“What is important is the larger point that I was speaking to, which is about making sure that blame isn’t placed on a whole faith, that we as Muslims are not collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists.”
Of course. Everyone takes that for granted. We are constantly told that Islam and Muslims had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. But Omar’s framing of this question as one of “making sure that blame isn’t placed on a whole faith, that we as Muslims are not collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists” actually sidesteps the real issue: what is in the texts and teachings of Islam that incites believers to violence, and what can be done about it? When has Ilhan Omar ever spoken about that?
“Blame shouldn’t be placed on a whole faith: Ilhan Omar,” Express Tribune, July 23, 2019 (thanks to Lookmann):
US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar has said that Muslims cannot be collectively blamed for the actions of a few terrorists.
In an interview to Al Jazeera, the House of Representatives member for Minnesota questioned the basis of President Donald Trump’s derogatory remarks against her
She spoke against the offensive comments made by Trump in which she was accused of moderating the 9/11 attacks and appreciating al Qaeda.
“Those are horrific attacks. There’s no question about it, that’s not a debatable thing. Innocent Americans lost their lives that day, we all mourn their deaths … And I think it’s quite disgusting that people even question that and want to debate that.”
“What is important is the larger point that I was speaking to, which is about making sure that blame isn’t placed on a whole faith, that we as Muslims are not collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists,” Omar added….
gravenimage says
Ilhan Omar: We must make sure “that we as Muslims are not collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists”
……………………..
Never mind that this is what Islam preaches–and that Omar herself has never condemned Jihad terror.
Maria Garcia US says
Not all Muslims carry the blame for what some Muslims choose to do. Ok.
Then not all Christians are to blame for the Crusades.
Not all white Americans are to blame for slavery, or what was done to those who were here prior to European settlement.
Not all Republicans are to blame for anything Trump says.
Not all Americans should have to pay for the school loans of others, the health care of others, the cell phones of others…
Angemon says
+1
CRUSADER says
If more Christians had joined the Crusades in the 1100s
there’d be little to say about Islam now….
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thankfully, Jay Smith believes that Islam
— once its falsity is exposed to enough
Muslims — will dry up as a faith to believe in;
although it’ll likely morph into some globalist
deceitful ideology which totalitarian
fascistic socialists would somehow
use again as a tool against the values
which work toward goodness and liberty,
being demonic minded control freaks, as history
proves many humans to be….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ611NSxfCk
revereridesagain says
Not all atheists are to blame for Stalin and Mao. Twil be a cold day in the imaginary realm of Hell when I see that one in practice.
CRUSADER says
revereridesagain,
lovin’ the ” ‘twil ” !
gravenimage says
“Whiteness” does not preach enslaving others–but Islam does indeed preach Jihad.
If Muslims do not want to support the diktats of their own belief system, they should explicitly reject them. Few do.
Beyondculturewars says
But all whites are responsible for slavery and reparations, and all Jews are responsible for all violence in Palestine.
Her words are just code for muslim superiority.
CRUSADER says
Islam is a fascistic, totalitarian, supremacist, bigoted
demonic confluence of false teaching and human filth.
Westman says
There is ample evidence that Islam, the religion, IS responsible for Muslim terrorists.
Its “holy works” are filled with hatred and apartheid for the unbeliever and instructions of how to kill or subjugate them. The fact that most Muslims would not respond to that incitement by no means excuses the violence in the religious teachings or for the terrorists (jihadists) it creates.
If Omar wants the religion to have universal respect in the West, then it requires a reformation and a willingness to stop the generation of radicals within the mosques. Respect for Islam is declining in opposition to the wishes of governments and good-citizen Muslims because the radicals will not stop the mayhem – all committed in the name of Allah. Get that stopped or there isn’t a miniscule chance that Islam will have majority respect in the West.
James says
Well the problem is that one way to reduce the amount of terrorism is to have fewer Muslims flooding into our country. If the good Muslims do not want to be blamed for terrorism, they should start speaking out against the violence in the Koran, in the mosques and cultural centers, in the teachings and practices of musolim meaders, theologians and scholars. Instead they let it go on. They read the same books the terrorists read and say nothing against the texts. If they want fewer terrorist acts, they should stop attacking Israel and the Jews, stop attacking America. But of course they don’t have to do that. They can say whatever they want and still be harmless victims.
Terry Gain says
Good Muslims read those vile texts and say: “this can’t possibly be the word of God”. They them leave Islam.
CRUSADER says
Good” Muslims don’t remain followers of Islam.
“Good” Muslims listen to Jay Smith, and see where
their blind belief in the false teachings of human-made,
finite, pieced together passages of the Queer’an
amount to wasted time — so they convert away from Islam.
“Good” Muslims don’t let other Muslims believe in the made-up
fantasy hero Mohamhead.
David Longfellow says
We must make sure “that we as Muslims are not collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists”
This despite the fact that there is virtually zero evidence that they aren’t complicit, as Omar’s actions clearly show.
Joe says
In fact, Muslims are required to pay Zakat, and a significant part of that is supposed to be spent on violence against non-Muslims. So yes, Islam and its followers are paying for the terror, and they should be held accountable.
Emilie Green says
Her Islamic supremacism comes through, loud and clear, to the point that she acts as if she were a queen – complete with crown in the form of her ever-changing head coverings – deigning to take questions from her subjects, instead of being a representative of the people, making law.
And to answer her objection, these questions will continue since her Muslim co-religionists will continue to follow their Qur’an – the same Qur’an which Omar reads – and the instructions in it to kill the non-Muslim until the whole world worships their Allah.
In fact, now that we know that this irritates her, more questions about Islam should be directed at her. Lets see her become really unglued, revealing the Muslim beneath.
