The ridiculous Scott Shane and his New York Times colleagues here delivered one of the first salvos in the establishment propaganda media’s latest attempt to demonize and destroy Steve Bannon, and by extension, President Trump. In this lengthy piece, they try to create the impression that the clash of civilizations and the jihad against the U.S. are a “dark view of Islam” concocted by right-wing “Islamophobes” (including me, of course). Unfortunately for their narrative, Muslims with this “dark view of Islam,” such as the Allahu-akbaring, machete-wielding would-be killer in the Louvre this morning, keep trying to kill Europeans and Americans. Trump’s “dark view of Islam” is simply Islamorealism, as every day’s headlines attest. More below.
“Trump Pushes Dark View of Islam to Center of U.S. Policy-Making,” by Scott Shane, Matthew Rosenberg and Eric Lipton, New York Times, February 1, 2017:
WASHINGTON — It was at a campaign rally in August that President Trump most fully unveiled the dark vision of an America under siege by “radical Islam” that is now radically reshaping the policies of the United States….
“The hateful ideology of radical Islam,” he told supporters, must not be “allowed to reside or spread within our own communities.”Stephen K. Bannon, the former chief of Breitbart News and now President Trump’s chief strategist, was the main driver of President Trump’s rapid signing on Friday of the executive order on immigration, which set off a political firestorm.
Mr. Trump was echoing a strain of anti-Islamic theorizing familiar to anyone who has been immersed in security and counterterrorism debates over the last 20 years. He has embraced a deeply suspicious view of Islam that several of his aides have promoted, notably retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, now his national security adviser, and Stephen K. Bannon, the president’s top strategist.
This worldview borrows from the “clash of civilizations” thesis of the political scientist Samuel P. Huntington, and combines straightforward warnings about extremist violence with broad-brush critiques of Islam. It sometimes conflates terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State with largely nonviolent groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots and, at times, with the 1.7 billion Muslims around the world. In its more extreme forms, this view promotes conspiracies about government infiltration and the danger that Shariah, the legal code of Islam, may take over in the United States.
Those espousing such views present Islam as an inherently hostile ideology whose adherents are enemies of Christianity and Judaism and seek to conquer nonbelievers either by violence or through a sort of stealthy brainwashing….
How could anyone have gotten such a hateful, Islamophobic idea? Could it be from the Qur’an, which tells Muslims not to take Jews and Christians as friends (5:51) and instead to conquer and subjugate them (9:29)? Could it be from the Qur’an’s command to Muslims to fight unbelievers “until religion is all for Allah” (8:39)? The “brainwashing” bit is Shane being silly, but could the “stealthy” part come from the captured internal Muslim Brotherhood document that declares that its goal in America is a kind of grand jihad aimed at “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within, and sabotaging its miserable house”?
Rejected by most serious scholars of religion and shunned by Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, this dark view of Islam has nonetheless flourished on the fringes of the American right since before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. With Mr. Trump’s election, it has now moved to the center of American decision-making on security and law, alarming many Muslims.
What a pity that these “serious scholars of religion” have been very intent on convincing non-Muslims that Islam is a religion of peace, but have made few, if any efforts, to disabuse jihadis of their supposed misunderstanding of Islam, which continues to spread worldwide by billing itself among Muslims as the authentic interpretation of Islamic teaching.
Mr. Trump has insisted that the executive order is not a “Muslim ban,” and his supporters say it is a sensible precaution to safeguard Americans. Asked about the seeming antipathy to Islam that appeared to inform the order, the White House pointed to Mr. Trump’s comments in the August speech and on another occasion that signaled support for reform-minded Muslims. His administration, Mr. Trump said in August, “will be a friend to all moderate Muslim reformers in the Middle East, and will amplify their voice.”…
But critics see the order as a clumsy show of toughness against foreign Muslims to impress Mr. Trump’s base, one shaped by advisers with distorted ideas about Islam.
“They’re tapping into the climate of fear and suspicion since 9/11,” said Asma Afsaruddin, a professor of Islamic studies at Indiana University and chairwoman of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy. “It’s a master narrative that pits the Muslim world against the West,” appealing to Trump supporters who know nothing of Muslims or Islam beyond news reports of terrorist attacks, she said.
Here again, what as Asma Afsaruddin done to convince Muslims who are pitted against the West, such as those of the Islamic State who have repeated called for the murders of Americans, that they should lay down their arms?
The executive order, she said, will backfire by reinforcing the jihadist line that the United States is at war with Islam. “The White House is a huge soapbox,” she said. “The demonization of Muslims and Islam will become even more widespread.”
If there is any such actual demonization, it isn’t the fault of Trump or Bannon or Flynn or Gaffney or Geller or me. It is the fault of Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and Nidal Malik Hasan, and Syed Rizwan Farook, and Tashfeen Malik, and all the other Muslims who have committed murder in the name of Islam and in accord with its teachings.
