Robert Spencer

|

Pamela Geller

|

Bat Ye'or

|

Brigitte Gabriel

|

Daniel Pipes

|

Debbie Schlussel

|

Walid Shoebat

|

Joe Kaufman

|

Wafa Sultan

|

Geert Wilders

|

The Nuclear Card

Archive | May, 2011

Katya Koren: Ukrainian Beauty Queen Killed by Disturbed Classmate not Sharia’ Law

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Katya Koren: Ukrainian Beauty Queen Killed by Disturbed Classmate not Sharia’ Law

Posted on 31 May 2011 by Mooneye

Muslim beauty queen Katya Koren was brutally murdered by a classmate who was obsessed with her, according to police in the Ukraine. Not only was the classmate, Bihal Gaziev, a mentally unstable individual, according to reports he had also developed a deeply “unhealthy” and “unrequited obsession” with Koren.

According to some reports after being arrested, Bihal said he had no regrets because he had fulfilled “Sharia’” –obviously a cynical ploy to deflect from his atrocious and sick actions. Is it Sharia’ to rape, beat with a rock, kill and then dump the body as was done in this case? The answer of course is an unequivocal “no.”

This has not stopped some in the media as well as the Islamophobesphere from going buck-wild and attempting to link this murder with Islam. It is similar in some ways to the allegations of the “Mass Gaza pedophilia wedding,” which turned out to be false.

A closer analogy may be the case of a Christian, named John Thomas, who stoned a gay man, Murray Seidman, to death in Philadelphia and claimed to have done it in the name of the Holy Bible. It was reported at the time that Thomas had personal interests and perhaps even a homosexual relationship with Seidman, these points were made quite clear in the mainstream media, with the AP even going as far as to cite Biblical scholars defending the Bible.

At the time we asked the simple question, “What would happen if John Thomas were Muslim?” and tried to excuse his actions by saying he did it in the name of “Islam” or “Sharia?”

The question is rhetorical, and the tragic death of Koren at the hands of the crazy Bihal further highlights how right we were in asking the question. The double standard is evident.

Robert Spencer wasted no time in blaming Islam writing,

The fact that this was an extrajudicial killing doesn’t let Sharia off the hook.

While wacky Pamela Geller wrote,

And when they come for the feminists, their daughters and their sisters — we will respond in kind. Their silence on the oppression, brutality and subjugation of women  in Islam makes them as guilty as the murderers. Their silence is their sanction.

These quotes are just an example of two of the most prolific Islamophobes, one only has to google search to see the plethora of hate sites and even mainstream media that are taking the line that Islam is or may be to blame.

From the Telegraph, a right-wing UK newspaper:

Muslim teenage beauty queen ‘stoned to death’

by Andrew Osborn

There were conflicting reports of how and why she was murdered. Some local newspapers claimed she had been stoned to death by hardline Muslims upset by her participation in the beauty contest and that police had three suspects in their sights.

But the police said her killing had nothing to do with sectarian violence and that the girl had been killed by a psychologically troubled classmate who had given her a lift on his moped and then robbed and possibly raped her before battering her to death with a rock.

“A student did it, killing his classmate. There is no other underlying reason, neither religious nor linked with inter-ethnic conflicts,” said Sergei Reznikov, a senior policeman involved in the case.

The area is home to more than 250,000 Muslim Crimean Tatars, and although there has been mob violence in the past sparked by perceived historical injustices, cases of Sharia punishment being meted out by stoning are unheard of.

Police said the main suspect, 16-year-old Bihal Gaziev, had a long history of mental health problems and was already in custody. He is understood to have confessed amid reports from his village suggesting he had developed an unhealthy and unrequited obsession with Miss Koren.

Some local media quoted him saying that he killed her to enforce Sharia law and had no regrets, while others said he had confessed to the killing but had been unable to explain his motives. He is now undergoing a series of tests to see whether he is of sound mind or not.

Update (hat tip:BBoyBlue). May be more to the story than we knew:

Surprisingly balanced (by their standards) reporting from the right wing Daily Mail. The comments however are as hateful and ignorant as usual.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1392454/Muslim-girl-Katya-Koren-19-stoned-death-beauty-contest-Ukraine.html

This comment is interesting though.

