“Some students have opposed Spencer’s visit due to his Islamophobic views…”
“Islamophobia” is a propaganda term designed to shame people into fearing to oppose jihad terror and Sharia oppression.
“Caleb Smith ’17 M.A. ’18, a Daily news staffer who authored the petition against the event, urged the Senate to reconsider its decision to continue to fund the event. ‘The ASSU is a private members association and is not a governmental organization, so it doesn’t have the same requirements that would be attached to a local government,’ said Smith. ‘There is a difference between actively preventing speech from happening and providing the equal amount of discretionary funding to all speakers of all viewpoints, no matter how extreme.’”
What is “extreme” about opposing jihad terror and Sharia oppression? Nothing, in a sane academic environment, but that is not what prevails at Stanford. And the stigmatization of opposition to jihad terror goes far beyond academia. Find out how the defense of free society against jihad and Sharia became so demonized, and what is at stake in this even for those who are doing the demonization, in my book Confessions of an Islamophobe. Preorder your copy here now.
“In the resolution, which will be voted on later next week, Senators wrote that they ‘believe in free in speech and the open exchange of ideas at Stanford, but that this can only be possible within a culture of mutual respect. Bringing in a speaker that has founded an organization that has been designated as a hate group is antithetical to the inclusive and diverse culture that Stanford aspires to foster.’”
When you say you “believe in free speech” and then add “but,” you don’t believe in free speech.
Notice how there is no discussion of whether the “hate group” label is justly applied. No “hateful” quotes from me are offered. No evidence is offered at all.
“Advocacy committee chair Hamzeh Daoud ’20 made a final comment on the Robert Spencer event, voicing his own experience as a Muslim. ‘…I have been stopped at airports because of my religion.'”
Hey Hamzeh, I’ve been stopped at airports because of your religion, too. Once I was working on Jihad Watch in an airport, and suddenly I was surrounded by large German Shepherds and a gang of cops. Someone had seen “jihad” on my screen and reported me. Another time, I had a sheaf of notes — quotations from the Qur’an and Hadith, without any comments — in my suit jacket pocket, and it fell out while I was going through security — you know, “Kill them wherever you find them” (Qur’an 2:191, 4:89, and 9:5) and the like. I didn’t notice, but police did, and I was soon surrounded by cops again and questioned. You don’t hear me whining about this. I didn’t mind either time. I was glad the police were alert and on the job. If you’re against jihad terror, as I am sure you are, then you shouldn’t mind a bit of inconvenience at airports. We all have to go through it.
“I have been questioned about my position at Stanford because of my religion.”
I very, very seriously doubt that.
“Daoud concluded by reaffirming his pride in his Muslim identity and community….’Muslims aren’t passive forces – we’re active, and we have the power to change and react. However, we don’t need people who suffer from the white savior complex to talk over us.’”
“White savior complex”? As far as I know, jihad mass murder and Sharia-induced oppression of women, gays and non-Muslims are not races. But maybe you can clue me in on what race they are when I’m at Stanford, Mr. Daoud. See you there!
“Senate condemns Robert Spencer event,” by Felicia Hou, Stanford Daily, November 8, 2017:
On Tuesday night, the Undergraduate Senate condemned Stanford College Republicans (SCR) for hosting Robert Spencer at an ASSU-financed event but did not revoke its funding.
Spencer, who co-founded Stop Islamization of America and the American Freedom Defense Initiative, will be speaking at Stanford on Nov. 14 by invitation from SCR. Some students have opposed Spencer’s visit due to his Islamophobic views – an online petition to defund the event has been circulating via email, while an unknown individual tore down posters and flyers advertising the event in Crothers Hall over the weekend.
In its official statement on the Robert Spencer event, the Senate stated that they “have an obligation to consider all student groups for funding equally, regardless of their respective ideologies.”
The Senate cited to its Mission Statement, which states that the Senate is responsible for appropriating funding to over five hundred voluntary student organizations that in turn provide the majority of programming for the entire campus. It also said that it must act in compliance with Supreme Court decisions, federal law and California statutes regarding the protection of free speech on college campuses when making decisions – including stipulations that prevent the preemptive censoring of speech.
Caleb Smith ’17 M.A. ’18, a Daily news staffer who authored the petition against the event, urged the Senate to reconsider its decision to continue to fund the event.
“The ASSU is a private members association and is not a governmental organization, so it doesn’t have the same requirements that would be attached to a local government,” said Smith. “There is a difference between actively preventing speech from happening and providing the equal amount of discretionary funding to all speakers of all viewpoints, no matter how extreme.”