Those in the administration with long records of criticizing Islam begin with Mr. Bannon and Mr. Flynn. Mr. Flynn last February tweeted a link to an anti-Muslim video and wrote, “Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL.” In an interview, he said that “Islam is not necessarily a religion but a political system that has a religious doctrine behind it.”
Islam is certainly a religion, but it is also a political system, and an authoritarian, violent, supremacist, misogynistic, anti-Semitic and expansionist one at that. Pretending this is not the case will not make it go away — as the last fifteen years abundantly prove.
Mr. Bannon has spoken passionately about the economic and security dangers of immigration and took the lead role in shaping the immigration order. In a 2014 talk to a meeting at the Vatican, he said the “Judeo-Christian West” is at war with Islam.“There is a major war brewing, a war that’s already global,” he said. “Every day that we refuse to look at this as what it is, and the scale of it, and really the viciousness of it, will be a day where you will rue that we didn’t act.” Elsewhere, on his radio show for Breitbart News, Mr. Bannon said, “Islam is not a religion of peace — Islam is a religion of submission,” and he warned of Muslim influence in Europe: “To be brutally frank, Christianity is dying in Europe and Islam is on the rise.”
Can Scott Shane demonstrate any of these assertions to be false? There is certainly abundant evidence that they are true. Search the archives here at Jihad Watch for the categories “Islamic supremacism,” “Muslim persecution of Christians,” and the like.
…They all reflect the hard-line opinions of what some have described as the Islamophobia industry, a network of researchers who have warned for many years of the dangers of Islam and were thrilled by Mr. Trump’s election.
They warn about the danger to American freedoms supposedly posed by Islamic law, and have persuaded several state legislatures to prohibit Shariah’s use. It is a claim that draws eye rolls from most Muslims and scholars of Islam, since Muslims make up about 1 percent of the United States population and are hardly in a position to dictate to the other 99 percent.
Population size is hardly the point, especially since the Left has so wholeheartedly allied with Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islamic groups. It doesn’t take a huge population to affect massive change in any case. The Bolsheviks, despite their name, were never a majority in Russia. But they were an organized and energized vanguard, and they prevailed.
“The majority of Muslims don’t interpret the Quran literally,” said Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institution. “You can have five Muslims who all say we think this is God’s exact words, but they all disagree with each other on what that means in practice.”
That is flatly false. In reality, literalism is the dominant mainstream in Qur’an interpretation. Even if it were true, there is still a major global problem of those who do take it literally and act on its verses of violence. Should we ignore them and do nothing to stop them because other Muslims don’t take the Qur’an literally?
Among the most outspoken of those warning about Islam are Pamela Geller, of Stop Islamization of America, Robert Spencer, of Jihad Watch, and Frank Gaffney Jr., of the Center for Security Policy.
All three were hosted by Mr. Bannon on his Breitbart radio program before he became chief executive of the Trump campaign in August. Mr. Gaffney appeared at least 34 times. His work has often been cited in speeches by Mr. Flynn. Kellyanne Conway, now counselor to Mr. Trump, did polling for Mr. Gaffney’s center. Last year, the center gave Senator Jeff Sessions, who has warned of the “totalitarian threat” posed by radical Islam and is Mr. Trump’s nominee for attorney general, its annual “Keeper of the Flame” award….
The Times then goes on to invoke the hard-Left hate group the Southern Poverty Law Center to smear Gaffney. It doesn’t explain why the SPLC is a credible source as to who is hateful and who isn’t. The Times need not bother with such niceties. Which is why ever-increasing numbers of people are discovering that they need not bother with the Times.

Terry Karcich says
Pres. Trump can end this insane desire of American leftists to imitate the EU by letting unlimited numbers of “refugees” into our country. He should take in two million of them without vetting. Settle one million in NY and one million in California. Then he should ensure that those states provide welfare to all of them. States who want open borders should be required to support the immigrants and refugees who come in to take advantage of those States’ welfare systems. Look how well tat has worked in Germany, UK, Sweden, etc.
Laura says
Yes, but there must be restrictions on their traveling to any other states!!!!
Jack says
How many maniacs that adhere to this demon religion are in America that believe it’s their right to live off we “Infidels” ? and how many of these maniacs believe their false god gives them permission to rape ‘Infidel” women? one is too many but we know there are thousands and if something isn’t done only fools believe we wont end up like many parts of Europe, after-all they are cut from the same cloth. We also have against those of us who understand this Fascist Political Ideology the “Interfaith Movement” these are professing Christians in churches who are catering to these anti-Christs, while ignoring Christians being wiped off the face of the Earth,, people we Christians are warned not to have fellowship with, I suppose those in these churches have never heard the term Laodicea, those Jesus said he would spew out when He returned, these professing Christians are warned of “Strong Delusion” it will come to the church first and it’s here now.
gravenimage says
Terry Karcich wrote:
Pres. Trump can end this insane desire of American leftists to imitate the EU by letting unlimited numbers of “refugees” into our country. He should take in two million of them without vetting. Settle one million in NY and one million in California.