Kay says
From what I have read, Omar doesn’t actually answer the questions asked of her about FGM, al quada, or other aspects of Islam. She merely emphatically expresses her offense at even being asked.
If I’m wrong, please give a citation. Thanks.
James Lincoln says
Kay, you are correct. Very insightful observation.
Demsci says
Continue to ask her these awkward questions to which she responds with either a studious non-reaction (silently walking on) or a lengthy judgemental one, without a clear yes or no.
The RNC already released an ad with a compilation of such reactions.
were she to publicly denounce FGM, terrorism, sharia, what have you; this too can become part of public record and THEN, but only then, she can say; do not repeat the same questions every time.
She complains that people have different assumptions about Muslim politicians than other politicians. YES, DUH! That’s justified, given the contents of their Most Important Guiding Texts. It would be inappropriate if there were different assumptions about Black and White politicians, but some assumptions are more valid than others.
And many people know that there are a lot of negative assumptions about pres. Trump too!
rubiconcrest says
The terrorists do not act alone. They are supported by governments and others financially. They are supported by Imams who give them spiritual guidance. There are handlers and those to say one thing to western audiences and quite another when speaking to fellow Muslims. So the problem is much bigger than those who carry out the acts of terror. Death for apostasy and blasphemy are spiritual springs from which the terrorists drink. When Muslims do not speak up and addresses the totality of this we have to assume they are part of the problem. Ilhan Omar is clearly part of the problem not the solution because as Robert says she does not criticise the teachings and practice of Islam that lead to violence.
Terry Gain says
Death for apostasy and blasphemy are spiritual springs from which the terrorists drink.
…….
Those doctrines are satanic. There is nothing spiritual about them.
CRUSADER says
Very demonic influenced.
Shaytan deceives.
Lucifer appears as angelic light.
No Muzzies Here says
The religion tells them to commit terror. Those who don’t actually carry out the terror need to show they reject terror by condemning those who commit terror. To date, the condemnations are extremely rare.
Kay says
And didn’t Omar ask for leniency for would be terrorists?
lisa says
Omar’s actions and comments incite violence. Her religion has never come as a whole and stood up for the victims of the violence. So yet again, Omar lies. Just ask her what she thinks of CAIR, HAMAS, TALIBAN, ETC.
Walter Sieruk says
This is the same Muslim politician ,Ilan Omar who referred to those murderous jihads affronts which occurred on September 11, 2001 are the results of “Some people did something” is, somewhat ,similar to a Muslim cleric who called 9/11 a “comedy film” is terribly heartless and cruel yet strong reminder that on the day of September 9 2016 some man I know who works as a security guard at a public place told me a Muslim actually had the nerve to walk over to him and said to him two Muslim “Jokes” about 9/11. As if it was a funny subject. It’s wrong to even try to “joke” about 9/11. Talk about bad “jokes” those two are the very much worst of all. The first was “What is the difference between September 11, 20001 and a cow?” answer “You don’t keep milking a cow after fifteen years.” Not only is that “joke” awful but those Muslims trying to be funny by say that cruel thing do have some gall because they have no room to talk . For they are still are “milking” the topic of the crusades and the crusades have been over for well more than seven hundred years. What gall they have!
The second “Muslim “joke” about 9/11 is “On September 11, 2001 the people trapped on the upper floors of the WTC had ordered their two pizza sent to them plane.” To say that such “humor” is terrible is an understatement. Furthermore, those Muslim who say those “jokes” are really only exposing their own sick, vicious, callous and heartless Islamic mindset.”
Daniel Triplett says
Frank Anderson, Esq, has frequently in this forum made compelling legal arguments about why Islam is a criminal conspiracy involving all Muslim adherents.
Criminal conspiracy is a crime with no sanctuary in the US Code simply because it’s draped in a “religion.” The laws are already on the books. Our government must begin prosecuting them, but that takes leadership.
*Crickets*
Keys says
All muslims become unindicted co-conspirators, like CAIR.
Terry Gain says
Daniel Triplett
It is easier to walk rather than set running records. What you suggest will never work. The public will rightly reject such harsh measures. The least expensive and most rational way to deal with the threat posed by this conquest ideology posing as a religion is to ban further Muslim immigration. That is all that is necessary.
Given the support in America for religious freedom, to get to that point it may be necessary to convince the public that Islam is not a religion. That is a formidable task.
Daniel Triplett says
>>> “The public will rightly reject such harsh measures.”<<>> “The least expensive and most rational way to deal with the threat posed by this conquest ideology posing as a religion is to ban further Muslim immigration. That is all that is necessary.”<<<
So, people who think prosecuting criminal conspiracy is not rational, are then going to say a total ban on Muslim immigration is rational? Come on Terry. Half of Americans want open borders altogether. And have you forgotten the vehement opposition to Trump’s travel ban because it would’ve included some Muslims? The Left marched in the streets and excoriated him for that.
If you “rightly reject” Islamic proscription as a “harsh measure,” then what justification are you using to deport Muslims and deny further immigration? If Islamic fealty isn’t a “criminal conspiracy,” then what’s the problem, and why deny immigration?
Logistically, how do you propose keeping Muslims corralled inside Dar al-Islam, and outside Dar al-Harb? What would you do with the Ummah already inside Dar al-Harb? Let them stay and amass strength, or would you deport them? Who’d be obliged to take Dar al-Harb citizens? Do you think they’d leave without a fight? How would you handle the counter-insurgency? If we can’t even control and track the 20 Million+ illegals already in the US, how would you control and track Hijrah Muslims on a mission for Allah? Forced Registry? Internment camps – then freedom for apostasy, and prison for those who refuse? How would you force their apostasy, or would you?
