If you read the Washington Post yesterday, you may have noticed the story headlined, “Anti-Muslim Harrassment Complaints Jump 30 Percent” in which Michelle Boorstein “reports”:
A national Muslim advocacy organization yesterday blamed a “negative and politically charged” environment on the Internet and talk radio for the 30 percent jump in anti-Muslim incidents reported to the group last year.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations received 1,972 complaints of harassment, violence and discriminatory treatment in 2005, up from 1,522 in 2004, according to an annual report released yesterday.
[...]
“We’re seeing a rise in anti-Muslim rhetoric fed by the Internet and also on talk radio,” CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said at a news conference. “You can’t turn on the radio without hearing negative, bigoted comments about Islam.”
Seventy-nine percent of the complaints came from nine states — including Virginia and Maryland — and Washington. Those are also the places with the largest Muslim populations, CAIR said. The organization registered 144 complaints last year in Virginia, a 32 percent jump from the previous year. Maryland’s total was 85 in 2005, five more than in 2004. There were 93 complaints in the District last year. The group didn’t report the 2004 D.C. number, because the city did not make the top 10 that year.
Those are some pretty damning numbers! Except for the fact that out of a population of between 1.5 and 2.0 million, only about 2,000 made any complaint (CAIR claims that 2,300 complaints were received, of which only 1,972 were deemed legitimate). And its all because of that bigoted internet and talk radio contingent, apparently egging on these attacks (where have I heard that before?). Nevertheless, the CAIR report does suggest that anti-muslim attacks are significantly rising. So I decided to go ahead and read the report.
CAIR claims that:
In 2005, CAIR processed a total of 1,972 civil rights complaints, compared to 1,522 cases
reported to CAIR in 2004. This constitutes a 29.6 percent increase in the total number of
complaints of anti-Muslim harassment, violence and discriminatory treatment from 2004. For the
second straight year, the 1,972 reports also marks the highest number of Muslim civil rights
complaints ever reported to CAIR in its twelve-year history.In addition, CAIR received 153 reports of anti-Muslim hate crime complaints, an 8.6
percent increase from the 141 complaints received in 2004.
Right off the bat, “civil rights complaints” certainly seems different than “harrassment” as screamed in the Washington Post headline, although, to be fair, later on in the report CAIR characterizes the complaints as “harrassment, violence and discriminatory treatment.” Yet the most abundant claims were of the “due process” variety:
The largest portion of complaints, more than 17 percent, fall into the “due process” category, said CAIR Legal Director Arsalan Iftikhar. Those include complaints such as racial profiling and overzealous arrest or interrogation practices. Second, at 15 percent, are denial of religious accommodation accusations, and 14 percent concerned employment discrimination, according to the report.
For some reason, however, despite the numerous pretty graphs showing how the numbers have increased over the past five years, there are very few examples of the harrassment claimed in the report. Of those examples included, some are clearly erroneous, such as this claim on page 8 of the CAIR report:
On October 5, 2005, an Iowa man shouted a racial slur at a woman of Middle Eastern descent
before punching her in the face at an Iowa City tavern restaurant. Authorities say that the man
allegedly called the woman a ‘sand nigger’ and punched her in her left eye, knocking her to the
ground. The woman sustained a variety of injuries, including a chipped tooth, black eye, and a
cut nose, police officials said.
On a hunch, I followed the cited news article to see what the details were. It just seemed like such a random act, I was curious as to why some man would just haul off on a woman because she was muslim:
Authorities say a Coralville man spewed an ethnic epithet at a woman of Middle Eastern descent before punching her in the face at an Iowa City bar over the weekend.
Troy Anderson, 24, faces the charge of assault causing bodily injury in violation of civil rights – more commonly known as a hate crime – as a result of the alleged Oct. 1 attack.
The unidentified female complainant was leaving the patio area of the Deadwood Tavern, 6 S. Dubuque St., around 9:30 p.m. when Anderson, 2310 12th St., allegedly started to address her with slurs, said Iowa City police Lt. Jim Steffen.
Then, authorities say, Anderson allegedly called the woman a “sand nigger” and punched her in her left eye, knocking her to the ground. The woman sustained a variety of injuries, including a chipped tooth, red eye, and a cut nose, police said.
Police officials on Tuesday did not have additional information regarding the incident.
This would absolutely qualify as anti-muslim harrassment and violence, but riddle me this — what was a muslim, one who was apparently immediately recognizable as such, doing in a bar? Maybe she was just there to eat and got picked out of the crowd by some drunk racist prick, or maybe there’s more to the story.
Man not guilty of ‘hate crime’
Bryce Bauer – The Daily Iowan
Issue date: 7/19/06 Section: MetroIt was the classic case of “he said, she said.”And the jury believed him.The two-day long trial of Troy Carter Anderson, 25, ended Tuesday after a jury found him not guilty of assault causing injury and violation of individual rights – commonly known as a “hate crime.”[...]Mathes – who was born in New Delhi, India – testified Monday the altercations began after she sat down with a friend and some others on the Deadwood patio. She asserted that Anderson originally took issue with a jersey she was wearing that read: “Arabian Gangsters.”"He didn’t like the T-shirt I was wearing – he said it was stupid,” Mathes said during her testimony Monday. “I told him if he didn’t like it, he didn’t have to look at it.”However, in his testimony Tuesday, Anderson alleged Mathes originally insulted a female friend accompanying him, calling her a “fake bake bitch.”“She wanted to hurt someone’s feelings, obviously,” he said.
Regardless of who initiated the confrontation, both individuals agreed it escalated to the point of Anderson telling Mathes to “fuck off” and Mathes calling Anderson a “cracker.”
Now none of this lets Anderson off the hook as a loser who picked a bar fight with a girl (seriously, that’s about as lame as you can get), but clearly this was not a “hate crime” and it most definitely was not the random incident it was portrayed as by CAIR. But it gets worse. Mathes seems to have had some other problems with the law:
At the time of the incident, Mathes was on probation for a third-offense OWI – stipulations of which include alcohol abstinence and staying out of legal trouble. She admitted to drinking numerous beers – the exact number, which may have ranged from two to 10, was disputed – throughout the day. The defense went on to say one of Mathes’ motivations for pressing charges was to evoke sympathy and avoid being reprimanded for violating her probation – action that could have resulted in her losing custody of her child.
Again, that does not mean that Anderson gets a free swing at her. But it does suggest that Mathes was not the innocent victim she’s made out to be by CAIR (and it should be noted that there is nothing in the story that says she’s a muslim). In fact, of the three examples I checked from the CAIR report, only one seemed fairly plausible. In a bid to be even more lame than Anderson, three men are allegedl to have verbally harrassed a pregnant muslim woman who was walking down the streets of Arlington, VA:
On August 10, 2005, a 23-year old pregnant Virginia woman “was attacked by three men who
shouted anti-Muslim slurs and called her a terrorist.â€6 According to news outlets, when the
woman was being assaulted by one of the men, “The other two guys were just laughing and
screaming at the top of their lungs like it was a joke.â€
Again, its not acceptable behavior to act this way, but is calling someone a terrorist in order to get their goat a “hate crime” or a “civil rights violation”? I couldn’t find anything else about the incident, and the only other example I followed could not be found in the Washington Post‘s archives:
On September 22, 2005, Montgomery County (MD) police said that “…a Star of David was
painted…next to the sign of the Muslim Community Center†in suburban Washington,
DC. A line was also spray-painted across the word ‘Muslim’.
