies the death penalty for any of a list of 20 attitudes and actions including denial of any part of the Qur’an. In this case 8.12, 57 & 60; 9.111, 120; 33.26-27 & 59.2.
As for the characteristics and attributes specific to the group called “muslims” which has been inculcated from birth in the cultural indoctination called “islam,” it’s only according to their own most official rules – the Qur’an itself, which defines what a muslim is, and is not, and what a muslim thinks and does, and thinks not, and does not.
According only to them SELVES, (and not according to some parochial Westerner who grew up been spoon-fed the Enlightenment ideals of universal human rights – and responsibilities – and free will, such as your self) all muslims are proud slaves of “allah,” who were deliberately created to Submit to his immutable, implacable will.
And – also according to them, not to you – “allah” also very deliberately created YOU, as an “infidel,” to vex him, and for his “muslim” mind-slave minions to therefore murder, as a test of their devotion to him.
Islam is a monolithic crime-creed, with instructions in their war and crime-manual applying to all aspects of their holy mobster “muslim” minions’ lives. Its management is not a top-down affair.
Each and every one of them knows their obligations to the tribe and knows they are at war with us. The Qur’an sentences us all to “Death By Muslim!” for our “crime” of simply not being muslims ourselves!
ISLAM IS OUR DECLARED ENEMY.
Islam long-since officially declared WAR on all that is not islam in this world.
AIDING AND ABETTING IT IS TREASON.
Making business deals with muslims is treason.
Buying oil from them is treason. Inviting them here is treason.
HOW HARD IS THAT TO UNDERSTAND, TRAITORS?
Would we bother to separately arrest and try each and every individual member of a crime-gang or ARMY which had officially declared war on us and was openly attacking us?!
Would you still be saying “It’s unfair to pre-judge every single one of their soldiers as guilty of attacking us, as long as there’s even the slightest chance that even one of their less attentive members hasn’t committed any crimes of aggression against our populace, first!”?
Would we only be “allowed” to prosecute, in court, with rules of evidence, each and every soldier, one at a time, while their gang remained free to rampage at will across our countrysides?!
sidney penny says
You said it right Robert Spencer
I am not anti-Muslim and I am not right wing.
I am for :
human rights,
freedom of speech,
and for the equality of rights of all people before the law.
I am also against:
jihad violence,
legally sanctioned beating of women,
the institutionalized oppression of non-Muslims,
denial of the freedom of speech,
and other violent and oppressive aspects of Sharia.
Do not be shy about repeating this mantra every time and all the time.
sidney penny says
Never put yourself on the backfoot.
sidney penny says
Dear Marita Moloney.
Can you please let me know what is “anti-Muslim rhetoric.”?
A good definition and a few examples will do .
While you are at it, what is “right-wing activism”?
Once again a good definition and a few examples will do.
Also, name the groups that you say are involved in “right-wing activism” based on your definition.
It should not take up too much of your time as you would have done a lot of research already.
Best wishes,
Sidney Penny
Mark says
What a load of Marita Baloney.
Nabi says
Notwithstanding the free card you give to Muslims–bearing in mind that stainless steel logic indicates the culture itself must be the crucible for all the negatives you mention–what’s to like? How can any bunch so captious and self segregating possibly be a social asset? Sounds like we’re the Uncle Toms.