THE KEY FACTS: 1. Katya is an Orthodox Christian. 2. Bilyal is formally Muslim, just adopted by Muslim man 3. Bilyal is not religious, like his father, even didn’t go to mosque. 4. Murder is not done by stoning. 5. Internal Affairs Dep. announced that murder has no religious roots. 6. Such a news first appeared in pro-Russian media.
- Asan, Crimea, 31/5/2011 16:11

Comments (34)

lmladicfuma

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Pamela Geller Watch: Serbian War Criminal Mladic Caught – Pamela Geller Inconsolable

Posted on 31 May 2011 by Emperor

How do we know that Geller wants Muslims dead? She grieves when genocidal war criminals are caught.

Serbian War Criminal Mladic Caught – Pamela Geller Inconsolable

by Charles Johnson (Little Green Footballs)

War criminal Ratko Mladic was arrested yesterday in Serbia, where he was hiding from justice under an assumed name. Time’s Mark Benjamin has this excerpt from Mladic’s indictment, with horrifying details of his massacre of thousands of Muslim prisoners.

Between 12 July and about 20 July 1995, thousands of Bosnian Muslim men were captured by, or surrendered to, Bosnian Serb Forces under the command and control of General Ratko MLADIC. Over 7,000 Bosnian Muslim prisoners captured in the area around Srebrenica were summarily executed from 13 July to 19 July 1995. Killings continued thereafter. From about 1 August 1995 through about 1 November 1995, VRS units under the command and control of General Ratko MLADIC participated in an organised and comprehensive effort to conceal the killings and executions of the Bosnian Muslims of Srebrenica by reburying, in isolated locations, bodies exhumed from mass graves.

“The Serbs dared to fight.”It’s important to note that one of the most relentless whitewashers of Mladic’s monstrous crimes is none other than anti-Muslim lunatic Pamela Geller, and the reason is obvious: Mladic slaughtered Muslims, and that makes him an ally of Geller, Robert Spencer, and the rest of their thuggish crowd.

In her usual weasely fashion, Geller tries to have it both ways; she cheers on Mladic for “daring to fight,” but at the same time posts numerous articles at her website denying the genocide at Srebrenica as “a lie.” For example:

CANADIAN PM STEVEN HARPER, LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD, VETOES BOSNIAN LIE RESOLUTION
ISLAMIC BOSNIA: “IT BEGAN WITH A LIE”

It’s easy to make fun of Pamela Geller, because she’s so completely deranged. But there’s absolutely nothing funny about her support for war criminals and mass murderers, or her denial of genocide.

And she continues to defend this butcher, even today: JULIA GORIN: “ROASTING MLADIC”.

Instead of admitting their terrible mistake, the dhimmi Western powers are digging in their heels and further prosecuting the Serbs in their sisyphean and thankless efforts to stop Islamic imperialism.

Look, there are no heroes in the Bosnian conflict, but the Muslim atrocities were far worse. The Serbs dared to fight. That’s what this is all about. As Gorin so succinctly put it, “They are guilty of ….. daring to answer war with war.” The question is, why would the Western powers send in troops and pave the way for a militant Islamic state in the heart of Europe? The catastrophic consequences have not yet manifested themselves, but they will impact the geopolitical landscape in what promises to be a bloody 21st century.

Just disgusting.

Comments (47)

Conyers-without-a-license-thumb-400xauto-13254

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Detroit Reps. Conyers, Clarke call on federal government to counter anti-Muslim sentiment

Posted on 31 May 2011 by Emperor

A move from rep. Conyers and Clarke to combat anti-Muslim hate.

Detroit Reps. Conyers, Clarke call on federal government to counter anti-Muslim sentiment

By Jonathan Oosting | MLive.com

U.S. Reps. John Conyers and Hansen Clarke want the federal government to take an active role in countering anti-Muslim sentiment in the United States.

In a House resolution introduced last week, the Detroit Democrats urged federal investigators to avoid unconstitutional profiling and called for the government to target rhetorical attacks and violence against Muslim, Arab, Sikh and South Asian American communities.

“Communities should be protected from the threat of violence and suspicion that, for example, was at the heart of last January’s thwarted attack against the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn,” Conyers and Clarke said in a joint statement. “They should also be able to rely on law enforcement’s fundamental integrity and respect for First Amendments protected rights.