Smith added that the Senate “already exercises considerable discretionary authority over how its funds are spent” on a day-to-day basis.
Senate Chair Kojoh Atta ’20 thanked Smith for his concern but responded that the Senate could not amend their statement. The Senate emphasized that it is responsible for the funding – not planning – of events and that the nature of the events are curated by the student groups that hold them. Additionally, the ultimate decision to allow or disallow events on university property belongs to Stanford administrators.
“We can’t freeze the funding,” said Senator Doris Rodriguez ’20, “but [students] have the right to request a refund on student fees to the ASSU if you feel like your voice is being ignored. But that has implications, because that would be taking funds from other student groups.”
“If you were to take back your student funds, you unfortunately would not be able to take back the funds that went to Robert Spencer,” Student Life committee chair Lizzie Ford ’20 added.
Despite its decision to continue funding the event, the Senate, in its joint resolution with the Graduate Student Council, officially condemned the SCR’s decision to invite Spencer.
In the resolution, which will be voted on later next week, Senators wrote that they “believe in free in speech and the open exchange of ideas at Stanford, but that this can only be possible within a culture of mutual respect. Bringing in a speaker that has founded an organization that has been designated as a hate group is antithetical to the inclusive and diverse culture that Stanford aspires to foster.”
Senate reaffirmed that it will continue to support all student groups equally, and that all Muslim students are valued members of the Stanford community.
Advocacy committee chair Hamzeh Daoud ’20 made a final comment on the Robert Spencer event, voicing his own experience as a Muslim.
“My religion is a religion of peace and love,” said Daoud. “This person [Robert Spencer] in no way reflects anything about my religion when talking about extremists. I have been stopped at airports because of my religion. I have been questioned about my position at Stanford because of my religion.”
Daoud concluded by reaffirming his pride in his Muslim identity and community.
“I’m here to say that I’m Muslim and I’m proud, and nothing can change that,” Daoud added. “Muslims aren’t passive forces – we’re active, and we have the power to change and react. However, we don’t need people who suffer from the white savior complex to talk over us. Be there to help, and be there to recommend. If you speak over us, don’t. Leave. I’m Muslim and I will say what I have to say and I will do what I have to do. I won’t be a passive force.”
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
The academy is lost. Oh the irony. Tenure was put in to protect disrupters from being fired for bucking the wisdom conventional among his colleagues. What we got are universities in which virtually all the professors think the same, academic groupthink if you will. I remember a posting here in JW several years ago where it was reported that a recently hired professor at Indiana Law School was fired for daring to speak conservative opinions. Oh the irony that the dude was a Native American, and oh the irony that he did not yet have tenure being too new on the job.
And, the professors don’t even have to do the dirty work of discrimination and censoring. Their students happily do that duty. Perhaps the kids hope to become professors some day.
DrSique says
“Their students happily do that duty.”
Lenin’s “useful idiots.” Ironically, the ones with the actual phobia, an irrational fear, are these weak kneed pseudo-students. They are afraid of allowing anyone with a view different from their own to speak on campus. That seems pretty effin irrational.
Westman says
Let’s suppose a rotund leader in North Korea fires missles on California. Which member of Stanford’s student senate would fight to protect California and the US? Which members of the Santa Cruz University student senate, which members of the UCLA student senate? Would they suddenly develop a need for their “deplorable” Young Republicans?
California students are developing a myopia about the true nature of humans and, a completely naive notion that mixing the world’s population, in a frenzy of globalism, will result in peace. It will, in fact result in balkanization.
Frankly, the inmates. and leftist professors, are trying to control the institution that should be teaching them to revere their own nation; which, instead, is teaching them to hate their country while expecting entitlements and protection from that same nation due to a superior “education”.
Perhaps the recent arrest of some UCLA baskeball team members in China is representative of what the expectation of entitlement will create.
Wellington says
Agreed, Westman. As that old fashion liberal, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, observed, the single greatest failing of modern liberalism is its inability to recognize and fight true evil.
gravenimage says
+1
JawsV says
Their ignorance is appalling. Millennials = Morons.
PRCS says
But you don’t really care for free speech, do you?
AnneCrocket says
“You” who?
gravenimage says
I imagine this is a reference to the Stanford Undergraduate Senate.
PRCS says
“When you say you “believe in free speech” and then add “but,” you don’t believe in free speech.”