The elipsis just makes me wonder what came between “painted” and “next to.” In any case, if it happened as alleged by CAIR, vandalism is unacceptable behavior, and the perpetrators should be prosecuted. The real issue here is, why didn’t the Washington Post do any of this homework?
As far as I’m concerned, CAIR is a completely unreliable source for any newstory, especially one that quotes a “report” that is little more than pretty pictures and unconfirmed numbers. Surely there were attacks on muslims across the country, some of which were based on bigotry and hatred. But the fact that a reputable newspaper (and the Washington Post is the best of the Big 3 general newspapers as far as I’m concerned) would “report” what is essentially a propganda piece as straight news is reprehensible. How does this “report” receive absolutely zero scrutiny? I’m willing to believe sheer laziness plays a big part, but after you read this post, go ahead and google up the number of articles citing the CAIR propaganda as a factual document. Are all of those reporters lazy? Every single news organization? I truly doubt it, and so should you.
Pingback: Plus + Ultra » Blog Archive » Bust CAIR; Bogus ‘Civil Rights Group’ Must Be Outed; MSM Again Picks Up B.S. ‘Bias’ Report
Excellent work, Michael! I read through the report last night as well and noted that it was lighter this year (as compared to last) on facts to identify the incidents they were citing. This is certainly due to Pipes and Chadha completely discrediting the previous report due to the inclusion of several incidents of known “hate crimes” that had been staged by the victims themselves. I wrote about the most recent incident of CAIR accusing a community of bias due to a staged “hate crime” bombing for The American Thinker a few weeks ago:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5810
Just looking at the dates it seems that there is more than one year’s data here too. Remember that the last report came out in May 2005, but it seemed that there were incidents recorded past May 2006 in this edition, meaning they are using at least more than 12 months data. This report is nothing more than propaganda pretending to be scientific. But could we ever expect less from CAIR?
Again, great job.
I had almost forgotten about the muslim tendency to stage hate crimes and then point the finger at American culture and play the hate crime victim. There were several of those at the university I went to a few years back. One person staged two of them, which was his downfall, because everyone had fallen for the first one. In exchange for not being charged with a crime, he left the university due to “mental illness” problems (which diagnosis we certainly agreed with).
The sad thing is, I would imagine hate crimes really do happen (regardless of provocation) but I and many others are disinclined to believe them, especially if it’s CAIR that announces them.
The funniest thing about the Iowa City story is that the Deadwood is a hippy bar which is frequented almost exclusively by politically correct types. Everybody knows that anyone walking in there and uttering anything that would smack of non-pc speech would be kicked out of the place immediately by the patrons or the staff, whichever got to him first.
umm… “Honky” is a racial ‘epitet’, made popular by a man named George Jefferson in the 1970′s…….
Outstanding!
You’ve done the homework that WaPo (and CAIR) seems to be uninterested in, I guess it wouldn’t really make their case if they told the “rest of the story.”
So, if someone calls a Muslim a ‘sand nigger’ and that’s a hate crime, why wasn’t THAT person prosecuted for calling the white guy a ‘honky’, an obviously racial epithet? Are we now going down the road to dhimmitude? If not, where do YOU think the road starts? I say it starts when a Muslim doesn’t get the same treatment as a white guy did out of fear, whether it’s fear of being firebombed/marched against/burned in effigy/the list is endless, or whether it’s simply fear of not being politically correct. Political correctness is a disease, and the Islamiczation of America is the symptom.
Pingback: Eyes On CAIR « Trafficland
You as a “responsible” news agency have a duty to vet your articles, especially when they are of such a sensitve nature as this. If you want propogate harmful lies there will be repercussions.
Pingback: Public Secrets: from the files of the Irishspy
Are you THREATENING us, Jeff?
#9 Jeff must be a Muslim or a PC liberal.
Islam is quickly turning me into a person who hates Islam with a passion. I seriously would look the other way if all Muslims were deported or worse.
I consider them an enemy to my country and to Western civilization. It will be only a matter of time before we either submit or slay. Those will be our only two options against a heidious “faith” which has declared war upon us. When war is declared, then the right to use deadly force against said enemy is justified.
Honestly, I wish the climate in the United States would become so unbearable against Muslims that they would FLEE this country and find refuge in a “paradise” like Saudi Arabia. Afterwords, we could raze the mosques.
Before everybody gets in a snit, I think jeff is speaking to the Washington Post, not me. This entire post is aimed squarely at the Washington Post and other MSM for taking propaganda disseminated by the likes of CAIR at face value, without doing any homework.
DarrenY:
Not all muslims are as vile as CAIR (which, BTW, is a Saudi run operation). As an example of muslims who the MSM should be consulting whenever garbage such as the CAIR report is issued, I recommend the Free Muslims Coalition.
Jeff,
I am not sure who you feel is being irresponsible, Michael or the WaPo?
Darren,
The Muslim faith hasn’t declared war upon us, the Islamists have. This site includes an author who is a devout Muslim who also supports the right of Israel to exist, hates the Islamists and is in favor of liberal democracy. Most US Muslims do not wish to reduce us to dhimmitude.
That doesn’t mean we support CAIR, as this post makes clear. I suggest going into the archives and reading our posts that are under the category Religion and theology. I’ll plug my own, Approaching Islam. The comments are interesting as well.
I also recommend the interview with Michael Ledeen if only to read Ralph Peters remarks and Ledeen’s response on this issue.
I say this because I want to lay down a ground rule. I understand anger at the Muslim world. Understanding it however doesn’t excuse in my mind hate that extend to those who have not only done us no harm but are not our enemies. We are fighting vicious ideologies, not a faith.
That faith may at this point have far more of our enemies or at least fellow traveler’s than we wish, but there are also millions of moderate, in fact immoderately devoted to liberty, Muslims in this world and we have links to some of those organizations as an alternative to organizations such as CAIR.
The media keeps running to these whiners and liars because they emphasize conflict. We all know the media distorts in many areas. You should remember that they do the same to Islam as a whole. Don’t buy it. We need Muslims such as Omar, we don’t need to agree with the Islamists that Islam means what they say it does. If they win that argument we will be at war with over a billion people. Distinctions have to be made.
I am leaving your comment up. I hope you keep reading. As I said, I understand, but we have to be dispassionate about passionate issues. In the coming years we need people who both understand and appreciate the threat that the Islamists and Baathists and others pose while simultaneously are busy building bridges with those who are not our enemies. To an extent that is a primary goal of this blog in my mind. Expose the liars and hypocrites yes, but I want to find our friends as well.