Even if you could 100% prevent further Muslim immigration, how long before the Muslims already here outnumber us due solely to womb jihad? How about in Sweden, France, India, or Russia? What happens when Muslims control the Indian, UK, French, and Russian nukes? How long anyway before the Ummah figures out how to build, buy or steal nukes? 10, 100, 1000 years? What happens then? Isn’t the Pak arsenal frightening enough? How long before a devout Pak PM detonates those nukes for Allah? Should we destroy their arsenal now?
Do you see this as just an American problem, or rather a Worldwide problem? Should we isolate ourselves while the rest of the World collapses into Islam? Could the US survive alone with the rest of the planet trying to kill us?
I haven’t heard a containment strategy yet that will work.
Besides, even if we could contain the entire Ummah inside Dar al-Islam, that would just give the them Safe Haven to plot jihad and build nuclear weapons.
Isolation and containment gave us a nuke-tipped ICBM armed North Korea, the most ostracized, contained, isolated state on Earth. And unlike the North Koreans, the Ummah really does pursue Worldwide conquest. Will they ever abandon jihad? Why or why not?
Dar al-Islam has a minimum 26,000 mile long land and sea perimeter. How can we possibly contain Muslims within that? We don’t have the military, money, method, and especially the Will to patrol that kind of perimeter. We can’t even prevent thousands of aliens daily from breaching our 1933 mile long Southern border.
Even in America, keeping the Muslims out is nearly impossible.
Europe’s Mediterranean border is impossible to fully secure. The Greek coastline alone is 8498 miles long. Notwithstanding the NGO boats that pick up Muslims in African territorial waters to hand-deliver to Europe, hundreds and thousands of boats make it from Africa to Europe on their own now.
While the native-European population continues its steep decline, the African population will explode from 1 Billion today to 4 Billion by 2100. If Europe can’t repel the invasion today, how can they possibly repel an invasion four times the size?
And what about all the Muslims pouring in via land routes from the East into Europe? Europe as it is can’t prevent Muslim border crossings, on top of the EU immigration and “refugee” disaster. The European — Asian land border is 3850 miles long.
Just giving you some things to consider Terry. I’m not attacking you. Not trying to be a smartass. We’re on the same side, and we’re all here to learn about the problem, and discuss solutions for the future. Let’s also not forget our history lessons. This is total war. Our grandfathers already demonstrated for us how this works.
In my view, the solution is more involved than just banning immigration, both now and in 1941. I see forced Islamic proscription as the only viable long-term strategy. First domestically, to set the example, then abroad, in an alliance with Russia, China, India, Israel, UK, and France. Every country on the globe picks one of two sides.
To the extent Americans are getting all hung up on religious rights, one way to circumvent that deference is to begin articulating Islam as the crime syndicate and criminal conspiracy that it is. We already have Federal conspiracy laws.
Regardless of religious status, we’re not required to tolerate people who pursue our extinction. No one could invent Islam today. Were Muhammad alive now, he’d either be in a psych ward or on Supermax death row.
Much more detail to discuss later. This is already too long-winded for now.
Stay strong Terry
CRUSADER says
D.T. (do you like that you share your initials with “The Donald”?) 😉
Well, this thread is about to get more long-winded!!
I appreciate the foresighted logic you apply in your reply
and I add my comments below, *** accordingly *** :
———————————————————————
”
……..
If you “rightly reject” Islamic proscription as a “harsh measure,” then what justification are you using to deport Muslims and deny further immigration? If Islamic fealty isn’t a “criminal conspiracy,” then what’s the problem, and why deny immigration?
*** Proscription in Roman times meant listing people to designate them for death!
Might come to pass, but only after extreme levels of devastation, the likes of Medieval Times. Could be best at this stage to point out how Islam is false and have Muslims covert away;
Robert Spencer and Jay Smith have more than adequate information on that score. Making a legal case against Shariah — being contrary to Constitutional Republics — could be more realistic, and already has had some track record. Proving that Islam is conspiratorial after that stage would be easier. ***
Logistically, how do you propose keeping Muslims corralled inside Dar al-Islam, and outside Dar al-Harb? What would you do with the Ummah already inside Dar al-Harb? Let them stay and amass strength, or would you deport them? Who’d be obliged to take Dar al-Harb citizens? Do you think they’d leave without a fight? How would you handle the counter-insurgency? If we can’t even control and track the 20 Million+ illegals already in the US, how would you control and track Hijrah Muslims on a mission for Allah? Forced Registry? Internment camps – then freedom for apostasy, and prison for those who refuse? How would you force their apostasy, or would you?
*** Difficult to contain suitcase bombs….
….ever see the BBC movie: “DIRTY WAR” ? ***
Even if you could 100% prevent further Muslim immigration, how long before the Muslims already here outnumber us due solely to womb jihad? How about in Sweden, France, India, or Russia? What happens when Muslims control the Indian, UK, French, and Russian nukes? How long anyway before the Ummah figures out how to build, buy or steal nukes? 10, 100, 1000 years? What happens then? Isn’t the Pak arsenal frightening enough? How long before a devout Pak PM detonates those nukes for Allah? Should we destroy their arsenal now?
*** Jihad by birth numbers. Jihad by prison conversions. ***
Do you see this as just an American problem, or rather a Worldwide problem? Should we isolate ourselves while the rest of the World collapses into Islam? Could the US survive alone with the rest of the planet trying to kill us?
I haven’t heard a containment strategy yet that will work.
*** Containment Strategy per George Kennan seemed a reasonable policy versus the Soviets, despite the proxy warfare which ensued.
“Mr. X” article on Soviet Union appears in Foreign Affairs – HISTORY
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/mr-x-article-appears-in-foreign-affairs
At least it creates a necessary mindset of defensive posture with the possibility of rallying for an offensive strategy.