With apologies to Leonard Cohen.
gravenimage says
True, PRCS.
W says
One could try to change the concept. To the large extent that focus on Islamophobia has become an opprobrium, what would happen if the concept was modified to ‘Islamo-wary’. Is that a meaningful shift?
David says
Oh cry because they don’t like you! The snowflacks!!!
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Mr Spencer, the merchant of lies and hatred towards Islam and Muslims, you are wrong. Islamapobia simply means hate propaganda against Islam and Muslims. This is exactly what you have been doing. people with conscience will never accept that ,because it is a neonazi proganda against Muslims calling for genocide on them. Yet, you are Jewish slave denouncing Antisemitism. Is that not an irony?
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
you are wrong. Islamapobia simply means…
… confusion, that’s what Islamophobia means. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. Fearing Moslem is rational. Fight until there is no God but Allah. Kill them wherever you find them. Fight who, find who?
Us. So our fear is rational, as was seen most recently in lower Manhattan.
gravenimage says
What calumny–Robert Spencer has never called for violence, let alone genocide.
Moreover, that “hate propaganda” against Islam–that Islam calls for violence–has all been amply affirmed by Ibrahim itace muhammed himself. He has himself said that Islam calls for enslaving and slaughtering Infidels.
JawsV says
People, check out the Moslem above to see what 1400 years of inbreeding produces. It’s no wonder the Moslems don’t invent, create or discover anything. They leave all that to the West and then invade like the parasites they are.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Wait a minute there, ex-Prez Barack Hussein said that Moslems created algebra. What about that?
AleX says
Axiom:all mohomodan ‘states’ are failed states. Parasitic, unsustainable social forms with no prospect for any progress whatsoever.
For allah is all-knowing, wise.
msgoldberg says
You are a merchant of lies…. he has called for evaluating the Jihad, on it’s own terms, it’s own texts, and by it’s prophet. This is what you deny him and all others the right to do.
The Jihad calls for the submission of all others and the homicidism of the Jihadist for 1395 yrs or so, demands evaluation, such that the horrendous mutilating murdering of others, and up to and including muslims, as well as all ‘others’ demands, that we examine this reality. You deny the reality, you smear him and you are selling lies about what he has said, printed, discussed.
Being a supporter of Jihadists you may now examine your motives, but please, if you have anything like what is called a ‘conscience’ don’t let it get you overwhelmed. What is happening to you, is simply what is disallowed to you as a Jihadist.
AleX says
Correction: ‘ITS own terms, ITS own texts and by ITS prophet’ on your first paragraph, msgoldberg.
Sorry, I couldn’t abstain.
mortimer says
Ibrahim, IDENTIFY ONE LIE in all Mr. Spencer’s writing. YOU CANNOT DO THAT. Robert Spencer quotes the top A-1 Islamic sources.
Find the lie in what Robert Spencer writes. You will be the first person to do so.
gravenimage says
He’s been here off an on now for years, and he has *never* been able to identify a single untrue thing from Robert Spencer.
mortimer says
Ibrahim, you dislike GENOCIDE?
Ibrahim, please denounce the following ISLAMIC SCHOLARS who call for GENOCIDE AGAINST THE DIRTY KUFAAR… if you are able:
– “Killing a Kafir who is fighting you is OK. Killing a Kafir for ANY REASON (i.e. criticism of Islam), you can say, it is OK – even if there is NO REASON for it. You can poison, ambush and kill non-believers. You must have a stand with your heart, with your tongue, with your money, with your hand, with your sword, with your Kalashnikov. Don’t ask shall I do this, just do it.”Abu Hamza al-Masri (Egyptian born British Cleric)
– “As a Muslim, I must have hatred for anything non-Islam” – Anjem Choudary.
– from Sufi scholar Ahmad Sirhindi (1564-1624): “The honour of Islam lies in INSULTING kufr and kafirs. One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims… The real purpose of levying jiziya on them is to HUMILIATE them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur. They should constantly remain TERRIFIED and TREMBLING. It is intended to hold them under CONTEMPT and to uphold the honour and might of Islam.”