…………………..
Why should good people like myself have to suffer Jihad terror? Besides, if you really believe that all these Mohammedans will scruple to cross state lines, you are sadly mistaken.
Hopefully you were just trying to make a rhetorical point.
Terry Karcich says
Yes, I was being facetious about settling a million refugees in NY and CA, but my point is that Pres. Trump should use the law and his power to force people who support a policy which will endanger innocent Americans, to live with the consequences of these Soros-sponsored goals. Apparently they have learned nothing from Europe’s experience.
gravenimage says
It’s true that all too few on the Left in the US have learned anything from Europe, Terry–most still have the idea that Europe is some sort of socialist paradise where everyone gets five weeks of vacation a year, just like in Michael Moore’s stupid movie, “Where to Invade Next”.
Most have no idea about the mushrooming Jihad violence there.
saturnine says
What threshold should cause concern? Why must we we wait if the result is inevitable?
Ms. Mead’s statement applies in more ways than the NYT can imagine.
Dennis says
Historically, agitation for special minority rights begins at about 2% and grave problems begin to arise at about 5%.
Dennis says
See this article for more detail:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/05/the_five_stages_of_islam.html
gravenimage says
Yes–the threat of Islam can be reliably tracked by the percentage of Muslim infestation of a society.
somehistory says
Reading this story a couple of days ago, I realized that if the president wishes to know more about islam and what it means to freedom, he has the names of some who can help him understand; since some that he has working with him have spoken with those in the know.
Bezelel says
I would call this a must see video, preaching to the choir here though.
Jack says
I was in Turkey and Egypt in 2000, wouldn’t go back to the same places today for any amount of money, if the locals want you don’t expect the police to help you, if there were an American consulate there they would lie and say you provoked them by insulting Islam or some other lie. I got an idea from the video; all Muslims stay over there and I’ll stay here, Liberals are insane too but America is still a Constitutional Republic, no thanks to the “Useful Idiots”
pandainc says
“Those espousing such views present Islam as an inherently hostile ideology whose adherents are enemies of Christianity and Judaism and seek to conquer nonbelievers either by violence or through a sort of stealthy brainwashing….” Yupper, that about sums it up.
As far as Turkey goes, I was in Izmir (and Istanbul) in 1966 and observed a woman getting shoved into the street (heavily trafficked) by three a–holes only because she was in their way (and plenty of room to have gone around her). No one thought anything of it. At that time, I assumed that they were just slime — not really, just ragheads.
RAB says
I’m confused. Can somebody please tell me where is the “religion” in Islamic ideology? If there is absolutely no separation, ideally at least, between church and state in Islam, how can there be any spirituality if Allah governs every thought and physical movement of his slaves, I mean adherents. If the Koran and the Sunnah are the ultimate and final word of Allah for all time and for all of humanity, then there is no choice but absolute belief, in which case there can be no moral or intellectual foundation to Islamic ideology. Or have I got it all wrong?
Dawn says
I know you won’t do yhis it is called you tube and look up Robert Spenser and maybe your eyes will finally be opened to the truth
gravenimage says
Muslim with dark view of Islam attacks in Louvre 2 days after NY Times warns of Trump’s “dark view of Islam”
…………………….
Yes–that “dark view of Islam” comes from Islam itself.
billybob says
“What a pity that these “serious scholars of religion” have been very intent on convincing non-Muslims that Islam is a religion of peace, but have made few, if any efforts, to disabuse jihadis of their supposed misunderstanding of Islam, which continues to spread worldwide by billing itself among Muslims as the authentic interpretation of Islamic teaching.”
This was a brilliant and unimpeachable rebuttal to a key point, but the left would just skip over such a thing is if it wasn’t even there. So sad…
gravenimage says
Absolutely. It is the saw with so many supposedly “moderate” Muslims–they spend their time trying to convince Infidels that Islam is peaceful, instead of taking it up with their violent coreligionists.
dumbledoresarmy says
According to the article – “He [Trump] has embraced a deeply suspicious view of Islam..”.
Well, he’s in excellent company. The Founders of the United States of America shared his view; indeed, if anything, they went a whole lot further.
Here is Andrew Bostom discussing the views on Islam – considered, lucid, and manifestly informed by extensive reading, observation and experience, as is exposed, if one reads the final essay in the group, by certain remarks contrasting the “Fatihat” with the “Lord’s Prayer” – by the Sixth President of the United States, and one of its most learned and cosmopoitan, and most passionate in advocacy of human rights (to use modern terminology) – John Quincy Adams.