Visegrad countries in Eastern European bloc will have to show us the way today. ***
Besides, even if we could contain the entire Ummah inside Dar al-Islam, that would just give the them Safe Haven to plot jihad and build nuclear weapons.
*** Islamists have been building toward this strategy. ***
Isolation and containment gave us a nuke-tipped ICBM armed North Korea, the most ostracized, contained, isolated state on Earth. And unlike the North Koreans, the Ummah really does pursue Worldwide conquest. Will they ever abandon jihad? Why or why not?
*** Only by showing the false passages of the Qur’an and proving the false history of Islam as well as converting Muslims away from Islam could the future have a chance for survival. ***
Dar al-Islam has a minimum 26,000 mile long land and sea perimeter. How can we possibly contain Muslims within that? We don’t have the military, money, method, and especially the Will to patrol that kind of perimeter. We can’t even prevent thousands of aliens daily from breaching our 1933 mile long Southern border.
Even in America, keeping the Muslims out is nearly impossible.
Europe’s Mediterranean border is impossible to fully secure. The Greek coastline alone is 8498 miles long. Notwithstanding the NGO boats that pick up Muslims in African territorial waters to hand-deliver to Europe, hundreds and thousands of boats make it from Africa to Europe on their own now.
*** Math stats seem sound. For such reasons, many deep state bureaucrats and MObama
officials shrugged their shoulders at such formidable tasks and resolved just not to upset the Muslims of the world. ***
While the native-European population continues its steep decline, the African population will explode from 1 Billion today to 4 Billion by 2100. If Europe can’t repel the invasion today, how can they possibly repel an invasion four times the size?
*** Navy build up better begin soon! Hungarian Navy, anyone? ***
And what about all the Muslims pouring in via land routes from the East into Europe? Europe as it is can’t prevent Muslim border crossings, on top of the EU immigration and “refugee” disaster. The European — Asian land border is 3850 miles long.
*** Best chance was in the 1100s during the Crusades to kick Islam in the teeth. ***
Just giving you some things to consider Terry. I’m not attacking you. Not trying to be a smartass. We’re on the same side, and we’re all here to learn about the problem, and discuss solutions for the future. Let’s also not forget our history lessons. This is total war. Our grandfathers already demonstrated for us how this works.
*** Good points! ***
In my view, the solution is more involved than just banning immigration, both now and in 1941. I see forced Islamic proscription as the only viable long-term strategy. First domestically, to set the example, then abroad, in an alliance with Russia, China, India, Israel, UK, and France. Every country on the globe picks one of two sides.
*** Objective will have to be discerned. Sides will have to be drawn. ***
To the extent Americans are getting all hung up on religious rights, one way to circumvent that deference is to begin articulating Islam as the crime syndicate and criminal conspiracy that it is. We already have Federal conspiracy laws.
Regardless of religious status, we’re not required to tolerate people who pursue our extinction. No one could invent Islam today. Were Muhammad alive now, he’d either be in a psych ward or on Supermax death row.
”
++++++
Cheers,
CRUSADER
++++++++++
Actually, what is helpful is seeing this is the BBC production of “Dirty War”
About a dirty bomb in London, and the team putting it all together, at various levels…
as well as the counter team trying to prevent it from happening.
Head turning documentary….
Worth viewing. (Particular moment is at minute marker 15:30) that
explains the plotters on a schematics chart.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poZXRUxlaqk
CRUSADER says
At the beginning of this video lecture,
Jay Smith demonstrates where the Christian communities
surround the Muslim populations in London, per map:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsM9w8IJMrw
Terry Gain says
If you “rightly reject” Islamic proscription as a “harsh measure,” then what justification are you using to deport Muslims and deny further immigration? If Islamic fealty isn’t a “criminal conspiracy,” then what’s the problem, and why deny immigration?
……………
Daniel Triplett
I have never suggested that Muslims in America should be deported. Every action taken to resist Islamization must be legal. American Muslims have the same rights as all Americans. They cannot legally be deported.
Muslims outside of America have no legal right to immigrate. There is no right of conquest.
Daniel Triplett says
CRUSADER (Great screen name)
Yes, I have noticed I share the same three initials, DJT, as our fine president. What are the odds? Thanks for noticing too !
*********************
When I say proscribe, I mean to prohibit and make unlawful the practice and promotion of Islam. At some point, I believe we should force Muslims to choose between apostasy and prison.
We’re not going to talk 1.8 Billion Muslims out of Islam. They know what Islam is, and they like it. Words alone won’t work, in my view.
Words alone didn’t even work against our own people in the South. Ultimately, violence and cruelty were required to force the CSA to our Will. And perhaps we can agree: The Ummah is far less reasonable than 1861 American Southerners. Resolving this epic conflict without violence is unlikely.
Yes, we can defend against ICBMs. We can destroy the launch facilities, and we can even destroy them in flight. But nukes in a van or nukes in a container ship, not so much. That’s how I expect Iran to do it. Thanks for the “Dirty War” link. I’ll watch it, then report back to you. That’s right up my alley.
Containing the Soviets was different than containing the Ummah. For one thing, there’s a whole lot more Ummah. For another thing, the Soviet Union was a contiguous Bloc. Muslims are everywhere, including in every corner of Dar al-Harb. I live in an apple pie American town, and there are a dozen mosques / Islamic centers / Community outreach centers within a 10-mile radius of my home.
Western Europeans have a much bigger problem. Once we decide to win this war, we can all count on a stiff and bloody insurgency we’ll need to counter. We have just two choices – Win or surrender.
The Visegrad Group is certainly inspirational. The World could sure use a whole lot more Viktor Orbans. Will be interesting to see how Boris Johnson works out for the UK. He can’t be any worse than Theresa.