“Ultimately, the American Muslim community should be able to rely on the federal government to lead the effort in fostering an open climate of understanding and cooperation. Only through a balanced examination of the challenges facing the nation will we establish a strong policy framework for protecting security, while respecting the Constitution and the interests of affected communities.”

The resolution comes in the wake of complaints from several Metro Detroit Muslim Americans who say they were harassed, searched, groped or jailed without reason when crossing into Michigan from Canada.

The complaints prompted a probe by the Department of Homeland Security’s office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, while last week’s resolution was sent to the House Judiciary Committee, which Conyers chairs, for review.

Comments (3)

091023_ailes_roger_223_regular-1

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

How Roger Ailes Built the Fox News Fear Factory

Posted on 31 May 2011 by Emperor

via. Islamophobia Today

The onetime Nixon operative has created the most profitable propaganda machine in history. Inside America’s Unfair and Imbalanced Network

By TIM DICKINSON MAY 25, 2011 8:00 AM ET

At the Fox News holiday party the year the network overtook archrival CNN in the cable ratings, tipsy employees were herded down to the basement of a Midtown bar in New York. As they gathered around a television mounted high on the wall, an image flashed to life, glowing bright in the darkened tavern: the MSNBC logo. A chorus of boos erupted among the Fox faithful. The CNN logo followed, and the catcalls multiplied. Then a third slide appeared, with a telling twist. In place of the logo for Fox News was a beneficent visage: the face of the network’s founder. The man known to his fiercest loyalists simply as “the Chairman” – Roger Ailes.

“It was as though we were looking at Mao,” recalls Charlie Reina, a former Fox News producer. The Foxistas went wild. They let the dogs out. Woof! Woof! Woof! Even those who disliked the way Ailes runs his network joined in the display of fealty, given the culture of intimidation at Fox News. “It’s like the Soviet Union or China: People are always looking over their shoulders,” says a former executive with the network’s parent, News Corp. “There are people who turn people in.”

This article appears in the June 9, 2011 issue of Rolling Stone. The issue will be available on newsstands and in the online archive May 27.

The key to decoding Fox News isn’t Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity. It isn’t even News Corp. chief Rupert Murdoch. To understand what drives Fox News, and what its true purpose is, you must first understand Chairman Ailes. “He is Fox News,” says Jane Hall, a decade-long Fox commentator who defected over Ailes’ embrace of the fear-mongering Glenn Beck. “It’s his vision. It’s a reflection of him.”

Photo Gallery: Roger Ailes, GOP Mastermind

Ailes runs the most profitable – and therefore least accountable – head of the News Corp. hydra. Fox News reaped an estimated profit of $816 million last year – nearly a fifth of Murdoch’s global haul. The cable channel’s earnings rivaled those of News Corp.’s entire film division, which includes 20th Century Fox, and helped offset a slump at Murdoch’s beloved newspapers unit, which took a $3 billion write-down after acquiring The Wall Street Journal. With its bare-bones news gathering operation – Fox News has one-third the staff and 30 fewer bureaus than CNN – Ailes generates profit margins above 50 percent. Nearly half comes from advertising, and the rest is dues from cable companies. Fox News now reaches 100 million households, attracting more viewers than all other cable-news outlets combined, and Ailes aims for his network to “throw off a billion in profits.”

Slideshow: An hour-by-hour look at how Fox disguises GOP talking points as journalism

The outsize success of Fox News gives Ailes a free hand to shape the network in his own image. “Murdoch has almost no involvement with it at all,” says Michael Wolff, who spent nine months embedded at News Corp. researching a biography of the Australian media giant. “People are afraid of Roger. Murdoch is, himself, afraid of Roger. He has amassed enormous power within the company – and within the country – from the success of Fox News.”

Read about the GOP’s dirty war against Obama

Fear, in fact, is precisely what Ailes is selling: His network has relentlessly hyped phantom menaces like the planned “terror mosque” near Ground Zero, inspiring Florida pastor Terry Jones to torch the Koran. Privately, Murdoch is as impressed by Ailes’ business savvy as he is dismissive of his extremist politics. “You know Roger is crazy,” Murdoch recently told a colleague, shaking his head in disbelief. “He really believes that stuff.”