I have found the articles, in their entirety, digitised, online. I haven’t read through the whole, but have certainly read much of them, enough to know that Bostom’s account is a fair and accurate representation of Adams’ views, and that the passages Bostom cites are not ‘taken out of context’ in any way.
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=11283
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS KNEW JIHAD
By Andrew G. Bostom
FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Here is just part what Adams says, in the first of a series of essays on the subject of 1/ the Russo-Turkish war (i.e. the jihad waged by Ottoman Muslim Turkey, against Christian Russia, and Russia’s attempts at self-defence) and 2/ the Greek War of Independence (i.e. the war of a subjugated, oppressed indigenous community, to throw off the iron yoke of Dhimmitude that had been imposed on it by Jihad, and centuries of alien Muslim occupation and abuse), about Islam, versus Christianity.
“In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, **and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth.** {my emphasis – dda}
“Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle.
Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion.
“He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex,
“and the allowance of polygamy;
“**and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. ** {my emphasis – dda}.
THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE (Adam’s capital letters)….
“Between these two religions [i.e. between Christianity, which Adams had discussed prior to his summary of the rise and the teachings of Islam],
“**thus contrasted in their characters** {my emphasis – dda}, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant…
“While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.” [p. 269]
And there is more:
““As the essential principle of his [Mohammed’s – dda] faith is the subjugation of others by the sword; it is only by force, that his false doctrines can be dispelled, and his power annihilated.
“They [The Russians] have been from time immemorial, in a state of almost perpetual war with the Tatars, and with their successors, the Ottoman conquerors of Constantinople.
“It were an idle waste of time to trace the causes of each renewal of hostilities, during a succession of several centuries.
“The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.
“Of Mahometan good faith [Adams is being sarcastic – dda], we have had memorable examples ourselves….” (and he then goes on to cite a conspicuous example of mohammedan duplicity, from American experience during the early period of the war of self-defence against the Muslim jihad raiders aka ‘Barbary pirates’ – dda).”
Ah, that evil Islamophobe, John Quincy Adams, with his ‘deeply suspicious view of Islam’… based on a careful and intelligent examination of mohammedan founding texts, knowledge of the career of mohammed, and observation of mohammedan behaviour toward Infidels, both historic and contemporary.
dumbledoresarmy says
Here is the *money quote*, which can hardly be bettered as a summary of the core of Islam.
Send it viral on social media, identified as the ipsissima verba of John Quincy Adams, Sixth President of the United States of America.
“The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.
“The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute;
“the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace;
“and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective.
“The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.”
That was written circa 1829. It is as true today as then.
Let John Quincy Adams speak to Donald Trump. Let Donald Trump and his advisers on Foreign Affairs, Immigration, and Homeland Security – and on Business, Finance and Trade – read, learn, mark and inwardly digest the wisdom of John Quincy Adams, on the subject of Islam, and shape their policies and actions accordingly. No Infidel power has *ever* taken this assessment seriously as a guide to action at all times, when dealing with the Mohammedan mob; always, always, always they have been fooled into thinking they can ‘deal’ with this mohammedan entity or that; and ALWAYS that has been to their detriment. It is time to try something different; no matter how many smiling, plausible, besuited or elegantly-robed mohammedan Abusers issue either threats, or bribes, or greasy flattery and Deals Too Good To Be True.
Identify the Ummah as the Enemy. An Enemy in perpetuity; because it *is*. JQA saw that it was. He wasn’t stupid. he was wise. He could see what was in front of him
Then, having identified it as the Enemy – an enemy well versed in deceit and infiltration and subversion, as well as in the outright and flagrant and atrocious use of terrorising violence – **treat it as such**.
Wall it off and slam down a ten-tonne hammer on it every time its claws reach beyond the wall. When it whines and wails and sues for ‘peace’ (i.e a “false and delusive promise of peace”) grimly bear in mind what happened to the Meccans, after they concluded the ‘Treaty’ of Hudaybiyya, and.. go in and hit *harder*.
somehistory says
Thank you. I have read J.Q., but his words are always a good read.
islam is a hydra…one must keep cutting off the heads as they try to regrow. There is to be no trust given to it that it has “reformed” or changed in any way from its original form or intent. Evil through and through.
gravenimage says
Thank you, DDA.
Jack says
Thank you Robert Spencer for being a Watchman: Who is to say that you haven’t been called by Yahweh the Elohim of the Bible to be a Watchman during these troubled times: Ezekiel 33: States that if a watchman doesn’t sound the alarm,when he sees the Sword coming, the Watchman will share the blame. Too long to put it all on here. Several other O.T prophets have a prophecy on this including Isaiah and Jeremiah. No doubt a serious responsibility.
epistemology says
As a matter of fact Islam isn’t only at war with the West but with the whole civilized world. Even the peaceful Buddhists don’t like it when their women are raped and killed. See the problems the Burmese got with their Muslim Rohingya minority. It seems that people all over the world are pretty touchy about trifles like that. Please excuse my sarcasm but anything else fails when it comes to Islam.