I love Trump, but I’d sure like to see him be more aggressive against the Ummah. He seems to have retreated from his pre-election calls for a ban on Muslim immigration. I know he got strong opposition from the Left. Maybe he’s waiting until after the next election. Or maybe he’s been wrongly influenced by Deep State stooges like HR McMaster. Who knows? John Bolton is no Robert Spencer, but all things considered, Bolton seems to have a better grasp of the problem than anyone else in Trump’s inner circle.
I’m with you on the Crusades. We needed more of them. Sustained. Would have been easier to strangle the baby in the crib, than let the cancer metastasize across the globe. Perhaps we just need one final Crusade. But done so in a way that includes all the other Kafirs on our side.
Everyone really needs to pick a side. Let’s all just get this over with, before the enemy becomes much larger and more lethal.
Stay strong Brother !
CRUSADER says
Such COUNTER measures could come to pass when:
– either demographics go the way of the Muslims’ increase
– and/or Muslim threats are so vicious and rampant and frequent
that the Muslims hold much of what we hold dear hostage to their demands.
Walter Sieruk says
Near the beginning of this site main article is reads “We are constantly told that Islam and Muslims had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. Yes, that is ,indeed what we are repeatedly told ,time and time again .
Nevertheless, is what we are always told in accord to the reality of the truth ?
In may actually the the many apologists for Islam in an attempt to keep the image of Islam in a good reputation in the eyes of the American public the propagandists for Islam employ the Islamic doctrine of lying and deception which is called Taqiyya. So in with lies and deceit of Taqiyya “We are constantly told that Islam and Muslims had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. ” As already explain above.
Therefore , don’t let them fool you, the many apologists for Islam is will endeavor to set up a smokescreen to hide the reality of the truth about the violence and deadly essence of Islam by making the bogus claim that the al Qaeda operatives mass murderer on 9/11 were not real Muslims and that they were breaking the laws of the Qu ‘ran by their violence and deadly actions.” The apologists for Islam will further make the totally false claim that “Those terrorists on 9/11 were only criminals who hijacked the peaceful religion of Islam for Politics.” Those outrageously false claims are weak attempt of damage control for the image of Islam to the West. For the “holy book” of Islam the Qu ‘ran. For the Qu ‘ran instruct in Sura 9:111. Muslims who are engaging the jihad that “The believer’s fight in Allah’s Cause, they slay and are slain ,they kill and are killed “ That’s just what happened on September 11, 2001 the jihadists of al Qaeda “killed and were killed” in those 9/11 jihad attacks against both humankind and America. The Quran also teaches in Sura 9:123 to that jihad –minded Muslims behavior towards non-Muslims “let them find harshness in you…” Those Islamic attacks on 9/11 were indeed very “harsh.” As Sura 2:191 instructs “kill the disbeliever wherever you find them.” That’s a very strange kind of “peaceful religion” if there ever was one. Just to site one more out on many from the Qu ‘ran about the instruction of deadly violence is Sura 47:4. Which instructs “Whenever you encounter unbelievers strike off their heads until you make a great slaughter among them …” Let’s face it, using jet planes a missiles as those jihadist/ Muslims did of September 11, sure made a greater “slaughter among them” then sword can. Wake up West to the actual nature of Islam before it’s too late.
Hugh Fitzgeraldi says
But no one is blaming all Muslims for Islamic terrorism. We blame only those Muslims who believe Qur’an 2:19-193, 5:51, 8:12, 8:60, 9:5, 9:29, 47:4, and 98:6 — and another hundred verses — are the word of Allah, and must be taken to heart.. How much longer does Ilhan Omar think she can avoid discussing the contents of the Qur’an?
Keys says
Agree with Irish-Italian, Hugh Fitzgeraldi. ?
His point is the elephant on the leash of every non-violent muslim.
Given these Quranic citations, which Muslims believe as the sacred, unalterable word of Allah, how does Omar propose we distinguish the non-violent true believers from the violent true believers, especially when Allah hates those who disbelieve ?
Demsci says
Exactly Keys, When honest observers cannot really distinguish the Muslims with bad intent, detrimental to democratic society and citizens, from the ones that are “innocent until proven guilty”,
then there arises a binary choice; Are none (of the Muslims) to blame, for terrorism, supremacist, violent hostile intent and actions, or are all to blame?
Since the former is simply NOT TRUE, then we tend to go to the latter. But of course not in the form of severe “aiding and abetting charges” but in the form of pointing out that simply remaining in Islam (in a Democratic Nation) makes a person a part of the problem, not the solution, and take it from there.
Terry Gain says
I respectfully disagree. Terrorism is as Islamic as conquest is Islamic as xenophobia is Islamic as lying about Islam is Islamic as slave-taking and rape are Islamic.
Demsci says
We can say that all these supremacist, violent intentions and crimes, this lying, are common among all sorts of human groups, religious or national, and so not uniquely Islamic, as Islam-apologists endlessly tell us,
but I think you mean that all these things are commanded/ demanded by Quran-Hadiths-Sira. So yes, I agree.
Kay says
In the same “some people did something” speech she made to CAIR, she scoffed at those who ask about particular verses. Her scoffing apparently makes it clear that those questions offensive to ask.
Demsci says
Then, with the extensive knowledge of what Islam is and is not, commands and forbids etc, there is another possibility. And that is to once again clearly formulate clear essential democratic and human right principles that contradict Islam, naming this DEM (ocratic) Positive Alternative To Islam (DEMPATI)
And then promote once more our basic democratic values, principles, laws and demand from Muslims to confirm these in a positive way (rather than denounce and leave Islam).
And Fox News seems to like to feature such Muslims, (like Qanta Ahmed, Zuhdi Jasser, Shireen Qudodi). And the new British chancellor, Sajid Javid, as well as Majid Nawaz, also seem to be such Muslims.