In the future, comments on this thread that express little but hate, comments that if they were about Jews, blacks or others I would delete will be deleted. I have too many friends, and though I have never met him I now consider Omar a friend, who are Muslim to not do so. They do not need to hear that no matter how they behave, how hard they work in their own communities to help in the struggle against terrorism that they are automatically to be thrown in with the Islamists. To be lumped in with people they despise and consider apostates.
Upon reflection I hope you can understand that, and will take this comment in the spirit in which it is intended. This is to a large extent the Muslim communities own fault, I acknowledge that. They have too rarely made their voices heard in protest, though in fairness, the media would rather cover CAIR than those who oppose them.
“Maryland’s total was 85 in 2005, five more than in 2004.”
Contrary to CAIR’s propaganda, the numbers actually show that Muslims have it much better than most people in Maryland, relatively speaking.
In 2004 there were 11,667 VIOLENT crimes in Baltimore alone. If you add on property crimes (which, if directed against Muslims, CAIR would, no-doubt, classify as hate crimes) the total jumps to 47,726. All told, there are about 4,000 crimes per 100,000 residents committed in Baltimore each and every year. The numbers look pretty much the same for D.C.
Inevitable conclusion: Muslims are much less likely to be victims of crimes than non-Muslims.
PS, there were 20 VIOLENT crimes (and 59 total crimes) committed within a half-mile radius of my Baltimore home wihin the past TWO WEEKS alone. Someone please call CAIR.
Darren:
Not to be offensive, but maybe you should read this:
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2006/09/why-we-cannot-rely-on-moderate-muslims.html
I count four groups. Those that are fanatics, and direct supporters. Those that are not fanatics, but think that terrorism is the way to go, or at least, are willing to shut up and let it happen. Those that are in Al-Taqiya, or the assumption of a false pose, in order to pretend that Islam doesn’t want world wide Sharia. And the fourth, those that believe this to be wrong, but are still Muslims.
The fourth group are the most dangerous, because they don’t believe in this, yet they promote Islam, and those in the third group recruit from this group. That may be too simple an explanation, but essentially, it boils down to this. You can’t say we aren’t at war with a religion when the BOOK of that religion says that we are at war with that religion. You can’t claim someone has hijacked a religion when they are doing what their holy book says, you have to claim that those who reject it are hijacking the religion, since it is THEY who are rejecting part of that holy book. And if it’s only a few percent, where are the hundreds of millions who should be standing up and protesting what they are doing? Nowhere, that’s where they are. Take it as you want, but for me, Islam IS the problem. You don’t have to bother banning me, I won’t be back, I don’t go to dhimmi blogs.
Dear DocNeaves….Sadly, I must agree.
Doc,
Don’t come back if you do not want, but I don’t classify your comment as something I would ban. Calls to round up millions of innocents and deport them I do. Especially since many of those people would face death, imprisonment or torture for not falling in any of the four groups you list.
I read the piece you linked to when it first came out. I’ll respond to a little bit of your reasoning.
For the sake of argument let us accept your protrayal of the Koran. So what? If they have rejected it then they are no longer the problem are they? I don’t get why they are not allowed to interpret the Koran in a different manner than you say they must, but it is really beside the point. They do interpret it differently. If that means in your mind they are no longer good Muslims then so be it.
That is a fair criticism and I have leveled it as well. However, for those who are standing up and protesting, such as Omar on this very blog and elsewhere, I am not prepared to send him away. What of those who are standing up elsewhere whose families have been tortured, murdered, raped and driven from their homes? Am I to ignore their plight? I would consider that not only unwise and wrong, but profoundly ungrateful. What about the Kurds? If their country were to be overrun am I not to help them despite the lack of Jihadists among them? Are their deaths and suffering of no concern? They do not interpret the Koran to mean what you claim. Maybe they are wrong and Bin Laden is right about what the Koran means, but if so I say power to them.
As I said before, distinctions have to be made. We need allies who do not want to relegate us to dhimmitude and it will be a lot easier if we allow them to interpret the Koran in ways that Bin laden wouldn’t like without telling them that they are wrong and Bin Laden is right. That just creates more enemies.
Here is an excellent link which you all may already be aware of:
http://prophetofdoom.net/
Robert Spencer also has some excellent books on the subject.
That is fine Darren. I am not trying to talk you out of the idea that Islam properly understood means what The Prophet of Doom claims, anymore than I would get into a theological debate with David Duke about his claims of what the Bible means. Maybe David Duke is right, and Zawahiri as well, but it says nothing about the beliefs of those who disagree with them. You can say they have their faith wrong, but if you are right then that is what we want. We want them to be wrong, and we would make it a lot more attractive for them to be wrong if we were not threatening to deport them to countries that would kill them for that error.
I don’t agree that The prophet of Doom’s interpretation is the only valid one, but the point is millions of Muslims do not believe that is how the Surah’s should e interpreted. Since they don’t, that interpretation is irrelevant when discussing them. It is relevant in discussing those who do believe that is how the Koran should be interpreted. Shouldn’t we at least stick to criticizing them and not the others?
I don’t doubt that there are some Muslims who are not dangerous, who don’t feel that way. My point is, the only way we can actually trust them is for them to reject the religion itself. The problem isn’t that some are misinterpreting the religion. If this were the case, then I would be in the “they’ve hijacked it” camp. The problem is the religion is the problem, because the ENTIRE message is one of servitude to a violent, vengeful “God”, who is really nothing more than a man. A man who, in today’s age, would simply be locked up, not worshipped. It is only those who reject Mohammed’s teaching in their entirety who get my support, and support them I do, with my money, with my hand in friendship, and with my life, as I’ve done before, since I’ve served and defended them. But, as long as they try to lie to themselves that Islam CAN EVER be peaceful, they are part of the problem. They are the ones I would be the saddest over if they were killed, but kill them I would, if it came down to it, because they, unwittingly perhaps, make it possible for Islam to still exist, and as long as that book exists, as long as any followers remain, there will always come a fanatic to interpret the words he sees in exactly this way, since, after all, this is exactly the way they were intended. And that is from someone who has been watching Islam since 1981. A long, long time. In twenty five years of searching for the truth of Islam, this is the only truth I’ve found. That article I linked to has it exactly right, and that’s from reading on my own their own words to their own people, which was pretty hard to do at first, because they try to keep that separate from us. Al Taqiya, you know. Beware the enemy who lies, but especially beware the ally who believes the enemy who lies, because he will soon be your new enemy. And it’s always harder to fight a friend. They know this, which is why they use this tactic more than any other. Thanks for not banning me. Truth is always more important than anything else. Sorry if I disagree, but it caused much heartache for the years I tried to have Muslim friends.
Interesting editorial regarding “peaceful” Islam.
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=23884&catcode=13
Sorry I’m joining this thread late. Lance, thank you very much for your support on this issue. I know that it is VERY unpopular in the US right now to support and/or acknowledge respect of and friendship with Muslims. And yes, I acknowledge that this is primarily due to the actions of some who call themsleves Muslims.
