Wafa Sultan
Wafa Sultan, or as she is better known, Wafa Stalin eventually spoke at Ahavath Torah on December 3rd. Ahavath Torah, is the synagogue which is led by the “betraying” Rabbi Jonathan Hausman, an admirer of neo-Fascist Geert Wilders and all around sleaze ball.
Before Sultan’s speech at the synagogue, LoonWatch exposed the fact that she is a liar who is duping her audiences into believing her concocted biography, we also exposed her craven and insane desire to “nuke” and “crush” Muslims. She said at the time,
“I believe King Abdullah can change Islam overnight, but you need to put pressure on him to do it, and the same kind of pressure you put on Japan, you might need it“ at that moment someone from the audience interjects and asks, “atom bombs?” Wafa Sultan replies, “Yes. At some point the West will need to do it.” This statement is quite revealing considering how in 2007, at a right-wing David Horowitz funded conference called “Restoration Weekend,” Wafa Sultan said, “I will change 1.3 billion Muslims…they have to realize they have only two choices: to change or to be crushed.”
Yet, despite exposing her genocidal fantasies and calling on the synagogue and Rabbi Hausman to repudiate her they went ahead with the event, Hausman introduced Wafa as a “brave” woman and other similar cliches that we are used to hearing from Islamophobes when they are congratulating each other. In effect, they belligerently ignored and refused to address the facts that LoonWatch had uncovered about Wafa Stalin.
What was interesting about Wafa Sultan’s speech was that there seemed to be a veiled hint to LoonWatch in her opening remarks.
Special thanks to you Rabbi Hausman for your brave decision to invite me to speak for your congregation. I am certain it must be a great challenge for you to stand firm and defy the forces who easily surrender to ignorance, to political correctness and to intimidation.
How brave is it to invite a bigot and liar to your congregation to spout lies and hate? How much of a challenge was it for Rabbi Hausman to have Sultan speak at Ahavath Torah? Was there any resistance to the idea from congregants or administration at the synagogue? In reality what Sultan seems to be referencing is LoonWatch, as we called on Ahavath Torah and the Rabbi to repudiate her grisly comments and charlatan story.
Now that we are exercising our freedom of expression and exposing Wafa Sultan for the hate filled bigot that she is, she wants to cry that we are “intimidating,” that we are “politically correct,” that we are “ignorant.” Wafa, what is ignorant about exposing the fact that you lied about being subject to Shariah in secular Syria? What is politically correct about exposing the fact that you want to “nuke” and “crush” Muslims? What is “ignorant” about asking the quite logical question of how an atheist can still consider herself not just a Muslim, but a Muslim reformer? What is “intimidating” about asking a house of worship and a spiritual leader to repudiate such an obvious hate filled liar?
In the end, we are yet to hear Wafa Sultan answer the questions and points we have brought up, instead she has chosen to ignore them and fall back on her nauseating “victim” status.
Wafa Sultan, if you are brave enough please answer these questions:
-Isn’t it a contradiction in terms for one to be an atheist and at the same time to be a Muslim, let alone a Muslim reformer?
-Aren’t you lying when you say that you were subject to brutal shariah treatment during your thirty years in Syria, when for much of that time Syria was ruled by the Ba’athist secular dictator Hafez al-Assad who happens to come from the same sect as you?
-How could you witness the murder of your professor in your classroom in 1979 when no such murder is ever recorded to have taken place on campus, and a number of students and friends of yours have confirmed that such a thing never occured?
-Do you repudiate and apologize for your past comments, which we have recorded, in which you call for the “nuking” of Muslims, applying the same pressure to Muslims as you did to Japan in World War II, and saying that there are only two options for Muslims: to change or to be crushed?
-Do you still believe Islam isn’t a religion?
-Do you still want to ban the Quran?
We await your reply.