The principle of fighting a negative can be transformed into formulating it’s positive opposite and then not ask Muslims to denounce and leave Islam, but ask them to confirm this positive opposite.
This then dovetails more with what the obtuse political corrects are saying.
But, I know, it sounds too far fetched, and unrealistic
Demsci says
We can even form a DEMPATI, whereby we put forward our own Democratic MIG (Most Important Guiding) Texts. And we can put forward one or more rolemodels of our own.
And then be OK with Muslims who confirm these MIGtexts and rolemodels as highly or most important.
This has the advantage of confounding the other Muslims. To let them battle it out among themselves.
And confounding the leftist Islamdefenders, who pretend that “The Islam does not exist”, meaning that there are many variations of Islam. Very well, so that means that there also can be Muslims like Zuhdi Jasser, Qanta Ahmed, Irshad Manji, Majid Nawaz, Shireen Qudodi, Sajid Javid etc.
It’s a confirmation that Islam can be interpreted differently, but all the above mentioned Muslims can never be allowed to explicitly or implicitly contend that their version of Islam is the only true one. No, theirs is just one more possible variation.
But, again, I know it sounds far fetched.
Demsci says
I have read many times that “Democratic Muslims” either commit taqqiya or are confused. This very probable taqqiya makes them extra dangerous I know.
But the existence of Democratic Muslims, and the support that is given to them by numerous media and politicians DO CONFIRM that their version is one more version of Islam and that means that Islam can be interpreted in multiple ways and
THAT means its original message is UNCLEAR, obsolete, contradictive, divided between prescriptive and descriptive interpretations, confusing etc; a whole host of adjectives that will cause doubt about thinking Muslims, as we know that Muslims are taught that Islam is the very clear one true message from God. Trying this strategy is like playing chess, it seems to me.
Shirley Ann says
Did I not hear that Ms.Omar or one of her Squad, wants to Introduce a Law that anyone who Criticizes her Policies, should be Charged? This Translates into: If you criticize her Policies, then you’re Criticizing her because of her Religion. She was able to get the Congress to Ok Dangerous HeadBags, without a Flinch! So what else would the Congress be foolish enough to OK, in the Name of a So-Called Religion?
Walter Sieruk says
So Ilhan Omar has declared that “we as Muslims are not collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists.”
Fair enough, for not all Muslims are jihadist terrorists, nevertheless all jihadist terrorists are Muslims.
Still for balance, as for Muslim terrorists this very year last April is should be remembered that those murderous jihadists in their horrible Easter Sunday jihad bombings in Sri Lanka were not acting 2:191. out in a hijacked form of Islam but actual Qu ‘ran based non-watered down hard core . As the Qu ‘ran teaches in 9:111, “The believers fight in Allah’s Cause, they slay and are slain, they kill and are killed.” Likewise, this “holy book” of Islam also instructs in 47:4 “ Whenever you encounter the disbeliever strike off their heads until you make a great slaughter among them…”
Let’s face it, using bombs as those as the Sir Lanka jihadists did can, for sure, make a greater “slaughter among them” than a sword can. There are the other verses the give instruction for violence and killing for the cause of Islam, as 2:191. 5:33. 8:39.9:5, 38-39.
In addition almost 18 year’ s ago on September 11,2001 many Muslims rejoiced in different countries around the world then they found about the outcome of those al Qaeda jihad attacks in which so many people died . They were so glad and happy about all those people who died in such terrible ways. The reason they felt so happy with joy is because ,as the Bible explains such people have had “their conscience seared with a hot iron.” First Timothy 4:2. {K.J.V.] For them that “hot iron” is Islam
milad meah says
Fair enough, for not all Muslims are jihadist terrorists, nevertheless all jihadist terrorists are Muslims. Muhammad OPENLY BOASTED HE WAS A TERRORIST. Read Sahih al-Bukhari 4:52:220 – I have been made victorious with terror.
Raymond of Canada says
You think Nazis are responsible for the Holocaust? Resounding yes. If you subscribe to Nazism, you are a Nazi. If a Muslim doesn’t want to take responsibility for Islamic terrorism, he or she must denounce the religion and separate himself from it.
CRUSADER says
Omar — a name inspired by the famous Caliph
in the saga of Mohamhead’s sira, a supposed biography *
(but which Jay Smith has proven to be falsified)
— who succeeded Abu Bakr, according to legend —
seems to have, as a representative to her district,
the only issue in mind to be about jihad :
against the US system
against US traditions
against capitalism
against Israel
— all textbook of the Leftist/Islamist (Red/Green) Axis!!
It’s as if Omar’s constituents only care (CAIR) about jihad….
Being that she has many Jews in her district, where have they
misplaced their minds as voters?
*
“The Life of Mohammed – The Sira – (a taste of islam)” –
Political Islam
Bill Warner
https://www.politicalislam.com/product/the-life-of-mohammed/
—————————————————————-
Jay Smith exposing and demolishing the Qur’an:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ611NSxfCk
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
To ensure that Moslems aren’t to be held collectively responsible for Jihad mass murder requires dealing Allah out of the loop. That’s apostasy, which for a Moslima is punishable by death. An emir must contact the House of Representative Sergeant of Arms to had her over for administration of justice.
As the ever-scripted Democrats said over and over during today’s impeachment hearings, no on is above the law. And that includes Islam Law, the Shariah.
Terry Gain says
Every Muslim is an adherent of a vile conquest ideology that commands killing to advance the vile ideology. So yes, all Muslims are collectively responsible for the terrorism committed in accordance with Islam’s dictates.
Terry Gain says
Someone sitting close to me just said we shouldn’t hold Muslim children under the age of 7 responsible. I agree.