Doc and Darren: I appreciate your opinions and, like Lance, I would not censor such comments. All three of the authors at this blog support freedom of speech to the fullest especially when we disagree with what is being said (that is the true test of support, no?). For obivous reasons, I disagree with you both. I won’t bother to refute the charge of falsehood (Al Taqiya, which, btw is primarily a Shia doctrine) as I regard it as reckless ad hominem and intellectually worthless. I do embrace a libertarian conservative outlook on politics and do consider myself a devout Muslim at the same time. I don’t see any contradiction between the two. I, and I suspect a great many Muslims, have no desire to impose our religious laws and duties on those who are not voluntary members of the Islamic community. Why shouldn’t you eat pork and drink beer? If it’s not against your religion, by all means, go for it. It in no way impacts my life (or afterlife, for that matter). At the same time, I would certainly resent anyone who told me that I should worship and follow the laws of their religion. What makes any religion superior to another? And if we are getting into superiority or inferiority of certain religions, who makes those decisions? And while we’re at it, let’s just go ahead and declare certain races or nationalities inferior, too.
Doc, I have no idea why you consider this a “dhimmi” blog. As for the deconstructions and ridiculous monolithic interpretations of Islam put for by some of its critics (some of whom you have linked to or quoted), the same thing has been done to EVERY religion. I have never, in my life, believed myself committed to a “false” religion. I truly do believe that Islam is a religion of peace, as are many other religions. Our God is the same God that is worshipped by Christians and Jews. No distinction can be drawn other than the names we use to identify Him. You say that we cannot be friends unless we reject Islam. I must, unfortunately, then, reject your friendship and lump you in with the apocalyptic Bernard Lewis, “Clash of Civilization” types. It is a loss, I’m sure, for both of us.
Darren: Your rhetoric is exactly the sort of self-fulfilling prophecy that forces me to lump you with Doc and the “Clash” types. It also stinks of ethnocentrism, or I suppose we should say religiocentrism. This is exactly the type of thinking that extremists in the twentieth century loved and which I thought most of us had learned to abhor. Apparently, I was incorrect. Also, be careful relying too heavily on Robert Spencer, although some of his work has merit, he is heavily biased and has faced criticism for his lack of credentials and scholarship on Islam (see http://www.unc.edu/courses/2004spring/reli/026/001/spencer.htm and http://www.juancole.com/2004/12/mark-levine-replies-to-robert-spencer.html).
Omar-
First, let me clarify something. I don’t know you, and I’m sure you are exactly what you say you are. If you reject Al Taqiya, good. If you reject the calling of Jews and Christians Apes and Pigs, good. Unfortunately, even though you may be a great guy and wonderful friend, I still have to reject you, and again, it pains me to do so. In fact, I have experienced nothing BUT pain concerning all the Muslims I know. The ones I know personally I liked very much. However, some have since rejected me outright, calling me just such names. Others have tried to be nice, to continue the friendship, but have made statements letting their true feelings about Islam through. Both have caused much heartache, but also have opened my eyes.
The fourth group I talked about is probably the one you are in. These are the ones who honestly believe in their faith, but reject parts like I spoke of. I feel for you most of all, because you are the central core of the problem. Let me illustrate it this way, to keep the heartburn down.
Let’s say I’m a Christian, and the situation is reversed. Christians all over the world are killing people because they aren’t Christian enough. Beheadings, wars, forced conversions, etc. Would not THAT ALONE make you afraid of Christianity? Sure it would, as it did for me with Islam, but not afraid enough to worship ignorance, so I began to study it, way back in 1981 (the start of my fall from the church, actually). What I found was Al Taqiya, but I didn’t learn that official name for it until recently, I just found the lies.
I found those who, like Arafat, would say one thing to the West, and another to their people. I found those who used examples of Hobidiya to justify their actions (where Mohommed, I believe it was, but correct me if I’m wrong, made a deal with Mecca for ten years of peace, then attacked as soon as he had trained an army of ten thousand). I found those who were proud of having decieved Christians and Jews, who intentionally used this to confuse the West into believing that most of the Muslim World was peaceful, even spreading the lie that Islam means “peace” to help their cause, while laughing at the misinterpretation behind our backs. Like the old saying goes, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
In short, you may be what you say, but from what I’ve seen, that makes YOU the fool this time. Al Taqiya even describes people like you, calling you warriors for Islam, because it is with those like you that rests the responsibility of recruitment here in the West. But, to go back to the analogy, if all you ever saw of Christianity was Christians killing anyone who wasn’t Christian enough, Christians lying about believing in peace, then laughing behind your back, how far would YOU trust one who takes a pillar of his religion to say “hey, I’m a GOOD guy, I don’t believe in that stuff, trust me”? How many times would you have to see a wolf in sheep’s clothing come in, slaughter the sheep, then laugh about it before you rejected all wolves in sheeps clothing? This is the way it looks to us, when we see someone from Islam claim peace now. It has been said, but it has never come true. It has always come true that they were talking about peace AFTER we have converted. First, the good cop (you), but if we don’t fall for it, the bad cop comes around to make sure we get the message, convert or else. I’m sorry if this distresses you, because it damn sure distresses me. It has made me change who I am because I had to change what I believe. Unfortunately, I have no choice but to believe this, since it is Muslims who have done these things, not Christians. When Christians murder in the name of God, they are soundly rejected the world over, by every sect of Christianity. When Muslims do it, we get the few, weak, halfhearted and well-worded apologies, like “we’re sorry for your loss, it was tragic and terrible”, but not, on the whole, “we’re sorry that Islam did this, they were wrong, and they are NOT Islamic if they think this is right” kind of statements you would hear from Christians. In this overwhelming lack of rejections flows the spice of Al Taqiya. We know this now, and, like the old joke about the guy who says “everything I say is a lie”, we no longer believe anything about the “religion of peace” except what we see. If YOU reject it, good on you. But pardon me if I won’t let you close to me, or my family. As I said, we, too, have a saying, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Except, for us, it’s fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, doom on me. If you so reject the basic pillars of your religion, why are you still a Muslim? I rejected Christianity for just such falsehoods, fewer than you have for Islam. And the comment about the dhimmi blog is because apparently it will be about “the religion has been hijacked by a FEW extremists” meme, which, to me, is nothing more than shilling for the enemy. If you don’t want me to consider Islam my enemy, then explain to me why most of the Islamic world wants to kill me. I think, sadly, that it is YOU who are being fooled, just as I said would be the case in the fourth group. I feel for you, Omar, because I know what it’s like to have your religion taken away from you, and I would never wish this on anyone. Unfortunately, due to the actions of MOST of Islam, I have no other choice but to reject your words as nothing more than either Al Taqiya (which is not only not rejected by most of Islam, but fully and enthusiastically embraced), or the words of someone in the fourth group, taken in by the lies of Islamic peace. I am truly sorry.