December 9th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Garibaldi thank you for this update,
This insidious low down, cheap, genocidal, sorry excuse for a woman, Wafa Stalin Sultan has the gall to say she lived under Sharia law, in SECULAR Syria, when she is an Alawite, which is a Shia sect and they’re not Muslim. This lie was parroted by the equally sorry excuse for a “rabbi”, the bigot “cowardly” rabbi hausman,
He calls himself a “warrior rabbi” yet he has the morals of a sewer, didn’t he publicy post an email of one of the members here who wrote to him, from the campaign Loon Watch started, he didn’t reply himself, but hid behind someone calling himself a Muslim, so the better name for him should be “cowardly rabbi” nor “warrior Rabbi”
The article above doens’t have the video of the speech so i’ll post a weblink here, so readers can see, the speech live, it’s in 4 parts, the first one is actually the low life “cowardly Rabbi” Hausman
http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=16586
About Wafa Sultan Stalin:
She lives in LA, California, or so it is said, and this is her facebook Page,
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Dr-Wafa-Sultan/12767347044?v=photos#/pages/Dr-Wafa-Sultan/12767347044
I can’t see her profile at Facebook, but she may have put it on private, certainly her public page has over 3000 fans, and the motley crew of low lifes, Islamophobes and the usual scum of american society is there.
How about contacting the Rabbinic Council which he is a member of, and asking them why this hate mongering Rabbi, is sponsoring a genocidal lying Alawite woman?
What do they hope to achieve with all this?
December 9th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Shame on Rabbi Jonathon Hausman for hosting this woman. Zionist occupation supporters are playing Israeli far right politics in America, the screening of this meeting and speech by this Wafa Sultan poseur, was joyfully bragged about at JStreetJive, which is Z Street, the Likud group which opposes us mid east obama policy. they have a blog where they write about their enemy J Street, and lending support to Wafa Sultan, and her new book, and cheering on the crazy Rabbi Jonathon Hausman
http://www.jstreetjive.com/2009/12/and-now-for-something-completely.html
Do you know who Z Street are? They are a group of fanatical right wing zionists who created Z Street, to fight J Street, J Street is pro Obama, and supported him, they formed J Street to break the Lobby strangehold, rabbi hausman is probably a member of this Z Street.
http://www.jstreet.org/
J Street, they have to battle these forces of right wing Zionism evil too, politically for Middle East peace, and they made many enemies, the same enemie we are facing, Kach, Kahane, Likud, and amazingly they do so in America, not in israel.
Why do they not take Wafa Sultan to Israel and give her a house in tel aviv? why doesn’t she go to israel to promote her book, why in america? her only fans are likuds agents like the rabbi, and zionists enemies which we dont need here.
December 9th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Why bother LW? She’s not going to reply. Hiding themselves behind the overused cliche “we are being silenced” is going to be their next and every move. Exposing them is the only thing we can do. The human mind is very stubborn though. The loons can’t bear to distance themselves away from their clan. These people are one group bent on destroying 1.4 billion people. Women lie, men lie, but numbers don’t.
December 9th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Shorter Islamaphobe: Gosh, Islam is so evil and violent. We should respond by bombing them into oblivion. Those violent bastards are asking for it.
December 10th, 2009 at 12:48 am
haha she’s an attention whore who is starving for cash. She doesn’t have the courage to answer your questions. That’s how loud-mouthed cowards are.
P.S. Robert Spencer needs to be subjected to draconian treadmill usage of 8 hours a day.
December 10th, 2009 at 7:47 am
Dr.Wafa Sultan has caused you grievous wounds which you are shamelessly licking and for which you have no defense.Is it a crime to speak the truth?Mustafa Kemal Ata Turk called Islam as the ABSURD THEOLOGY OF AN IMMORAL BEDUINE.He was referring to your so called holy prophet,who left no sin un-committed.Read Holy Terror by Amir Taheri page 187.Mutafa Kemal was also a Muslim,but an honest one,which is a rare quality in a Muslim.I will wait for your response.
December 10th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Nice try “lawrence.” Sultan does nothing to us, she is the one that must answer these questions. Don’t try to change the subject.
By the way you support a person who advocates nuking countries to change them. Congrats.