>> Continue reading: How Roger Ailes Built the Fox News Fear Factory

Comments (5)

herman.cain1_ (1)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cain Continues Walk-Back of Muslim Comments

Posted on 30 May 2011 by Amago

Cain continues walk-back of Muslim comments

Denials come days before Cain’s Iowa appearance on arm of Vander Plaats

In less than two weeks, former Godfather’s Pizza chief executive Herman Cain will return to Iowa as a participant in a religious conservative group’s presidential lecture series. For now, however, he is traveling the nation as a GOP presidential candidate and speaking with conservative-friendly media outlets in hopes of lessening the damage his remarks concerning Muslims have caused.

On Tuesday, Cain appeared on out-going Fox News host Glenn Beck’s radio program, and reiterated his belief that earlier comments he had made about Muslims had been “misconstrued.”

“I immediately said, without thinking, ‘No, I would not be comfortable.’ I did not say that I would not have [Muslims] in my cabinet. If you look at my career, I have hired good people regardless of race, religion, sex gender, orientation and this kind of thing.”

When Cain was approached by a Think Progress blogger in Des Moines following a late March Conservative Principles Conference, however, he was very clear.

… Would you be comfortable appointing a Muslim, either in your cabinet or as a federal judge?

Cain: “No, I would not. And here’s why. There is this creeping attempt, there is this attempted to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government. It does not belong in our government. … The question that was asked that ‘raised some questions’ and, as my grandfather said, ‘I does not care, I feel the way I feel.’ … “

The controversy also began in late March with an interview Cain gave to reporter Trevor Persaud of Christianity Today:

… When speaking about your battle with cancer at the Milner church, at one point, you indicate that you were a little uncomfortable when you found out that your surgeon’s name was Abdallah, until you found out he was a Lebanese Christian. So what’s your perspective on the role of Muslims in American society?

The role of Muslims in American society is for them to be allowed to practice their religion freely, which is part of our First Amendment. The role of Muslims in America is not to convert the rest of us to the Muslim religion. That I resent. Because we are a Judeo-Christian nation, from the fact that 85 percent of us are self-described Christians, or evangelicals, or practicing the Jewish faith. Eighty-five percent. One percent of the practicing religious believers in this country are Muslim.

And so I push back and reject them trying to convert the rest of us. And based upon the little knowledge that I have of the Muslim religion, you know, they have an objective to convert all infidels or kill them. Now, I know that there are some peaceful Muslims who don’t go around preaching or practicing that. Well, unfortunately, we can’t sit back and tolerate the radical ones simply because we know that there are some of them who don’t believe in that aspect of the Muslim religion. …

While referring to the “several crises facing this country,” Cain specifically took on what he perceives as a “moral” crisis, saying that such problems would need to “be solved in our families, our communities, and in our various religious institutions.” But then Cain clarified that he didn’t believe all religions had a role to play in combating the moral crisis by noting that “Christians, evangelicals, Jews, believers of all types when it comes to biblically-based religions, are going to have to step up more, and push back more, and not allow our Christian beliefs to be intimidated.”

And, roughly two weeks after speaking with Think Progress and the Christianity Today interview, Cain appeared on Bryan Fischer‘s radio program to further explain and assure the religious conservative talk show host and his audience that he was not afraid of being labeled a bigot for speaking the truth about his feelings regarding Muslims.

“I have been upfront, which ruffles some feathers, but remember, Bryan, being politically correct is not one of my strong points. I come at it straight from the heart and straight from the way I see it. And the comment that I made that became controversial, and that my staff keeps hoping will die, is that I wouldn’t have Muslims in my administration. And it’s real simple: The Constitution does not have room for sharia law. I want people who are going to believe and enforce the Constitution of the United States of America. And so I don’t have time, as President of the United States, to try and screen people based upon their religious beliefs — I really don’t care what your religious believes are, but I do know that most of the people of the Muslim faith, they believe in sharia law. And to introduce that element as part of an administration when we have all of these other issues, I think I have a right to say that I won’t.”

Watch the exchange with Fischer:

Fischer is the director of issue analysis for government and public policy for the controversial and anti-gay religious organization American Family Association, which was one of the key national organizations that bank-rolled the successful effort by Bob Vander Plaats, now heading The Family Leader, to oust three Iowa Supreme Court justices up for retention who took part in a unanimous decision that found a legislative ban on same-sex marriage to be in violation of Iowa’s equal protection clause.