And, in my defense, there are two more concepts that make me feel this way that I forgot to mention. I’ve read that there is no word in Islam for peace between Muslims and Infidels, since it can’t exist, only temporary (hudna), while you rearm and reequip. And, the fact that there are two parts to the world, one for Islam that’s considered conquered, and one for the rest of the world, which means the battlefield, those which WILL convert. I’m sorry, but this is the most telling to me, these few facts I’ve stated. If you have some evidence that they are false, I’d truly love to see it. You don’t know how bad I want to be wrong. But I won’t be fooled again.
Doc, as I mentioned above, Al Taqiya is a Shia practice. It is intended only to be used by a Shiite who feels that his life would be directly threatened by revealing his true beliefs. For further evidence of the unacceptable nature of this practice to Sunnis (75% or so of the world’s Muslim population), see, among others, the Hanbali school of jurisprudence which calls the Shia to task for this practice. Although many try to ascribe al Taqiyaa and hudna (a separate matter entirely) to all Muslims, let’s remember first that Islam is no more monolithic than is Christianity. There is no one holy, catholic, and apostolic Islam. We have Sunni, Shia, Sufi, and Kharajites within mainstream Islam (and there are many different variations of those four). Going even further to those who associate themselves with Islam, though in any intellectually honest sense aren’t Muslim, we have Baha’i, Ahmadi, and Qur’aniyyins. The last group are probably the most acceptable as Muslims, however all three have also spawned numerous subsects. I hope that we can now stop addressing Islam as this massive, unified, hive mind of a religion, which I assure you, it is not.
Since I find no merit to this charge of al-Taqiyaa (at least against me personally, as I am not a Shiite), the rest of the discussion of my role in “recruiting” or playing “good cop” is pointless. Regarding no “Islamic” word for peace with non-Muslims, I assume you mean Arabic which is the official language of Islam. There are many many dimensions of this charge which we can explore. Firstly, there is an Arabic word for peace (salaam) which, as far as I know has no secondary meaning of peace only with other Muslims (as Arabic existed before Islam). Secondly, you assume that most Muslims regard the lesser Jihad as neverending and more important than the greater Jihad. Let us remember that for many of us (not all, as OBL keeps remininding us), the greater Jihad (the struggle within oneself for perfection, also called Ihsan) takes precedence. External (lesser) jihad, to me at least, cannot take place until a Muslim has achieved perfection. Also, let’s remember that the concept of external jihad is DEFENSIVE in nature. Jihad is not just random holy war against anyone not Muslim. A big part of the reason OBL uses the term “Crusaders” when speaking of the West and the US, in particular, is that this implies that the West has taken the offensive and is actively waging war to convert or kill Muslims. This, to him and his ilk, provides the justification for jihad. They conveniently ignore the fact that a single Muslim cannot just embark on jihad. Jihad must be formally announced by a legitimate Muslim leader (a Caliph or Khalifa). As no such person has existed for years and will not conceivably exist for the fairly distant future, jihad is legally impossible. I understand that this doesn’t mean a hill of beans to OBL’s victims, but it does show the religious flaws in the radical jihadist movements. Understand that OBL and most other terrorists aren’t honestly religious. They are pan-Arab nationalists couching their goals in the language of religion. Once you understand that, you’ll realize that the VAST majority of Muslims have no desire to kill you, your children, or your pet Airedale. I hope that this has provided some explanation or at least “evidence” that what you have been led to believe is wrong and that all Muslims are not violent religious fanatics out to get you.
Sorry, Omar, but I’ve heard that before. You’re right, of course, ninety-nine point nine nine percent of muslims aren’t violent, out to get me or my airedale, as you said, etc. It’s just one or two crazies. So, how come the rest of you don’t do something?
It’s called silent support. All we hear from you is towards us, telling us, “Stop! We’re your friends!”, like the movie When Mars Attacks. We’re not stupid. You wish for me to believe you? Great, go out there and say something to those two or three Muslims that have hijacked your wonderful religion, then. Go back in time and show me where Islam has EVER been peaceful to it’s neighbors, except when it was rearming for war. Tell me how the basic pillar of Islam is peaceful, but those MILLIONS of muslims who are rioting are just a small minority, and how I shouldn’t be afraid of them.
I gave you that there are some who are, Omar, but you try to make it sound like it’s some small percentage. Again, just what Al Taqiya says you would say. Sorry, I don’t believe you. I have too much evidence to the contrary that a LARGE percentage, maybe more than fifty percent, are as I described, not as YOU described. And if what you say is true, and only forty percent of muslims are the way I describe, don’t you think that’s enough for a major problem? If there are so many of you, why don’t we ever hear from them? Why aren’t there Muslim armies attacking these people? There aren’t, and the only time we hear from anyone is when Islam is insulted, and there are more riots, in every country. Again, the peaceful fifth columnists. Again, I’ve never met a Muslim who felt as YOU do, they all hate America, and wish for a caliphate. I think I’ll go with the numbers I see instead of yours that, for all the evidence out there, don’t seem to exist in any great quantity. Tell you what, though. Get your guys together, march in the streets protesting, condemn terrorism in ANY decent show of force, and I’ll come march with you, deal? Until then, you can’t claim to be the majority. And again, when the rule is that you can lie to me, “you don’t believe in that rule” doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. I have to go by actions, and I haven’t seen ANYTHING like what you describe. I’ll believe my eyes on this one.
I’ve read ALL of the Qur’an and it is a book that promotes violence. I’m studying some history of Islam to see that in the lands Islam occupied it would ebb and flow in how it would treat Christians and Jews. There were times when Christians & Jews were not harmed, albeit treated second class, and at other times dealt with cruelly.
Couple the Quran with the following:
God in the Old Testament states the following about the descendents of Ishmael:
Genesis 16:11″And the angel of the LORD said to her, “Now you have conceived and shall bear a son; you shall call him Ishmael, for the LORD has given heed to your affliction.
GE 16:12 He shall be a wild ass of a man, with his hand against everyone, and everyone’s hand against him; and he shall live at odds with all his kin.”
So couple what God says of the descendents of Ishmael with a violent text like the Qur’an and you have one dangerous mix. Now I see why Sunni and Shia are at each other throats. Don’t see them peacefully discussing their Islamic faith disagreements.
Amazing that when Islamic terrorist commit a horrendous act, you hear very little or nothing from “Mainstream” Islam. But have a Pope make a statement or the press print an “offending” cartoon of Muhammad and there is hell to pay. The “mainstream” Muslim institutions even participate in the “outrage” and give their endorsement either expressly or implicitly.
The problem is not really with “fanatic” Muslims. The problem is with Islam. It has a history of violence which can’t be ignored, but often is. Islam is a faith bent on conquering; not a faith built on the foundations of “peace”.
Islam is “peaceful” when it has no choice; but given the opportunity Islam will attempt to put all under submission to “Allah”.
This American says thanks, but no thanks to Islam and if you’re a Muslim in America don’t expect us to conform to you, i.e. adopt your ways, for we find your ways repugnant and tyrannical. It is a faith that enslaves.