“Islam is certainly a religion, but it is also a political system, and an authoritarian, violent, supremacist, misogynistic, anti-Semitic and expansionist one at that. Pretending this is not the case will not make it go away — as the last fifteen years abundantly prove.”
I can only add to this insightful comment that Islam and Nazism are two of a kind. I know what I’m talking about my family was persecuted by the Nazis, so I studied Nazism and Islam as the grand mufti of Jerusalem was a great buddy of Hitler’s. This completes the circle. But there are still a lot of people especially in Europe who’ve got a lot to learn.
dumbledoresarmy says
Here’s another article that shows that others of the Founders, besides John Quincy Adams, had an even more “deeply suspicious” view of Islam, than Donald Trump, 45th President.
Keith Farrell, “What the Founders Thought About Islam”.
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/obama-claims-islam-part-of-founding-heres-what-our-founders-wrote-about-mussellmen
Excerpt:
“After winning its independence from England, American vessels no longer enjoyed British protection [and the British paid what was effectively ‘jizya’ to the mohammedans of North Africa, so as not to be attacked by jihad raiders on shipboard – dda].
“France, dismayed that the US would not aid it in its war against England, also ceased protection of American ships.
“The result led to American vessels being raided and plundered by Muslim pirates from the Barbary Coast.
“**After agreeing to pay 10% of the new nations dismal GDP in exchange for passage, attacks continued** [nota bene: appeasing mohammedans, paying jizya or tribute, DOES NOT stop the Jihad. – dda]
“Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin were sent as representatives to mediate the problem.
“It was there that they discovered that the Islamic law the pirates followed made it their duty to attack non-Muslims.
“The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise,” Jefferson wrote to Secretary of State John Jay, explaining peace was not possible.
‘Ben Franklin wrote of his experience: “Nor can the Plundering of Infidels be in that sacred Book (the Qur’an) forbidden, since it is well known from it, that God has given the World, and all that it contains, to his faithful Mussulmen, who are to enjoy it of Right as fast as they conquer it.”
‘John Adams, in his report to Jay, wrote of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, and called him a “military fanatic” who “denies that laws were made for him; he arrogates everything to himself by force of arms.”
END QUOTE.
True dat.
John Adams, of course, was the father of John Quincy Adams.
gravenimage says
Dumbledore’s Army, you know much more about American history than most Americans do. Thanks again.
simpleton1 says
Just love it dda.
That should be taught in schools, as part of the history of the USA.
Same as the Barbary Coast Wars, that I have often pointed out to Americans.
It shows up the modern trivializing of the Somalian pirates issue too,
And of course how appeasement has to be resisted and stopped.
Thanks to JW and many of the contributors, in bringing this knowledge, and by example also spreading the true understanding of islam, that is the ideology, as found in the koran,*(chronological order exposing abrogation) hadiths, surah,
shoehorn says
‘“It’s a master narrative that pits the Muslim world against the West,” appealing to Trump supporters who know nothing of Muslims or Islam’
… as opposed to Hillary supporters who are veritable walking Qur’ans …
‘beyond news reports of terrorist attacks, she said.’
Authorities assure us the attack in the Canadian mosque was terrorism, and that the perpetrator was an anti-Muslim white supremacist … but the driving over of pedestrians in Melbourne, Australia, by an Allah Akbaring motorist was not terrorism. The authorities and media are doing their best to cover for Islam and Jihad.
Lawrence says
A dark view of Islam is like a dark view of Nazism, a dark view of slavery, a dark view of Jim Crow. What’s the problem here? The NY Times makes it clear we ought to have a kind view of Islam, which is akin to having a kind view of Nazism, we must have a good view of rape, murder, tyranny and oppression, hate, hate and hate, so long as it comes from Muslims. This makes the NY Times and of course the Left out-and-out fascist if not out-and-out Nazi. In other news, scientists announce that water is essential for all life on earth.
gravenimage says
Spot on, Lawrence.
No Fear says
The Quran was written by a military commander who wanted his henchmen to win.
It is a war manual. “Islam” consists of all those who follow that military commander.
james.mich says
The plain fact is, that since September 11 2001, Islam has killed over 30,000 people. If Catholics were the offenders, there would be calls for the CC to be banned as a terrorist organisation, and those saying otherwise would be ignored, rebuked, or shouted down. Why does the same logic not apply to Islam ?
I think some kind of inverted racism may be at work: “These Muslim foreigners aren’t those unspeakable Christians with their revolting history, so they must be OK, so any accusatiions against them should be ignored”. They are different – so they are OK.
gravenimage says
james.mich wrote:
The plain fact is, that since September 11 2001, Islam has killed over 30,000 people.