December 10th, 2009 at 11:08 am
lawerence, you little Islamophobic fascist, Amir Taheri is a proven liar and propagandist. Taheri used nonexistent sources and made up facts in sources that did exist in his book “Nest of Spies”. Read the details in the following Nation piece:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060703/cohleresses
“It was in 1989 that Taheri was first exposed as a journalistic felon. The book he published the year before, Nest of Spies, examined the rule and fall of the Shah of Iran. Taheri received many respectful reviews, but in The New Republic Shaul Bakhash, a reigning doyen of Persian studies, checked Taheri’s footnotes. Suddenly a book review became an investigative exposé. Bakhash, a history professor at George Mason University and a former fellow at Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study, detailed case after case in which Taheri cited nonexistent sources, concocted nonexistent substance in cases where the sources existed and distorted the substance beyond recognition when it was present. Taheri “repeatedly refers us to books where the information he cites simply does not exist,” Bakhash wrote. “Often the documents cannot be found in the volumes to which he attributes them…. [He] repeatedly reads things into the documents that are simply not there.” In one case, noted Bakhash, Taheri cited an earlier article of his own–but offered content he himself never wrote in that article. Bakhash concluded that Nest of Spies was “the sort of book that gives contemporary history a bad name.” In a response published two months later, Taheri failed to rebut Bakhash’s charges.”
This is your hero? LMAO!
December 10th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
What a surprise. Another morally bankrupt islamophobe claiming “haha, you can’t answer her charges” – with complete disregard for the fact that she just called for NUKING MUSLIM COUNTRIES. What a vile person.
December 10th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Laurence
“Mustafa Kemal Ata Turk called Islam as the ABSURD THEOLOGY OF AN IMMORAL BEDUINE.He was referring to your so called holy prophet,who left no sin un-committed.Read Holy Terror by Amir Taheri page 187.Mutafa Kemal was also a Muslim,but an honest one,which is a rare quality in a Muslim.I will wait for your response.”
Sorry, Garibadli, I can’t let this pass
Laurence,
Spinning your Islamophobic lies here eh?
Bedouin culture is not the same as Islam. AtaTurk wanted to separate state from religion, because he thought the ruling sheikhs were ABUSING religious power for personal gain. He wanted Islam to go back to the enlightened age it was previously.
His criticism of beduouin culture, sheikly abuse of power done in the name of religon would be agreed with by many Musims, including Arabs themselves.
Before abolishing the Caliphate, On 1 March 1924, at the Assembly, Mustafa Kemal said
“The religion of Islam will be elevated if it will cease to be a political instrument, as had been the case in the past.”[24]
—Mustafa Kemal
Mango, Atatürk, 404
Atatürk and Islam.
http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0083
The depth of Atatürk’s religious conviction is still unclear; what is certain is that his drive toward secularism (called lâyiklik or lâiklik, a Turkish adaptation of the French word laïcisme) in Turkey was not conceived as an attack on Islam, which he considered the most rational, natural, and therefore final religion. He believed the decay of the Muslim world and its falling under oppression to be the fault of Muslims, dominated by their own wrong thinking. His idealist philosophy ascribed this to Muslims’ historical retreat from rationalism to implicit acceptance, rendering themselves submissive and defenseless. He argued that the weight of rigid orthodoxy that had turned Islam from a reasoned belief to blind faith must be lifted from society, not only so that Muslims might advance but for Islam itself, which needed to be cleansed of irrational and inflexible accretions. Then, too, since Islam is essentially a rational religion in which knowledge preponderates, individuals might reach the divine by using their intellect. Atatürk’s persistent attempts to have the Qurʿān and the language of worship rendered into an authorized Turkish version for general use were thus aimed at religious enlightenment. He wanted for Turkey a secular society of Muslims wherein the maintenance and advancement of Islam would rest upon the voluntary adherence of individual believers: nonreligious government for the religious rather than religious government, in what would inevitably be a secular state.