-Imam Abdul-Latif ibn Abdur-Rahman Rahimullah said, “It is not possible for someone to realize Tawheed and act upon it, and yet not be HOSTILE against the mushrikeen. So anyone who isn’t HOSTILE against the mushrikeen, then it cannot be said that he acts upon Tawheed nor that he realizes it.” [ad-Durar as-Saniyyah 8/167]
-“The doctrine of al Walaa wal Baraa is the REAL IMAGE for the actual practice of this faith.” – source “Al Walaa wal Baraa According to the Aqeedah of the Salaf”, by Sheikh Muhammad Saeed al Qatani, authoritative Saudi Sharia lawyer and imam at the Abu Bakr and Al Furqan Mosques in Mecca
– from ibn Taymiyya, “Book of Emaan”: “… true believers show ANIMOSITY and HATRED towards disbelievers and NEVER support them.”
– from Umar Sulayman ‘Abd-Allaah al-Ashqar, “Belief in Allah”: “The Muslim should regard the Kuffaar as ENEMIES and HATE them because of their kufr, just as he hates their kufr (disbelief) itself.”
– from [Chap.iv] “The Islaamic Concept of al-Walaa’ wal-Baraa’” by Khalid El-Gharib: “… to SHOW ENMITY to those who show enmity to Allaah and His Messenger”.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
wrote that they “believe in free in speech and the open exchange of ideas at Stanford, but“…
When it comes to free speech, the fundamental premise is that there can be no buts. Apparently they don’t teach Logic 101 at Stanford.
… “that this can only be possible within a culture of mutual respect. Bringing in a speaker that has founded an organization that has been designated as a hate group is antithetical to the inclusive and diverse culture that Stanford aspires to foster.”
Designated a hate group by whom, the SDLC? That outfit is at its core itself a hate group. And what do they hate most? Free speech.
Oh, and exactly why should there be no free speech in a culture not of inclusiveness and diversity? That’s what America was in the 1960s when there was free speech calling for the end to Jim Crow, and the outcome was the end of it.
Ahistoricity is a plague upon us. This is especially true when it comes to the “debate” around Islam.
Nobody wants to hear unpleasant truths, which is apparent in this episode at Stanford. Put you head in the sand and you’re bound to take it up the…
PRCS says
“Nobody wants to hear unpleasant truths, which is apparent in this episode at Stanford.”
Well, not exactly. The problem at Stanford–which is not unique–is those who don’t want to hear them want to prevent those who do from hearing them.
harold says
Robert, any speech to events such as these where you have the opportunity to address ignorant people who honest believe you are demonizing a religion for what a tiny minority do, is to start with the Pew Research Survey on the attitude of Muslims showing huge percentages that believe in such things as the death penalty for leaving Islam and then quoting the grand imam of the Al Azhar mosque, “Those learned in Islam and the imams of the four schools of jurisprudence consider apostasy a crime and agree that the apostate must either renounce his apostasy or else be killed.”
To address the “How dare you be concerned about American Muslims”, you next quote the Pew Research Survey of American Muslims ages 20-29 were a substantial minority believe in suicide bombings.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-26-of-young-us-muslims-ok-bombs/
Finally, you quote American Muslim Imams such as the one at the Islamic Center of Riverside praying to Allah for Jews be turned into the booty of Muslims
I realize the hard core leftist zombies will not care, but you will reach some people of good faith that have been misinformed.
Andino says
I live in Northern California and was planning on attending this event. If you don’t already know, Nor Cal is heavily liberal or progressive, or at least most people like to think they are. I would say I have spent most of my life in that context and have thought of myself as motivated by the impulse to “love one another” and with an idealistic notion of how that could solve the worlds problems. Before about two years ago I would say that I was of the mind that someone like R. Spencer was paranoid and over reacting, stereotyping and generalizing and making things worse for the people trying to heal the cleavages of our civilization. But it doesn’t take long to realize the thoroughness of his work here on this site, and the sincerity of his efforts to educate and lift the veil from others eyes. I now visit the site daily in order to find out what’s really going on. I have called the student organization number listed on one of these articles and left two messages inquiring as to why the event became closed to the public and expressing my displeasure at such closeminded tactics. Of course, I never heard anything back.
PRCS says
I live in NorCal, too.
Might drive down.
Robert Spencer says
Unfortunately, Stanford has barred non-students from attending.
PRCS says
I know. But it would be interesting to see all the crying going on outside the event.