Westman says
Agreed. But have you thought of how many ME adult Muslims are no more mature than a Western 7-year-old? When one observes half-million baying for blood there can only be a few conclusions: immature, low-IQ, or both.
CRUSADER says
Hitler quote:
“Give me a child when he’s 7 and he’s mine forever…”
tgusa says
“What is important is the larger point that I was speaking to, which is about making sure that blame isn’t placed on a whole faith, that we as Muslims are not collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists.”
“I would say our country should be more fearful of white men across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country,”
“And so if fear was the driving force of policies to keep America safe — Americans safe inside of this country — we should be profiling, monitoring, and creating policies to fight the radicalization of white men.”
Typical, I hate white men, democrat.
Good, don’t want to be liked by her type anyway.
tim gallagher says
I agree with many of the comments people have made up above. The way I see things is that if any person is a part of a violent, barbaric, vicious ideology such as Islam, which has a rotten attitude towards all non-Muslims, then that person has to pack up and leave that vile ideology. If I was brought up in a murderous, evil ideology such as islam I’d certainly try to find a way to leave it behind. We all have moral choices to make. I can’t see anything good about Islam. I have no respect for people who remain in such an evil ideology, except where they would very likely be killed as apostates if they left . People like Ilhan Omar could leave islam but won’t because she believes in all its barbaric garbage. That’s the choice she has made. I don’t have the time of day for any of these apologists for Islam. They are all trying to muddy the waters with their lies until Islam can take over. I’m sure that that is what this woman is all about. I believe that’s what all these Muslim spokespeople are all about. They always feed us BS while they try to help Islam conquer the world.
milad meah says
Prophet Muhammad OPENLY BOASTED HE WAS A TERRORIST. Read Sahih al-Bukhari 4:52:220 – I have been made victorious with terror.
“But we as Muslims should not be collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists.”
Terry Gain says
Islam’s role model and perfect Muslim bragged that he was successful through terror but not all Muslims are collectively responsible for terrorism? But they are. Muslims who honestly renounce terror would denounce Muhammad and leave Islam.
Steve Meikle says
It comes down to what the Qu’ran commands. If it commands terror then all who assent to the Qu’ran as the word of God are accountable, even if only by tacit support. Well, are there any “moderate” Muslims who have publicly denounced jihad terror?
This comes down to simple scholarship: what does their book say? and this question Robert Spencer and others have answered with abundant and clear proofs
CRUSADER says
Ever listen to Jay Smith lecture on demolishing Islam / Koran / Muhammad?
Steve Meikle says
Of course with taqiyya being in the mix we cannot trust anything a muslim says. she may be lying about the isolated nature of terrorists as being merely a few fanatics. and she could lie about it with impunity under her cult religion.
or she may be a naive child as Leftist usually are it seems
Ren says
All muslims are accountable for the actions of terrorists because all muslims endorse an ideology founded by Muhammad, a terrorist.
Robert_k says
Everyone knows the Jews are responsible for 911:
Demsci says
Noooo, not in THAT way! At all. Hitler said that Jews were responsible for a lot of bad things. And he painted them all with the same brush! Even down to their very GENES. Furthermore he executed very extreme countermeasures.
But Muslims are not a race. The adult ones, living in Western Nations, CHOOSE to remain in Islam, although they could get out of it.
The key problem is that among People who say they adhere to Islam it is very difficult to distinguish the “good and the bad ones”. While their sheer numbers do make this uncertainty a distinct danger.
But our reaction is not much more than pointing out that all Muslims are part of the problem. But we will try to keep our countermeasure as reasonable and respecting of democracy and human rights as possible.
gravenimage says
Is Robert_k being sarcastic?
Norger says
I was wondering the same thing. Maybe an oblique reference to “somebody” (i.e. “the Jews”) “did something” (9/11). I would like to ask Rep. Omar who she thinks was behind 9/11; jihadis or “the Jews.”
Marigold says
She is right when she says ALL Muslims can’t be held responsible for the actions of terrorists but ALL Muslims CAN be held responsible for conveniently ignoring,denying or turning a blind eye to the verses in the Quoran which terrorists use to justify violence in the name of Islam. They also say GOD IS GREAT as they carry out their murders so I would like to know what excuse they put forward for THAT ! In my opinion ALL Muslims are in denial about the true nature of their religion which was inspired by Satan. “Satan can disguise himself to look like and angel of light ” Cor 2 ch11 v14 I realise it is difficult if not impossible for Muslims born into a Muslim majority country to renounce their religion.It can mean ostracisation and even death in some Islamic societies.Not every Muslim has the courage to take such a step just as not all Christians have the courage to be martyrs for their faith.It would be easier for Muslims in a Western country but not completely without difficulty.Even in countries like Turkey where Islam predominates but at the same time is heavily influenced by secularism due to the legacy of Attaturk I suspect that government workers in particular feel that it is safer to have a foot in both camps to feel accepted and prosper.
CRUSADER says
All Muslims ARE complicit, and enabling, whether they recognize this or not; whether we non-Muslims recognize this or not!!!
Peter says
“That we, as muslims, are not collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists”
Phffft! Miss Omar, after having read through the homicidal incitements contained within your islamic version Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’, called the the quran (and which I first did back in 1981, before tossing this satanically inspired outbust into to garbage bin where it rightly belongs), you might have some understanding why I still believe the maxim that: ‘A radical muslimis is one that wants to behead you – A ‘moderate’ muslim is one who wants a radical muslim to behead you!’. Peter, Australia.
sidney penny says
“what is in the texts and teachings of Islam that incites believers to violence, and what can be done about it? When has Ilhan Omar ever spoken about that?”
Robert Spencer,you keep hitting the nail on the head.