————
Now how does all that tie in with what Wafa Sultan Stalin? Kamal Ataturk didn’t want the genocide of Muslims or the Quran banned, he though Islam would be elevated, if Muslims didn’t have the shackles of Sheiks, Dervishes, and self styled holy men impending progress. He didn’t see Islam as the problem, he saw how men were abusing it as the problem, that’s why he wanted a separatation of state and religion.
Now you are comparing a head of state to a woman who is not a Muslim being paid by far right Zionists, to lie for a cause (lIKUDISM) that the USA does nto support?
These groups are fifth columns in the USA, she doesn’t speak for the USA she speaks for the likes of Rabbi Hausman, in front of about 100 people?
Is that what Ataturk was doing? How can you compare the two?
December 10th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Laurence, Amir Taheri is a proven liar, and is a stooge of the neo cons in America. Your comment is a lie because Ataturk said no such thing. Either you or Taheri are lying.
Read the Guardian article where Taheri is caught lying about Jews beign forced to wear yellow in Iran. The story was proven false.
To everyone else, please read the article below by Brian Whittaker. He reports on these so called “Muslim reformists”. Apparently, the likes of Wafa Sultan, Shoebat, Ayan Hirsi, Brigette Gabriel are paid about £4000 per speech.
One of the commentators below the article said, I would lie and fabricate if i were paid to do so. To pretend to be an exMuslim to slur Muslims.
This was during Bush’s time, their influence is drying up now. Brigette Gabriael lied about being paid by by Israel Hasbara, something that she denied, but sourcewatch revealed.
It is no wonder, that towards the end of the Bush era and before Obama was elected, a lot of Americans were turning to the British media, so much so that the mainstream British online dailies were changing their advertising habits to accomodate this. Apparently it took a while for Americans to realise they were being lied to by the neo con controlled media.
Anyway, here is the article, read it, it’s illuminating, and shows why Wafa Sultan and her ilk are ready to peddle garbage. It’s not a lot, but for these hungry losers, who are usually ill educated it’s too much to resist.
——————————————–
False prophetsThe US loves listening to its Arab/Muslim ‘reformers’. And they love telling the US just what it wants to hear.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jun/05/nativemisinformants
For a long time now, I have been meaning to take a cool, reflective look at Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Irshad Manji. The ordeal of keeping calm long enough to write about them and avoiding serious damage to my blood pressure at the same time was mainly what prevented me.
Now, thankfully, someone else has done the job. There’s a long essay about them in The Nation magazine and, considering the subject, its restrained tone is admirable.
Hirsi Ali and Manji (“the Muslim refusenik”) are the most prominent among several “reformers” of Arab or Muslim origin lionised by the American media and in Britain by the likes of Melanie Phillips.
Editors and TV producers love ‘em. Their strident views make for entertaining television and, of course, the things they say are generally what the US public wants to hear. The trouble is, their approach is so simplistic and confrontational and so insensitive towards the culture they are trying to change that it does more harm than good. Among ordinary Muslims – the people they are supposedly seeking to help – their credibility is virtually zero.
In the academic world, people like Hirsi Ali and Manji are known as “native informants”, though Issandr el-Amrani of the Arabist blog has another term for them: “courageous reformist Arab personalities (CRAP).
Being a CRAP is quite lucrative – Manji reportedly charges $7,500 (£4,000)an hour for giving a talk. If you fancy joining them, there’s a bit of advice here on how to do it. From a media point of view, it helps if you’re a woman. And the latest female addition to the CRAP stable is Wafa Sultan, an ex-Syrian who shot to prominence as a result of some shrill remarks on al-Jazeera television that were then brought to an American audience via Memri.
It is the male native misinformants, however, whose advice is more often listened to by the Bush administration. Prominent among these are Fuad Ajami (an associate of Bernard Lewis, the neocons’ favourite historian) and Iranian-born Amir Taheri. Last month Mr Taheri wrote an article saying the parliament in Tehran had passed a law that would require Christians, Jews and other religious minorities to wear distinctive clothing: “Jews would be marked out with a yellow strip of cloth sewn in front of their clothes while Christians will be assigned the colour red.”