And, besides, maybe I’ll see you there.
gravenimage says
Another northern Californian here–I would also attend if it were open to non-Stanford students.
harold says
Robert,
If you focus only on what the Koran say, the reaction will be that you are not giving a fair presentation and they will turn to the “experts” from Georgetown University who say you are taking quotes out of context… blah, blah, blah.
harold says
You need to express good faith even if the opposition does not deserve it. For example, complement Hamzeh Daoud for saying “My religion is a religion of peace and love” and say that you support Muslims who promote the values of peace and love. We need people like Hamzeh to change the values of the 66% of Jordanian Muslims of believe that honor killing of women is sometimes justified. Quote the passages for the Koran or Hadiith that Muslims use to justify honor killings and then ask Hamzeh to not correct you on this interpretation of Islam but to focus his efforts on correcting the 66% Muslims in Jordan that have that interpretation. It is always stronger if you can give an example of an Imam citing the Koran citing the passage and then asking him to organize a group to correct the Imam.
Jon Sobieski says
Hamzeh Daoud is a very pushy muslim who has got all the other leftist Senators biting their nails and fully in line – don’t you dare say anything negative about islam. Check out his smug Senator photo – he’s chairman of some comittee and on the committee of all these ‘chairman.’ He is a student from Jordan and very into fighting islamophobia! Scroll over his pic after enlarging to check that text out.
http://assu.stanford.edu/senators/
harold says
Make a request that during the discussion people they tell you how they will focus on correcting the violent Interpretation of Islam that the leading Imams and substantial percentages support. Tell of the great respect you have for Muslims who were slaughtered or attacked in places such as Bangledesh for publicly supporting a tolerant version of Islam. Honor them by name. When someone starts telling the crowd that you as misinterpreting or distorting the Koran, focus like a laser beam that you are simply informing the public what contemporary Muslims and the leaders say. That there is no point in correcting you because you are not a Muslim. Peaceful Muslims need to show how they will risk their lives on behalf of their peaceful interpretation of Islam by trying to correct those Muslims who have a violent interpretation of Islam.
Tim says
The term “white savior complex” is racist.
PRCS says
Not to the “in” crowd.
gravenimage says
It is and it isn’t–if you are talking about something like Christian missionaries, it is “racist”. If you are talking about Leftist Stanford students, it is not…
MFritz says
It’s becoming very obvious that they don’t have any arguments against Spencer. That’s why they must stop him by all means. And if Stanford had balls they would sanction any disturbances from the regressives with law suits and expulsion.
Jackson03 says
That Spencer’s opponents will not oppose (most likely realize they cannot since they know he is correct) his statements of fact and opinion with logical counter arguments in a debate forum is puzzling to me: Are they really that willfully stupid? And if not what is the factual agenda they are trying to support and hide with propaganda and violence? Are they in fact strong supporters of the Islam on sale and practiced by the likes of ISIS?
Scary!
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
I hope Spencer is able to deliver his speech at Stanford. Kudos to the College Republicans for having the stones, and the acumen, to invite him. As always in the episodes, where is the university president or the Dean in this? It is their duty to publicly rebuke the censorious students and stand for the free exchange of speech.
Notable here is that the censor-students failed to check into the facts of the matter. One wonders whether Stanford is an accredited college or just another country club for post-high school boys and girls.
mortimer says
Agree with APF. THEY ARE MERELY VIRTUE-SIGNALLING. They did not bother to check any facts whatsoever or bother to read even one of Robert Spencer’s 17 erudite and meticulous books about Islam.
Stanford’s Undergraduate Senate acted SOPHOMORICALLY.
Robert Spencer would gladly debate anyone of them or debate a candidate of their choice… if they can find a Muslim who isn’t too cowardly to risk be badly beaten in debate. Robert Spencer is now so knowledgeable about jihad that he never loses a debate.
mortimer says
The Stanford Undergraduate Senate is actually saying that it favors free speech for DEMOCRATS ONLY.
Free speech for me, but not for thee.
St. Manuel II Palaiologos says
These people are a complete disgrace.
mortimer says
They are ‘sophomoric’.
gravenimage says
If only they were no worse than that…
Lydia says
In an Orwellian world, the truth is banned.
Freedom of speech is forbidden.
There is only ‘Orwell-think.’