………………
Actually, James, it is even worse than this–there have been over 30,000 Jihad terror attacks since 9/11, but many of them have left more than one dead–in some attacks, there have been dozens murdered.
dumbledoresarmy says
OFFTOPIC: BUT SHOUTOUT TO ALL BRITISH JIHADWATCHERS.
There are some rallies coming up that offer a *major* opportunity to network and to *visibly stand up and be counted* as opponents of the hideous ‘blasphemy law’ of islam.
Here is a summons to people of conscience in Britain to stand up on behalf of Pakistani Catholic Christian Asia Bibi, who faces death because of having been accused of “blasphemy!” by a screeching mohammedan mob. So far she has sat in prison for *seven years* while the government of Pakistan plays cat-and-mouse with her.
The British Pakistani Christian Association, with friends and allies, are holding FOUR rallies on her behalf, in Glasgow and Edinburgh, in London, and in Muslim-infested Birmingham and Manchester, in the course of this month. They are rallying outside the Pakistani diplomatic digs, and *then* in each case *also* petitioning the Scottish and the English Parliaments, requesting that UK *aid* to Islamic Pakistan be cut off, if Asia Bibi is not released.
Details may be found here:
http://www.britishpakistanichristians.org/blog/blasphemy-accused-pakistani-christian-womans-plight-triggers-demonstration-across-the-uk
However, I will repost here, the dates, places, and times.
The first demo takes place on Saturday 4 February – this coming Saturday – in London. I hope some of our London-based jihadwatchers may be able to attend. If you see this notice at 7 or 8 am, and you are in London, you *might* be able to hurry up and go; but if you miss it, then, there are several others planned for later in the month.
Date – Saturday 4 February 2017. LONDON. Time – 10 am to 11 am, and then 12 noon to 1 am. Place – Pakistan High Commission, 34-36 Lowndes Square, London, SW1X9JN.
A procession will leave the Pakistan High Commission at 11 am and arrive at 10 Downing Street for 12 noon for a one-hour protest.
Date: Saturday 11th February 2017. GLASGOW, and then EDINBURGH. Time: 12 noon to 2 pm. Place – 45 Maxell Drive, Glasgow, G41 5JF. The Protest will finish at 2 pm and then a delegation will travel to Edinburgh, to submit a petition to the Scottish Parliament.
(Dear Scotland-based Jihadwatchers – do please, please, please get along to this demo, if you possibly can. If you can’t do the Glasgow and then the Edinburgh, just turn up to one or the other. The more ‘warm bodies’ are out there and visible, the better. Mohammedans bow only to superior force. Therefore, if a HUGE infidel crowd turns up, all exhibiting a no-nonsense Attitude, it just might make a dent. If you can play the bagpipes, why not bring your instrument and offer your gift of music to liven up the rally. – dda)
Date: Friday 17th February 2017, MANCHESTER. Time: 4 pm to 6 pm. Location: The Pakistani Consulate, Pakistan House, 137 Dickensen Rd, Manchester, M145JB. Note – Visitors are kindly requested to bring candles (it’s the UK, and I would imagine that by 6 pm it’s getting dark – dda)
Date: Saturday 18th February 2017, BIRMINGHAM. TIME, 12 noon to 2 pm. Location: Pakistani Consulate, 10A, The Wharf, Bridge Street, Birmingham, B1 2JS.
‘A petition will be presented to each of the Pakistani diplomatic buildings, and to 10 Downing Street, the Welsh Council, and the Scottish Parliament. The petition calls for Pakistan to ensure that Asia Bibi has a fair trial, and that she is protected from harm in a nation that despises her because of her faith. The electronic petition can be signed by [link in original; so click on the link provided above, and then read on down to find the petition link -dda ).
From the BPCA notice, more:
‘
The BPCA is calling for people of good conscience to sign the petition and join us in solidarity.
‘Protesters are calling for the British government to intervene on behalf of Asia Bibi, who they say was falsely accused of denigrating the Islamic prophet Mohammed. They seek diplomatic engagement between the British and Pakistani governments to ensure that Asia has a fair trial, and that her family, the judiciary, and legal team representing Asia, are protected from the many hard-line Muslims in Pakistan.
“‘A letter will be submitted to 10 Downing Street, accompanying our petition. The letter will also call for the UK government to reconsider the 445 million pounds of foreign aid given to Pakistan. With a desire that the aid be termnated, unless Pakistan significantly improves its poor human rights record.”
Excellent idea! – DDA. And it could be applied to many another horrible human-rights-abusing mohammedan entity.
More, from the head of the BPCA, Wilson Chowdhry ( a *very* different kind of person, from that other Choudhry of whom we know only too much, at jihadwatch).
“Major donors such as the UK and the USA need to start to use their substantial foreign aid budgets to Pakistan as leverage for better human rights – with real conviction.”..”.