This, echoing the practices of Nazi Germany, was a classic piece of anti-Iranian propaganda – and sections of the media readily lapped it up. Unfortunately for them, the story was wrong.
Unfazed by that, less than a fortnight later, Taheri and Ajami trotted along to the White House to give President Bush their views on Iraq. White House spokesman Tony Snow described their meeting at a press conference:
read more here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jun/05/nativemisinformants
December 10th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Ataturk publicly state that:
“There is no God! These are only the chains by which the priests and bad rulers bound the people down. A ruler who needs religion is a weaklings. No weaklings should rule!”
So I think it’s pretty easy to deduce what he thought of islam, oh and what’s your email address? I have my reply to you all ready to be sent.
December 11th, 2009 at 3:30 am
“So I think it’s pretty easy to deduce what he thought of islam, oh and what’s your email address? I have my reply to you all ready to be sent.”
Cassidy/Barry,
3 things:-
1. Whether Ataturk believed in God or not has nothing to do with what he meant about Dervish’s and sheik’s abusing power. Don’t twist the meaning of what he said, if you’re not aware of what was happening at that time. He was right when he said rulers and sheikhs at that time were misusing religion to rule. And can’t you read? Even the quote you brought doesn’t make any statement about Islam. Did he call for Islam and the Quran to be banned or Muslims to be nuked? That was what Laurence was implying by comparing Wafa Sultan to Ataturk.
As for Ataturks’s personal beliefs, that is his own business. That wasn’t the point here was it? We responded to “Laurence’s” fabricated quote about Ataturk and how he linked it to Wafa Sultan, but you once again totally ignored what the thread was about, (Wafa Sultan ‘s speech). Ataturks views on God are not the subject for debate. He has a right to be an atheist if he wanted, but he didn’t stop others practicing their faith. Maybe you’re not aware but in Islam there is no papal priesthood or figurehead. Everybody has a relation with God direct, no third party is necessary.
Don’t twist Ataturk’s words to suit your own agenda, like Laurence was doing.
2. Anything you have to say can be said here, i’m not giving you my email, for all I know you could be harvesting IP addresses for one of the “loons” here, like Spencer or Geller. I’m not saying you are, but if you want to initiate discussions maybe you should join a forum instead of posting here. This is a commentary on articles, not a forum.
3. I’ve wondered why you post here? From what i’ve seen of your posts, I think you’re just here to divert commentary from the news articles and make the comments frivolous and off topic. Flaming wars are turn off’s for serious readers. I suspect you’re a plant posted here to make this website boring for readers, kind of “upmarket saboteur” because someone too obvious will be banned.
If i’m wrong, forgive me. You don’t have to reply to this, and no offence intended:)
December 11th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
“Don’t twist the meaning of what he said, if you’re not aware of what was happening at that time.”
How did I twist it? I just posted what he said, the man clearly did not believe in god.
“He was right when he said rulers and sheikhs at that time were misusing religion to rule.”
Which is what happens when religion and politics mix.
“Did he call for Islam and the Quran to be banned or Muslims to be nuked? That was what Laurence was implying by comparing Wafa Sultan to Ataturk.”
I’m not trying to support Laurence or Wafa I was trying to point out that Ataturk was not a muslim.
“And can’t you read? Even the quote you brought doesn’t make any statement about Islam.”
Ataturk clearly stated that he doesn’t believe in a god so how can you claim he was a muslim?
” Anything you have to say can be said here, i’m not giving you my email, for all I know you could be harvesting IP addresses for one of the “loons” here, like Spencer or Geller.”
That’s got to one of the most far fetched things I’ve read in the comments of this site, I just wanted to email you my reply to your last comment on that thread, I would have posted it but Danios wanted our discussion to end but if you don’t want to debate I have no problem with that.
“I’ve wondered why you post here?”
Why do YOU post here?
“From what i’ve seen of your posts, I think you’re just here to divert commentary from the news articles and make the comments frivolous and off topic.”
Well at least you don’t think I’m a undercover mossad agent like other posters here.