You are unlikely to get an answer from Illan Omar.
Just like you were not able to get an answer form Anne Aly.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/03/australias-first-muslim-female-mp-skillfully-plays-the-racism-and-victimhood-cards
Don’t blame all Muslims.It is racist.
A legitimate question: is Omar lying, or is she illiterate about Islam and its history?
CRUSADER says
In this critique of the Qur’an which demolishes the Muslims world’s false book of faith,
Jay Smith lists how Islam has failed to prove:
1) Koran as Eternal
2) Koran as Sent Down from Above
3) Koran was complete by 650 CE / AD
4) Koran is perfect
At minute marker 1:30:00, Jay Smith’s points get made about how the same questions
we must require Muslims to answer, Christendom had already been plagued by
during the 1800s due to historical, science criticism and Darwinism raising difficult questions —
which decimated the confidence of church congregations in Europe by 1905 — but
which eventually did get answered and confirmed by Christians about Christ and
the Apostles and about Christianity in fullness.
The Bible is acknowledged by Christians not to be any of the below,
but there is another Logos / Word of God, who walked among us
— Christ — who is very much each of these:
1) Eternal
2) Sent Down from Above
3) Complete
4) Perfect
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And so the argument for Christianity and against Islam is sound.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ611NSxfCk
Michael says
Muslims should ollectively condemn trrorism.
When 9/11 took place, Palestinians distributed sweets in the streets of Gaza.
When terrorist episodes took place in London, Sadik Khan did not condemn it with one word of condemnation, how could be the follower of the terrorists’ mufti ( sheikh El karadawy , who is protected by the Prince of terror of Qatar), condemn terrorism that is sanctioned by the mufti. Khan only words were directed to the Western Kufar, to subdue them into accepting islamic terrorism without holding those who do not condemn it to account. All what he said was “they (the London car terrorists) will not devide us”.
Al azhar (Islamic sunni university and legislator of all sunni sharia and fatwa) refused to declare Dahesh/ Isis as non Islamic. There is no more or better testimony that terrorism is not collectively condemned for a strong reason: to Condon terrorism is not Islamic.
The refusal to collectively condemn islamic terrorism is rooted in the koran and sharia.
patriotliz says
HA! This from a hijabed Muslim supremacist who supports known Muslim terrorists and who said:
“I would say that our country should be more fearful of white men across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country.” She should have stayed in Somalia…she would have been happier there since not that many white men. There’s no reason she can’t go back to HER country.
MJP says
Naturally this evil & vile mouthed creature would say this yet at the same time openly hates Israel associates with Linda Sarsour, CAIR & other organizations that are associated with Terrorist activity she needs to be removed from Congress along with the other 3 hogs
Kay says
I don’t believe she acts alone. She is the cover for some group. It is unheard of that a freshman congressman is in the spotlight so much.
Alain says
What double-speak Omar actually means is that “we Muslims should not be collectively held responsible for jihad”. This is like saying that the German nation at the end of WWII should not be collectively held responsible for voting Hitler into power and for following him willingly into his atrocities.
mike says
prove it action is louder then words
Linde Barrera says
There is doctrine and there is human behavior. 95% of the planet’s Muslims do not act out the commands of verses 5:33, 8:12, and 9:5 and we can thank the Triune God for that. But all practicing Muslims believe that Islam is “the religion of peace” in spite of these 3 verses.
I cannot figure out how a rational person with reasoning skills can justify believing in any doctrine that includes harming or killing anyone. Can anyone enlighten me on this ?
infidel says
The jehaadi – moderate uncertainty principle… this constant flitting between the 2 modes is to obfuscate, frustrate and wear down the infidel… I have spoken about it here b4. And this is what this Trojan is doing here.
UNCLE VLADDI says
i.e: “Well of course – we can’t blame all Nazis for the crimes of National Socialism.”
R Cole says
Ilhan Omar is so indoctrinated!!
And here’s how it possibly could have happened, she arrives in the US when she’s about 10 yrs and like a lot of Muslim families, they send their kids to normal schools, but after school, the kids are taken to these “Islamic lessons.”
It’s like when ISIS was forming or getting going, you had these otherwise normal western Muslim kids, who the authorities said were radicalized, and just up and decided to join the Islamic State. But I’ll bet those guys who went over to IS had long been radicalized.
We know something of what Muslim kids being taught in these lessons, it’s been reported by the BBC and by CNN, when it had some self respect left. These kids when the get to an older level, they are being taught how to chop off hands, and how to tie off the wound so the person doesn’t bleed to death.
Whereas the average kid in the west, is being taught the Kumbaya doctrine, everything is wonderful, group hug!! Later to be told that it’s because they weren’t nice enough to Muslims, that a Muslim committed a terrorist act or turned to extremism.
[It’s almost like the Demolition Man movie. You have two guys who’ve been in stasis and both have been fed completely different messaging and it’s to someone’s advantage.]
Chapter and verse Omar knows those radical teachings. And every time she shows up her eyes and her speech betray it.
Craig W says
We have never “collectively blamed Muslims” for the actions of jihadis. However, we have asked Muslims collectively denounce jihad and we are still waiting Ilhan.
Naildriver says
Muslims, ever wanting to have their cake and eat it too for their vile religion and NATION.
The whole thing here is that Muslims, just as Germans during WWII, bear some responsibility for the acts of their most devoted practitioners — And they know it, and they in overwhelming numbers, if pollsters are correct, approve of those monstrosities that they’ll claim do not involve themselves or Islam.
Muslims all — even the Sufi or so-cllaed refugees should be denied entry to the USA. All are guilty in better measure than the cities of people the West immolated during WWII.
Islam is the USA’s enemy, and our politicians need to be on board with that, or pay the price that traitors pay.