Your faith is “foreign” to this land, so if you don’t like it here living by our ways, then feel free to find one of the MANY Islamic paradises that ABOUND on this planet. But hurry, for I suspect the lines to get into Iran or Saudi Arabia are long!
Doc, your central argument revolves around the idea that anti-Western Muslims are devout, correct? You expect Salafis, Shiite extremists, etc. to actually be Muslims following correct religious practice, no? If so, then why would they abandon the tenets of the religion? I have pointed out above the legal requirements of Jihad and the idea that Al Taqiyya is a practice of the SHIA, not the Muslim majority, which has legal rulings against such a thing. Shia are also only allowed to use Al Taqiyya under a specific set of circumstances. We can’t have it both ways. Either OBL and the terrorists are religious and follow the rules to the T (which they do not) or they are simply using religion to mask a political agenda.
As for Muslim armies attacking them, correct me if I am wrong, but are the governments of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan not actively working with us to shut down terrorist cells? Remember, they don’t have carrier battle groups to saber rattle like we do. While the efforts of the governments of the world’s majority Muslim nations haven’t been perfect, I think that some of them are honestly trying to fight or reduce terror. This isn’t NATO we’re dealing with here. These are third-world countries with sometimes shaky governments. They have to act within their capabilities and within the scope of what is possible given internal strife.
Darren: I’ve read ALL of the Bible (Oxford Scholars and KJV) and it is a book that promotes violence. When certain verses are taken out of context, you could probably say that Charlotte’s Web or Winnie-the-Pooh promote violence. If you are going to use the Bible as a source of “factual” attacks against Islam, then I might as well use the Quaran for “factual” attacks against Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, etc., correct? What, pray tell, is the point of this sort of thinking? How does it advance the dialogue between the faiths?
If you have read the history of Islam, then you will understand the subtleties of Sunni-Shia relations. It has remarkably little to do with the Quaran and very much to do with politics. The Quaran and the Islamic faith also have nothing to do with the reason Shia dislike and distrust Syrians. Also, since you seem to subscribe to the Robert Spencer/Daniel Pipes school of thought regarding the expansion of Islam through violence only, please explain why not a shot was fired when Indonesia, Malaysia, and many parts of SE Asia became Muslims? Also, your rhetoric at the end comes dangerously close to that of the Know-Nothing Party of the late 19th century or the Christian Identity movement of today.
Lastly, to both Doc and Darren: Since both of you claim that Muslims are “silent accomplices” to terrorism, let’s take a look at what prominent Muslims are really doing.
http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php
lists a ton of Muslims who are actively opposing terror.
Also, see:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20060831-083928-6811r.htm
http://www.ihsanic-intelligence.com/#
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19444
http://www.libforall.org/
Doc and Darren:
I won’t go into specific rebuttals of your arguments since I think Omar can do that all on his own. I will say that I am glad that you all are still visiting and arguing your points. I don’t agree with much of what you say (too broad of a brush IMHO), but I am hoping that you will continue to visit and maybe we can persuade you all to focus your attacks on those truly deserving of such derision.
I have said all along, I only want to be at war with those who wish to be at war with me. I’m just having a lot of trouble finding more than the odd man here and there who believes this. I don’t see it in the papers, these marches, these protests, and maybe it’s because those poor countries don’t have enough of a grip on power to really be effective, or maybe it’s because they don’t WANT to. Maybe it’s because only these few believe in this, or maybe it’s the fact that others are acting peaceful in order to fool us into letting Islam into the country. Can you name a country that has allowed Islam into it peacefully that didn’t get taken over forcefully? I don’t care if only ten percent of you are ‘militant’ or not. That ten percent attacks for the rest of you, who benefit by the spread, just as if you were part of it, which I suspect you are (not you, personally, Omar, I would never accuse anyone of that without solid evidence) but in general. And, Omar, as for being the bad cop, let’s pretend that you are a perfect Muslim, except for all the violence crap in there, and you reject the apes and pigs thing, and you absolutely LOOOOOVE everyone in the world. Don’t you then become a shining symbol for someone ELSE to convert to Islam? Maybe even two or three? And don’t you think these ‘militant’ ones are USING you to recruit for THEIR brand if Islam? They are, and you know it, which makes you an accomplice, whether you intend to or not. There are plenty of people who have gone to jail for being an accomplice in something they didn’t even know they were part of. My point is this: Islam is violent. Christianity is not, but I’m not going to allow Christianity to rule the world anymore than I’m going to allow Islam. Trouble is, it’s not Christianity that’s TRYING to take over the world, it’s ISLAM, and ONLY ISLAM. You say it’s peaceful, but the book you base it on, by your own words, says you are either wrong, or that you reject parts of it, major parts of it, major pillars of it, in fact, which makes you an apostate, yet, you still shill for what you THINK is Islam. Sorry, bitten by that dog before, won’t happen again. You want respect and friendship from me, you’ll have to pick up a gun, go stop these guys, do something besides stand there telling me how peaceful YOU are, when I see MILLIONS rioting, killing, burning, looting, all in the name of ALLAH.
And, for what it’s worth, the Koran doesn’t say that Al Taqiya is ONLY for certain sects. It is a reality, and it’s there for you to use or not. There is not ONE DAMN THING I can find that says some use it and some don’t, though I could have given that to you logically. But the canard that YOU don’t beleive in it hardly makes it any less real. And I won’t be foolish enough to fall for anyone from your religion who tells me anything with the track record Islam has in the world.
Doc, have you failed to read the majority of my comments? Islam spread throughout SE Asia without a shot being fired. There were no hordes of psychopaths on camels with scimitar in one hand and Quaran in the other. Examine the history of Malaysia, Indonesia, etc.
In regards to the idea that I am providing an example for others to convert to Islam: I assure you that isn’t the first thing I think when I wake-up in the morning. Yes, I like to think that I live up to the standards expected of a member of the Ummah. No, I don’t expect people to convert because of that. If a person is not striving to live up to the standards of his religion, then why does he bother to belong to said religion? Even Orthodox Jews (who do not welcome converts, as a rule) strive toward living a Torah based life, thus setting an example for the rest of us. This is simply guilt by association and nothing more than McCarthyism.
Regarding proselytizing, while we’re discussing it, Islam isn’t the religion that has been sending missionaries around the world for the past 2,000 years to “save souls”. Aggressive recruitment has been the hallmark of Christian denominations (some moreso than others), not Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc.
I have no desire for Islam to “rule the world.” I am not an Islamist, nor have I ever been. There is no compulsion in religion. That is a very basic teaching of the Quaran which cannot be overridden by later, man-made laws. If a person wishes to convert, wonderful, we’ll happily welcome him/her into the Ummah. If a person wants to be a Christian or Jew, etc., also wonderful, I for one am glad to see an increse in worldwide religious observance, no matter what the denomination. If a person wants to be an atheist, I’ll pray for them, but certainly would not demean them or force religion upon them. Religion is a personal choice. Compulsion in religion destroys the meaning of religion.