December 12th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
“I’m not trying to support Laurence or Wafa I was trying to point out that Ataturk was not a muslim.”
Why was that important? The subject wasn’t Ataturks religons, and anyway, it isn’t a given he was an atheist, some say he was some say he wasn’t. But that’s irrelevant. He wanted to separate the rulers from religion, he did however let all religions be practiced freely. He just didn’t want religon to be used as a tool to acheive political aims or to be abused.
“I would have posted it but Danios wanted our discussion to end but if you don’t want to debate I have no problem with that.”
If you kept to the subject nobody would need to ask you to end the discussion. You don’t. You pick off things you don’t like in threads and start a new topic about them. That is selfish of you. This is not a forum, where you can post what you want and expect responses, if you’re not a sabatoer then you’re misusing the commenting board . If you have stuff to say, or want to raise discussions, go and join a forum. There are plenty of Islamic forums on the internet.
“Why do YOU post here?”
I wasn’t going to answer your post, as I feel you have a lot of time to waste. I’m only responding because of this gem of a question. I mean, are you totally stupid or what? I POST HERE TO HELP COMBAT ISLAMOPHOBIA. That is the mission statement of this website. Isn’t it obvious?
I have twice asked you, and you havn’t answered, why YOU post here, so i’m obliged to say, if you have time to waste go and do it elsewhere. Don’t start off subject topics here, because it will lower the quality of the site. People come here, to read a thread about a particular Islamoophobic person or topic, and to find information on what to do to combat and fight it.
If you can’t help readers or don’t want to, then at least don’t be a hindrance and nusisance. I’ll end this exchange by saying, since you refuse to say why you post here, don’t be offended if I conclude that you’re up to no good here.
December 27th, 2009 at 2:35 am
It is time to face the truth about the fascist nature of Islam,rather than the sloagans of Islamophobia.The fear about Islam is real and to ignore it is suicidal.It was started with the sword.it was spread with the sword and it will die with the sword.Probably with NUKES as Wafa Sultan has predicted.The days of Islam and Muslims are numbered and that is the writing on the wall.
December 27th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Milad, read the 10 books below, it’s obvious you’ve never studied even basic history.
“The fear about Islam is real and to ignore it is suicidal.It was started with the sword.it was spread with the sword and it will die with the sword.”
Islam was not spread by the sword, (see references below) and Islam will never die. It goes from strength to strength. Islam is the fastest growing religion especially in the West, in numbers of converts. Who is spreading by the sword in America? Russia? Europe? Which sword converted the 3 million or so converts in America?
Professor Huston Smith of the MIT in his book, “The Religions of Man” says, “In some areas where Islam and Christianity are competing for converts, Islam is gaining at a rate of 10 to 1.”
———
A. J. Arberry (Aspects of Islamic Civilization,) states:
The rapidity of the spread of Islam, noticeably through extensive provinces which had been long Christian, is a crucial fact of history..
The sublime rhetoric of the Quran, that inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which move men to tears and ecstasy”. (M. Pickhtal, The Meaning of the Glorious Quran, p.vii)
Arberry continues:
This, and the urgency of the simple message carried, holds the key to the mystery of one of the greatest catalysms in the history of religion. When
all military, political and economic factors have been exhausted, the religious impulse must still be recognized as the most vital and enduring.
—–
Historian De Lacy O’Leary in the book “Islam at the crossroad”:
“History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated.”
——
Jostaf Lopond, in his book, The Arabs Civilization, states, ‘ Force was never a factor in the spread of the Glorious Quran. In fact, Arabs left the freedom of choice to the people they overcome and conquered. Some of the Christians, who converted to Islam and took the Arabic language as a medium of communication, were merely impressed with the Arabs conquerors’ justice. Such people never noticed any such astounding justice from their previous masters. Secondly, such converts noticed a great ease in dealing with the Islamic life, faith and principles.’ (Ibid, page 314).