So, there you go. Whilst all the Useful Idiots, Mohammedans and Islamophiles are squealing and ginning up faux outrage over Trump’s really very limited and modest attempts to make America a little safer for Infidels, *you*, if you reside in the UK, can be taking part in a *real* protest rally on behalf of someone who truly IS an innocent victim… an innocent victim of cruel, savage and barbaric mohammedan discrimination and persecution, meted out to her – by MUSLIMS – because of her faith.
gravenimage says
Great information, Dumbledore’s Army. I hope all good Britons who can make it go.
Demsci says
I am so glad with the rebuttal of Robert of this article of Scott Shane. So that I know the arguments from both sides. I and many of us can use this information in conversations, esp, since elections are coming up in Holland and France, where parties who have the same “dark view of Islam” can get a lot more power.
And I am so glad that Trump already has and his allies may well got so much more power.
Because I like to compare, to ferret out double standards wherever I find them, in relationship with Islam and Democracy. When in conversation with 2 or more people, I understand that it is not the person who disagrees with me the most, that I have to convince. It is more like the 2 us vie for the approval of all others present; “public, audience”.
And now our side can argue that we too detect a “dark view”, but this time it is from the left about the Trump-administration”. Leftists are very excited about the current and coming shift of power, and they see their own “dangers”, just as JW-ers see dangers, only different ones.
And so now finally leftists are riled and prepared for debating, which they weren’t when they were comfortably in power.
I see all sorts of comparisons, that are possible in debate with leftists; such as:
Why are we supposed to know what the Trumpteam is doing and believe it, when you most often don’t bother to inform yourself about Islam and when you dismiss or even ignore all our knowledgeable arguments so totally so often. Now that “we” are in power we can do the same to you, until you finally listen to us as well as you want us to listen to you.
The area of criticizing Trump on treatment of women you leftists have totally lost, because we can endlessly compare Trump’s attitudes and actions with Islamic ones and win.
Before Trump there was much less grounds for comparison, but now we can utilize all criticism on his team by seeking to put in a global and historic context, whereby all the criticisms are compared with the teachings and behavior of Islam.
If Muslims get so much excuses and protection, on what really are their choices, like clinging to Islam in democratic countries, why do democratic governments, politicians and defenders not the same help, or benefit of the doubt?
I think “Noblesse Oblige” is a complete bad principle and am in favor of same/ singe standards for all. But even if it were used, then still that does not mean that Muslims are “innocent as angels”, but rather that they are viewed by leftists as on a par with: “Animals, Children, the insane”, which are not to be criticized due to their inability to change. Leftists and all humans only vehemently criticize those they view as capable of choice and change. And Muslims are as sane, adult humans as the Trump team and their supporters. So same/ single standards for both please!
And I already see a lot of comparisons like this going on. It is such a good thing that the Trumpteam now has the power.
Demsci says
And I take a clue from Shadi Hamids remark about “5 random Muslims” all saying they know Islam exact words, but still disagreeing about them”. And Roberts rebuttal of “even if it were true, what then?
Scott Shane and leftists don;’t think through this lame excuse of Shadi Hamid. Because it must mean that there is “miscommunication” between what Allah meant and aimed to achieve, according to Islam, and what was indeed understood and achieved by his followers in 1400 (or was it 1200) years.
This self-admission of a (pro)-Muslim opens the door to avoid the trap of the ubiquitous, eternal accusation of leftists to counterjihadists of “painting all Muslims with one brush”.
Well, leftists also paint Muslims with one brush, namely a white one, whitewashing clearly detrimental interpretations of Islam texts as “not belonging to Islam”, and so declaring “all real Muslims to be “innocent, peaceful”.
And we now can “avoid both the white and the black brush” by pointing out that the whole Islamic text somehow is terribly unclear and multi-interpretable on very important issues, so that ALSO the Islamic State leaders and warriors interpret Islam in some kind of valid way (or even more valid way).
Isn’t that enough? Isn’t this deplorable lack of clarity and proneness to anti-democratic supremacist interpretations of the Islamic holy texts and it’s practice reason enough to take precaution measures involving Muslims especially? When clinging to such a religion is a choice?
And is n’t it rational and reasonable that we therefore want to at least put conditions on being Muslim in a democratic country? Like adhering to it’s constitution, laws, values above all, as the Trumpteam has formulated it recently, so also above Islam’s contradicting laws, values etc?
billybob says
“Isn’t this deplorable lack of clarity and proneness to anti-democratic supremacist interpretations of the Islamic holy texts and it’s practice reason enough to take precaution measures involving Muslims especially?”
You offer an interesting approach, side stepping all debate on the specific meaning of verses. If we follow along with your proposition that therefore we should “take precaution measures involving Muslims”, that opens the door to demanding that Muslims clarify their particular understanding of Islam to us – upon arrival in this country, in mosques and in school. They must clearly state that their understanding is a peaceful interpretation of Islam, and furthermore, they must condemn any other interpretation at every occasion.