As for my personal beliefs, while not necessarily fundamentalist (and that’s not a bad thing), I assure you that I fall well within the scope of orthodox, though perhaps liberal leaning, Sunni Islam with some overlapping Sufi beliefs. The issue of Al Taqiyya was, I felt, dealt with in my above comments. The majority of Sunni jurists have condemned al Taqiyya as heresy and that the Shia have been using it to bring disharmony to the majority of the Muslim people. I accept the five pillars of Islam : Shahadah, Salat, Zakat, Sawm, and Hajj. In English: “There is none worthy of worship but God and Muhammad (SAW)is the Messenger of God,” 5 daily prayers, charity to the poor, fasting during Ramadan, and pilgrimage. Perhaps you can point out to me how I am an apostate?
Omar, this will be my last reply. In response to every charge, you continue to make this personal, as in, YOU don’t do this, and YOU don’t do that. My charge has never been that YOU do this or that, but that ISLAM does this or that. And believe me, your attitude is hardly typical of the Muslim you meet today. Islam wasn’t spread by the sword in Indonesia, eh? Well, you may be right, there wasn’t a formal war, but it WAS enforced by the sword, and is being done so today. Three Christians were just beheaded there simply for being Christian. Again, Al-Taqiya isn’t simply lying, it’s taking whatever status is necessary to promote your faith, which is what you are doing here, promoting your faith as one of harmless love and peace. You can speak for yourself if you wish, but you can hardly speak for those murderous souls who beheaded those little girls, stoned women to death, etc. THIS is Islam at it’s finest, and for you to pretend that it’s otherwise is simply what I’ve said all along, Al Taqiya, the falsehoods used to pretend your religion is one of peace. Indonesia wasn’t spread by the sword? Have you forgotten about Timor? Do you not see how it is enforced throughout the Muslim world? Did you not hear anything Mahathir has said? Goodbye, Omar. If you are a real prince of peace as you say, congrats. But again, I’m not falling for it. Stay peaceful. Continue to embrace Christians as your friends. But don’t count this one amongst them. I will never trust another Islamic for the rest of my life, because I have been lied to by all of them, except when they were threatening to wipe me off the map.
Sad, Doc. Very sad. Because you’ve been mistreated by one, or possibly a few Muslims in the past, you choose to believe that all of us are bad. I’m truly sorry for your past experiences, but try to see the other side of the story. Say I’m an Iranian, and I’ve seen Americans replace my democratically elected leader (Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh), with one of their own choosing (General Fazlollah Zahedi) who supports one of the most oppressive totalitarians in the region, the Shah. Years later, after we’ve again choosen a new leader (Grand Ayatollah Khomeini), we again see Americans attempting to impose their will on us (Iran-Iraq war, alliances with and/or support of anti-Iranian groups, etc.), why should I, Joe Iranian, ever want friendship with the US again? In fact, shouldn’t I be doing everything in my power to bring the US down? And yet the US expects me to overthrow my democratically elected leader and embrace their goals? Hmm… truth is stranger than fiction, isn’t it?
Are we beginning to see where your true allegiances lie, Omar? Did I simply strike too close to home? Are you justifying my feelings? Those are exactly the same sentiments I got from Ferez, an Iranian who worked as our assistant manager. He prayed there at work, and we had no problem with it. When he burned an American flag, he was let go, not for the flag burning, but for statements against the US government. It’s not just Islam, Omar. It’s the fact that we are at war with Islam everywhere, in Africa, in Indonesia (I’m not so sure there was no war, but I haven’t the inclination to go look…it doesn’t take a formal war to rule by the sword, they just did it in Thailand, not a drop of blood, there will never be a war for anyone to point to when they look back and say, when did Thailand turn Islamic?), in the Middle East. I have never seen anything good come from Islam, and if you don’t mind, it’s Islam that attacked us on 911, at the Cole, in 93, and even before that. Speaking if Iran, my unit left some hardware there, do you remember that? And if you don’t like democracy, doesn’t that speak tons towards YOUR loyalty? Doesn’t that make you exactly what I said, someone who wishes for the overthrow of the US, and worldwide Sharia? Or are you going to split the baby to sound ‘moderate’, and say, no, just for me and my people, we should have self determination, sovereignty, and nukes? You see, there’s a reason why not every country has nukes. You guys (I’m assuming, since you spoke of it that way, that you are Iranian, but if not, please adjust this accordingly) have stated repeatedly that you want to wipe Israel off the face of the map, and are willing to kill your whole country in the process, in fact, would consider it an honor to do so. How do I know you are the ‘muslims’ who don’t lie? I don’t. How do I know you are the ‘muslims’ who want peace and how do I tell you apart from those who want peace as soon as the rest of the world is converted or dead? How do we tell? By listening to your words, because those like you will always betray themselves. Good, Omar, I’m glad you like Iran, and being Iranian. You should go back there. America is for Americans, not for those wishing to turn America into where they came from, or hadn’t anyone told you that?
First of all, Doc, you’re the one making this personal, not me. Secondly, the last of my family left Iran when it was still called Persia. We have no connections to anyone currently residing there. Thirdly, although I am loosely of Persian descent, I’m also Turkish, Greek, Armenian, and Italian. That makes me a bit of a Heinz 57, which most Americans are. Lastly although I feel no particluar reason to waste breath defending myself, I’ll give you a one-shot courtesy since you are our guest here. Several members of my family have served in the United States armed forces in times of war, including two Purple Hearters (one from WW 2, one from Vietnam), so as regards my family being some kind of “sleeper cell” operatives for the global Islamic conspiracy… try again.
I’m quite happy being American. I wouldn’t want to live anywhere else in the world, although I have spent approximately half a decade overseas. Exactly what is an “American,” by the way? I assume you are of either Eskimo or Native American Indian heritage to be making such a claim as to America being “your” country and that people like me should “go back” to where we came from. Tell me, have you ever considered running for office on a ticket with David Duke?
My response was intended to show the folly of the belief system that you are advancing. It’s such a tit for tat system as to be ridiculous. It’s exactly why the Israelis and Palestinians can’t ever be in the same room together and why President Ahmadinejad believes the way he does. Sadly, given your penchant for paranoid ethnocentrism, you and he deserve each other.