——–
Rosenthal makes his point as follows:
The more important factor for the spread of Islam is religious law of Islam (Sharia which is an inclusive, all-embracing, all-comprehensive way of thinking and living) which was designed to cover all manifestations of life. (Political Thought in Medieval Islam, p.21)
——————–
Thomas Carlyle, in his book “Heroes and Hero worship”, –:
“The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one, in one man’s head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it; there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and tries to propagate with that, will do little for him. You must get your sword! On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can.’
————–
Brockelman, who is usually very unsympathetic and partial, also recognizes the religious values of Islam as the main factor for the spread of Islam.
(History of the Islamic Peoples, p.37)
———
Ira Zepp Jr.,
‘ The historical reality is that the expansion of Islam was usually by persuasion and not by military power. In any case, Islam cannot be forced on anyone; if profession of the shahadah [i.e. the declaration of Islam] is forced on someone, it is not true Islam.
References
[1] De Lacy O’Leary, Islam at the Crossroads (London, 1923), p. 8
[2] A. S. Tritton, Islam (1951)
[3] Thomas Carlyle, Heroes and Hero Worship
[4] Thomas W. Arnold, The Call to Islam
[5] Huston Smith, The Religions of Man (1983)
[6] Dr William Baker, More in Common Than You Think: The Bridge between
Islam and Christianity, (1998) Defenders Publications
[7] John McManners (Ed.), The Oxford Illustrated History of Christianity,
Oxford University Press, 1992, p. 174
[8] Ira Zepp Jr., A Muslim Primer (1992), Wakefield Editions, US, p. 134
[9] Norman A. Daniel, Islam and the West: The Making of an Image, p. 270
[10] Washington W. Irving, Tales Of The Alhambra, p. 52
December 28th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Well lookie, we have a new member! Milad, the Islamophobe!
“It is time to face the truth about the fascist nature of Islam,rather than the sloagans of Islamophobia.”
There is no facism about Islam and Milad we will indeed not waste any opportunity to expose the truth about the slogans of Islamophobia. Let the truth be told, and people can make up their own minds, they either choose truth or lies.
“Probably with NUKES as Wafa Sultan has predicted”
Wafa Sultan’s predictions are worth less than your droppings, she is paid to give speeches by the crazy far right, in this case the cowardly Rabbi Hausman, a settler and Likud supporter. They have to keep up the myth of the threat of Islam.
“The days of Islam and Muslims are numbered and that is the writing on the wall”
Dream on, you’re not the first, nor will you be the the last..we were warned about your sort, and also what would happen to them…History records what happens to our enemies.
————–
The Challenge of Islam
Mordechai Nisan
http://www.acpr.org.il/ENGLISH-NATIV/02-issue/nisan-2.htm
But perhaps the central lesson of Islamic history is that even when the
Muslims lose, they are really not defeated. The Crusader interlude in the
Holy Land, that began in 1099 and finally ended in 1291, left no impression on Muslim social, political, let alone religious or cultural life. In the modern period, following the termination of European imperialism and colonialism in the Muslim Arab lands of the region, one could not identify any major foreign Western impact on the deeper recesses of Muslim thought and belief, or in the arenas of politics and ideology. Christianity made hardly a mental dent at all, and secularism was rebuffed by the spiritual sturdiness of Islam.
———–
Milad, we’ll defeat our enemies, don’t worry. They always fall. As for nukes, well what would that achieve? the power of Islam is in the Quran, the Quran would live, even if many Muslims die, but remember usking nukes would mean the end of whomever tried that. The world cannot function when the oil countries and mineral nations are nuked. Islam would not die even then, so what would you acheive other than your own guarenteed destruction?
Maybe you should remember Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson’s words:-
“People who worry that nuclear weaponry will one day fall in the hands of the Arabs, fail to realize that the Islamic bomb has been dropped already. It fell the day MUHAMMAD was born.”
- Joseph Adam Pearson (President, CEBI Christ Evangelical Bible Institute)
Perhap’s that’s why God put all the oil under the feet of your enemies huh? as a kind of insurance, that if nuked, then world comes down with us.