We have laws for truth in advertising. For example, if the benefits of a drug are advertized, contradictions and precautions must be clearly stated within that same ad. No drug is without unwanted side effects. Even if the numbers affected by them are statistically very low, these must be clearly stated.
Similarly, each copy of the Quran must bear a stamp in large letters, “THIS MAY BE HARMFUL TO YOUR SPIRITUAL HEALTH” or some such, and clearly state the contradictions and precautions one must take if they should choose to read the text therein.
There must also be proper disclaimers on every page as footnotes, such as “Rape is prohibited by law in all jurisdictions within the USA.” or the same about polygamy, the murder of gays, the forced marriage of child brides, the mutilation of female genitals, the killing of apostates, the killing of daughters gone astray, etc, etc, even “There is no evidence Muhammad actually flew on a winged donkey as nobody ever saw this supposed flight take place, and nobody ever even saw a winged donkey.”
gravenimage says
Good posts, Demsci. Thanks.
Angemon says
Well, misters Shane, Rosenberg and Lipton, do you think it should? Do you think that groups with views like that of Al-Qaeda or ISIS should be allowed to reside and spread in the US? Do you think that women should have acid thrown in their faces for not wanting to wear the burka? Do you think child marriages and female genital mutilation should be made mandatory under US law? Do you think gays and apostates should be killed and that non-muslims should be institutionally discriminated against and forced to pay a poll tax?
If you don’t think any of that, if you are as disgusted and reviled by the mere thoughts of any of that as I am, I don’t see why you’re objecting to saying they should not be allowed in your communities, especially when they’re all punishable by American law to begin with.
“Mr. Trump was echoing a strain of anti-Islamic theorizing familiar to anyone who has been immersed in security and counterterrorism debates over the last 20 years. ”
Again: Bannon’s words were “radical islam”. How is that being “anti-islamic”? Unless, of course, you are tacitly admitting that “radical islam” is simply orthodox islam, and that brings me up to my previous questions: do you think that FGM, child marriages, etc, should be allowed to spread in your communities?
Unless you can offer proof and evidence that his thesis is wrong, this is not an argument.
Again: if you can’t prove that they’re wrong, then you don’t have an argument.
Huh, mate? Al-Qaeda and ISIS *are* offshoots of the MB. BTW, define “largely non-violent”. Because the implication here is that the MB *is* violent. You know how serial killers are often portrayed by their neighbours as nice, friendly folk? One can they they’re largely non-killers…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7TAAw3oQvg
Conspiracies such as? And again, not an argument, just an attempt to poison the well – the conclusion here is that saying “radical islam shouldn’t be allowed to reside and spread in our communities” is akin to espousing conspiracy theories.
Again: either prove what they are saying is wrong or it’s not an argument.
Wasn’t Bush one of the stupidest Presidents ever? A terrible decision maker? Why, then, should I trust him on this particular issue?
Which it literally isn’t. The people being barred from entry are barred from entry because of their *nationality*, not religion. Muslims from France, Germany or Saudi Arabia, to name a few countries, can enter US soil normally. It’s people from a few, select, terrorism-hotbeds that can’t, regardless of their religion or lack thereof.
Is there anything the WH can do that won’t be considered “demonization of islam and muslims” by the perpetual crybullies who make a living posing as victims? You had two administrations saying that they were not at war with islam and that islam was a religion of peace. Combating islamic terrorism has been presented as a war against islam and muslims. And muslims living in the US have all the rights and duties as any other religious group.
Again: prove him wrong or that’s not an argument.
Yes, some islamic sects groups think, for example, that gays should be stoned to death, others that a wall should be dropped on them, others that they should be beheaded, others that they should be hanged and others that they should be tossed from a tall building. All of them agree that gays are to be killed because allah ordered so.
gravenimage says
Fine analysis, Angemon.
Guy Jones says
“It sometimes conflates terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State with largely nonviolent groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood…”
——–
Examine, if you can stomach it, the dishonest rhetoric on display here. “Largely” non-violent? What does that mean, exactly? They espouse violence only some of the time? Oh, the same Muslims Brotherhood that assassinated Sadat in Egypt, has slaughtered scores of tourists in Egypt, and, is rightly designated as a terrorist group, worldwide?
Champ says
Scott Shane has revealed that he is a sell-out and even a dangeorous ‘journalist’ when it comes to writing anything on the subject of islam. I would even add that Scott is a coward, and probably a pawn for the NY Times, for not reporting the truth about islam—since the entire world has become completely saturated with ISLAMIC TERRORISM and knows (or should know) the unmistakable connection between islam & jihad. This is so obvious that Scott does in fact look “ridiculous” …which is putting it mildly. But Scott has chosen to side with this silly lie, rather than the obvious truth.