They don’t want others to learn the truth.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Dedicated Satan (Holy Spirit) worshiper Gravenimage, Mr Spencer’s lies are obvious. He has been copying and pasting lies concocted by Christian evangelists’ lies against Islam and you have been buying it as myiopics. He has been misinterpreting the Quran and hadiths without knowledge by Cherry picking thereby drawing wrong and mischievous conclusions. Eg, he picked a portion of a Quranic verse “faqtuluhum haithu thaqiftumuhum (fight them wherever you find them) and concluded that Muslims jihadists can Kill non-Muslims, whether combatants or non-combatants, whether circumstance warrants resorting to military confrontation or not, as misguided evil Isis and other terrorists have been doing. Mr Spencer said Isis and other terrorist groups are carrying out atrocities in line with this verse, which is a lie. There are so many other instances where Mr Spencer have been making such mischievous interpretations of Islamic sources to justify his hate propaganda against Muslims and Islam, and all of you are taking it hook, line and sinker, because you are ignorant filthy Christians and evil Jews. Idiots!!
gravenimage says
The vile Ibrahim itace muhammed wrote:
Dedicated Satan (Holy Spirit) worshiper Gravenimage, Mr Spencer’s lies are obvious. He has been copying and pasting lies concocted by Christian evangelists’ lies against Islam and you have been buying it as myiopics. He has been misinterpreting the Quran and hadiths without knowledge by Cherry picking thereby drawing wrong and mischievous conclusions. Eg, he picked a portion of a Quranic verse “faqtuluhum haithu thaqiftumuhum (fight them wherever you find them) and concluded that Muslims jihadists can Kill non-Muslims, whether combatants or non-combatants, whether circumstance warrants resorting to military confrontation or not, as misguided evil Isis and other terrorists have been doing.
…………………………..
Ibrahim itace muhammed has himself confirmed that Muslims can use us as sex slaves, and that they can mass slaughter us in almost every circumstance.
Even by the standards of his own Taqiyya here, Americans and quite a few Europeans would be fair game, since we have dared to have our troops defend against violent Jihad.
As for this being about the interpretations of “Christian evangelists”, this is of course false–it is pious Muslims who are waging violent Jihad in the name of Islam.
More:
Mr Spencer said Isis and other terrorist groups are carrying out atrocities in line with this verse, which is a lie.
…………………………..
How absurd–it is these Muslim groups who regularly cite the Qur’an, the Hadiths, and the model of the “Prophet” for their waging violent Jihad, as Ibrahim itace muhammed knows full well.
More:
There are so many other instances where Mr Spencer have been making such mischievous interpretations of Islamic sources to justify his hate propaganda against Muslims and Islam, and all of you are taking it hook, line and sinker, because you are ignorant filthy Christians and evil Jews. Idiots!!
…………………………..
Well, this is just hilarious. He implies that it is a lie that Islam has any animus against non-Muslims, then goes on to call all Christians “ignorant” and “filthy”, and all Jews “evil”.
It always amazes me that pious Muslims like Ibrahim itace muhammed fail to realize that they just reveal the savagery of Islam when they post here.
GUEST says
Dear Emily: Please come to Europe! Enjoy our monuments guarded by groups of strolling militia with AK 47s. Don’t wear shorts if you come in the summer or laugh out loud or you will risk getting slapped by a passing random (male) muslim who feels women should dress “modestly” and, in the case of laughing, should speak in whispers and not experience “pleasure.” London is finished: chador-clad women in clusters, looking like The Walking Dead, are everywhere. In France the debate on TV talk shows night after night is what to do about the latest threats. Last week alone: Charlie Hebdo staff are getting death threats again for printing a cartoon that offended them.
When European settlers first came to what is now America they had no intention of assimilating to the native culture they found. Why? They felt that their culture, their beliefs, and their religion were superior, and so it is with Islam: nation after nation is submitting to these barbarians who refuse to assimilate, multiply like rabbits (multiple wives – they claim each new arrival is a “cousin”) then live off our taxes.
As a “journalist” surely you’ve researched Islam’s agenda and read of the millions of deaths and beheadings in many many countries that were occupied by them for centuries before they were finally driven out. Look up The Martyrs of Otranto in southern Italy. No, many in Europe do not forget. One day when you are wearing your chador or burqa (oh yes out of “choice”: refuse to wear it in a muslim community and you risk being beaten or gang raped. Btw you will also risk beatings / gang-rape if you leave your home without a male escort) you will remember how sweet freedom tasted and wish you’d endorsed the Robert Spencers of the world.
Joe says
Does the young man understand why he was stopped at the airport? 9/11 wasn’t that long ago. It is amazing that he doesn’t tie his religion to the event that caused extra airport security. He should have condemned Islam for the extra airport security. Or is he saying that mass terror events should be part of freedom of speech, but a talk at Standford is the true terror and must be stopped?
Kirk says
I am praying for you, as you are a light to people who are so easily blinded.