One positive outcome, would be that for once the entire Ummah would unite against a common enemy. Now that would a formidable force for you. If you think you have enemies now, that would be kid’s play.
“It was started with the sword.it was spread with the sword and it will die with the sword.”
Those are lies, by those envious of Islam’s attractive creed. Islam’s rapid expansion, unequaled by any other religion, was due to its religious content and values. The Quran forbids forced conversions anyway. If converts are not sincere, they are rejected, conversion has to be sincere, not for a reward.
(Al-Baqarah: 256)”
“Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error; Whoever rejects Evil and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handhold, that never breaks. And God hears and knows all things.”
[Al-Qur’an:16:125]
“Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious.”
Indonesia is a country that has the maximum number of Muslims in the world. The majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. May one ask, “Which Muslim army went to Indonesia and Malaysia?”
Similarly, Islam has spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. One may again ask, if Islam was spread by the sword, “Which Muslim army went to the East Coast of Africa.”
It is also interesting to note that when the Mongols invaded and conquered large portions of the Islamic Empire, instead of destroying the religion, they adopted it. This is a unique occurrence in history – the conquerors adopting the religion of the conquered!
What were saying about the sword?
January 1st, 2010 at 8:05 am
Nabeela,The muslims MIGHT have a few qualities but HONESTY is not one of them.Did the Muslim invading armies used Quranic verses to conquer Palestine,Syria,Egypt,Persia and Turkey?You certainly are a GOOD MUSLIM!!!As far as the MONGOLS are concerned,who conquered Iraq,they became Muslims because the found hardly any difference between BARBAIC ISLAM and their BARBARIC CULTURE.Both are similar in Nature and Character.Birds of a feather flock togather.Once you are infected with the virus of Islam,y he result is Moral,Intellectual and Spiritual Death,
January 1st, 2010 at 6:42 pm
Um, yeah sure Milad. Please advocate genocide then try to paint Muslims as the barbaric ones.
We are 1/4 of the planet. Good fricking luck mate.
There is no point trying to educate someone so hate filled and clearly moronic.
January 1st, 2010 at 7:15 pm
Milad
LOL, is this the best you can do? When all your points are debunked you dont acknowledge you were wrong, but hide behind another Islamophobic myth. Not much of a man are you?
The Mongols hated Islam and the Caliphate, that’s why they attacked the Caliphate. They HATED and yet after a century they’d all converted that shows you the superiority of the faith.. It was the only time in history conquerors took the faith of the conquered, It was one of the prophecies foretold by The Prophet, and it was how Islam reached central Asia and Russia. They were tools in God’s hand.
Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6960:
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: You shall fight in the hours to come against a nation wearing shoes made of hair and faces like hammered shields, with red complexion and small eyes.
Much like in the US, of the many converts in the US, a lot were ex islamophobes. So how do you explain why when we took the Quran to China, nearly all the Jews there became Muslim, though the target were the pagan Chinese? A lot of the 50million Muslims in China had jewish ancestry, and others converted.
Your statement infers that americans are attracted to a fascism? why are so many converting to islam? You just shot yourself in the foot.
January 2nd, 2010 at 5:53 am
Nissa, I wonder if Islamophobes such as Milad have thought of the possibility that some people reading their rhetoric may recoil in the opposite direction – “better dhimmi than génocidaire”?
That’s how I now react in my gut to rhetoric advocating extermination of all Muslims…
January 3rd, 2010 at 2:01 am
Nissa,We are 1/4 of the planet,you claim.How very SAD!!How this planet earth managed to contain so many ignorant souls.Good fricking luck!!If you are a woman,you sound like a STREET WOMAN.There seems to be something wrong with your upbringing.Do you know your fathers name?You are so VULGAR!!.
January 3rd, 2010 at 8:37 am
@Milad
Again your hypocrisy goes right over your head- calling someone else vulgar whilst accusing them of being a prostitute and calling them a bastard really just shows how stupid you are.
The only thing wrong with my upbringing is that I am too polite…now run along and go get hit by a bus.