Man, is this is what passes for reasoned discourse to you, you have a long, long way to go. YOU made it personal, as in, you took everything I say about Islam to mean you, by defending anything I said by saying YOU don’t do this, and YOU don’t do that. GEESH, get a grip, you egocentric little troll, since we’re into calling names, now. And how is it paranoid ethnocentrism when being Muslim isn’t an ethnicity, unless YOU decide it is? Just because I take your “pro-Iranian” statements as “anti-US” statements? How else should we take it? And I already allowed I could be wrong assuming you were Iranian, though you basically admitted it with this statement: “Years later, after we’ve again choosen a new leader (Grand Ayatollah Khomeini)”, and how you felt about him, too, with that “GRAND” stuff. And don’t try that lame dodge about “I’m a heinz 57″. That moronic line would go over better if you hadn’t laid down the pro-iranian garbage first, dude. So which is it? Do you wish for democracy, or sharia? Do you wish for Islam to rule the world, or do you wish for freedom? Because everything I’ve seen says that they are not compatible ideas in the Muslim world. And I want you to go back to Iran if you think it’s such a great place, and if you think America ruined your life. Gee, sorry for the intervention, something about having murderous dictatorships in countries that can hurt us that we just don’t like. Might makes right around the world, Omar, or hadn’t you realized that yet? Half a decade overseas? Well, a real world traveller then, who can tell YOU about anything? And how dare you liken me to David Duke? You fucking moron, you have no idea of what you speak. You are representative (and defender of) a religion that has killed millions, but you equate ME with David Duke for wanting to defend my country against invasion by a religion that wishes to take away everything this country stands for? How can you call yourself an American if you preach Islam, which is antithetical to freedom and democracy? Give it a rest, I’m no dhimmi, and I won’t fall for your lies or the lies of Islam, and THIS is what upsets you. Too damn bad. All I have to say is when it happens, bring it on, dude. Now, come back in here and tell us how you are all in favor of democracy and freedom, you just happen to be a Muslim, too. And I’ll call you a liar again. Islam and democracy are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and the only way for you to advocate both is to be a liar.
And this time, I WON’T be back, I don’t want to be associated with any blog that would let these statements go unchallenged. Again, don’t bother banning me (or do, if it makes you feel better), Why should I stick around if I’m the only one defending America. Good luck with your blog.
See ya’. Hopefully your ability to follow through with your promises is better than your ability to read for comprehension.
Ok dokey. I’m wondering if good ole Doc bothered to actually read my responses or not. Other than referring to him as a paranoid ethnocentrist (which I’m fairly sure I’m not the only one who felt that way after his “get out of America” comments), I can’t find any instances of me calling him names or using profanity to abuse him. In fact, I feel that I was quite reasonable with him and tried to use logical, rational dialog, even when confronted with irrational prejudice and hatred.
If anybody feels differently here, please tell me so that I can correct myself in future discussions. Otherwise, I’m going to assume that this was nothing more than a one-sided polemic by a Christian Identity type and move right along.
Pingback: A Second Hand Conjecture » Thanks Aslam, but what about Taqiyya?
Looks like Doc is following the good old neo-con credo. I am a caucasion male with no religious affiliations. He sees what he believes on TV. The talking heads each night tell us that Islam is evil,that Islam was responsible for 9/11, and 7/7. Wake up moron.Your beloved US government and the Brits were responsible.Do some research DOC,,,read something other than the Post. 9/11 was a “Pearl Harbour type event” so the US could pick a war with anyone it chose to blame.PERIOD….Saddam had NOTHING to do with 9/11 and neither did ISLAM. Wake up DOC,,,the people in the US need to wake up and see the government for what it is,,,EVIL,pure EVIL. If you would like to watch something that might open your eyes,navigate to youtube and look for ALEX JONES movie documentary called “TERROR STORM” and see for yourself.
Posts like the one above by “Dave” are precisely the reason why it’s hard to have a serious, productive, discussion about terrorism and Islamofascism. One can object to the American administration’s policy with regards to the Middle East without invoking nonsensical 9/11 conspiracy theories. Saying such stupidities just makes you look like a complete and utter fool. Attempting to reason with conspiracy theorists is tantamount to discussing quantum physics with a monkey, so it’s better not to try and save your energy for something worthwhile, like making sure these paranoid schizophrenics are properly medicated and kept as far away from our children as possible.
44. Dave said:
“The talking heads each night tell us that Islam is evil,that Islam was responsible for 9/11, and 7/7″.
Islam WAS responsible. EVEN the TRUTHFUL Islamists admit that although the Quran teaches it is ok to lie. Islam IS evil. One does not need to listen to the talking heads, they just NEED to read the Quran. I have. It is a book of forced coercion, submission, slavery, dhimmitude, oppressive taxation on non-muslims, and simply a book of insanity and pure vile evil. Allah is a false god and Isa (Jesus) is a conterfeit Jesus. It is a book inspired by Satan himself through the false prophet Muhammad.
The term “radical Islam” is redundant and it is time we wise up to the fact that we are at war with Islam. We had no problems waging war against “nice people” who just happened to be members of the Nazi Party and read from Mein Kampf and we should have & did. Same with the “nice people” who ascribe to the Quran. They may be nice, but their loyalty is to a vile book which is in opposition to much of what we hold dear.
We ARE at war against Islam; yet no one wants to say so…AND we SHOULD BE. The West with its liberties, freedoms, and ideals intact, cannot co-exist with Islam. It will either be us who die or they…I prefer them.
Right on Islamoskeptic
God Bless the United States, my marine nephew fighting in the Anbar Province of Iraq (Ramadi), and Israel.
Islamoskeptic, you are absolutely right. Rational, productive dialogue with conspiracy theorists is pointless. It is equally pointless with those like Doc above and with Darren Y. They have their preformed set of opinions and no facts will ever convince them otherwise. They are also conspiracy theorists, no different than good ole Dave above. Just a different set of villains.
Dear Omar:
The attacks upon the Twin Towers, the London subways, and Madrid train was NOT done by Christians or Jews, but by believers of the Quran who understand the Quran obviously better than you do.
This is NO Conspiracy, but a FACT. A fact you like to ignore.
You are a worshipper of a false god and a book that is evil. Those are the facts you like to gloss over. True you believe your “god” to be true, but you are deluded in believing a lie.
Attacks on me won’t change that.
Omar,
Seems like Darren and Doc’s opinions are founded in reason. Contrary to what what you may think, having an opinion is a good thing as long as it’s based on a reasoned interpretation of the facts. Given the behavior of Koranimals worldwide, it is reasonable to conclude that the religion is inherently violent, intollerant, domineering and totalitarian. That’s not to say that all Muslims act this way. Muslims are the main victims of their oppressive religion. The sooner they release themselves from its shackles, the better they will be.
The strange thing is that the Islamofascists openly gloat about their terrorist activities. They film beheadings and their murderous rampages and show them around with pride. Then they threaten that they’ll do it again… and they almost always keep their promises. We just take them at their word. It’s amazing that idiots like “dave” would not.
Really? I must have been reading the wrong edition these many years. Who knew?
Hardly. Unlike the conspiracy kooks, I (and the majority of America’s Muslim population) have very little problem admitting that those who committed the atrocities of 9/11, the London subway bombings, Spain, etc. were persons who claimed to be Muslims. Since their actions run contrary to established Islamic doctrines and their motivations and blanket organization are blatantly political (not religious, despite the facade of religion that they use), I dismiss them as mere pretenders to Islam. They may have thought themselves “true” Muslims, but I assure you that they were anything but.
Spoken like a true zealot. And which god is the “true” god, pray tell?
Attacks on any religion change nothing and are mere smears that reveal the underlying prejudicies and paranoias of the attackers.