Fischer insinuated on his blog in March that Muslims don’t have First Amendment rights.

When Cain returns to Iowa next month, he — like several other 2012 GOP hopefuls including Michele BachmannTim PawlentyRick Santorum, Ron Paul and, in July, Newt Gingrich — will appear beside Vander Plaats at a speaking event hosted and organized by The Family Leader, which continues to battle against the Iowa Judicial Branch, for a complete ban on all contraceptives and abortion services and for areturn of the unconstitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Cain is scheduled to speak on June 6 at Dordt College in Sioux Center, Pella Christian High School in Pella and the University of Iowa campus in Iowa City.

Comments (23)

OOTD

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Another anti-Islam protest comes to Dearborn

Posted on 30 May 2011 by Amago

Another anti-Islam protest comes to Dearborn

Another protest over what organizers call “radical strains” of Islam is planned on Saturday in front of Dearborn City Hall.

The Order of the Dragon, a pro-Israeli group, is planning the 3 p.m. demonstration to call attention to the “implementation of Sharia” or Islamic law in some court rulings, said Frank Fiorello, the head of the group’s Michigan chapter.

“We have a lot of people worried about Sharia creeping into family court,” said Fiorello, a Marlette resident. “There are 23 different jurisdictions where Sharia is being implemented in family court.” Fiorello did not provide specifics, but said there are recent cases in Ann Arbor District Court.

Other groups participating in the rally include the American Defense League, ACT! For America and David Horowitz’s Freedom Center’s Palestinian Wall of Lies, Fiorello said.

Fiorello, a Detroit native, was scheduled to host controversial Florida Pastor Terry Jones’ protest in Dearborn on April 22 but Fiorello backed off his protest after meeting with Dearborn Mayor John O’Reilly and a member of an interfaith group.

Jones ended up protesting a week later after being ordered by a Dearborn district judge that he would have to post a peace bond if he wanted to protest outside the Islamic Center of America on Good Friday.

Fiorello also said he backed away from Jones after a difference of option about how the protest should be handled. ”We’re not wanting to be involved in shock tactics,” said Fiorello. “That is not our route.”

Jones, meanwhile, has planned to protest against “radical Islam” at the Arab American International Festival in Dearborn next month.

Detroit News, 25 May 2011

Comments (25)

Awfully Dark Before the dawn

Tags: , , , , , ,

Awfully Dark Before the dawn

Posted on 27 May 2011 by Emperor

Leonard Pitts

A great piece from an excellent journalist.

Awfully dark before the dawn

by Leonard Pitts (Miami Herald)

Granted, this would be considered self-evident by most of us, but it has been a matter of great controversy in the Tennessee town of Murfreesboro, where 17 people went to court last year to prevent a group of Muslims from building a mosque. On their own land.

The need to defend this fundamental right was only one of the ordeals visited upon the Muslims of Murfreesboro, who have also faced threats, vandalism and arson. As recently, vividly illustrated inUnwelcome: The Muslims Next Door, a troubling CNN documentary, the antagonists here are a clownish band of bigots scared witless by the prospect that a new mosque will be built in their community by a congregation that has already worshipped in said community for 30 years.

Seriously. You can’t make this stuff up.

The 17 had contended Muslims have no constitutional freedom to worship because Islam is not a religion. So the statement at the top of this column represents not just self-evident truth, but an actual ruling last week by an actual judge in an actual court. Again: seriously. Chancellor Robert Corlew, the aforementioned actual judge, was obliged to verify that Islam — which has survived 14 centuries and claims a billion and a half adherents — is a religion.

As reported in the Daily News Journal of Murfreesboro, in throwing out most of the plaintiffs’ case, Corlew also dismissed claims that “Kevin Fisher, an African-American Christian, would be subject to being a second-class citizen under Sharia law, Lisa Moore would be targeted for death under Sharia law because she’s a Jewish female; Henry Golzynski has been harmed because he lost a son fighting in Fallujah, Iraq, by insurgents pursuing jihad as dictated by Sharia law.”

Maybe you’re tempted to turn away in disgust. Yield not to temptation. We need to see this. This is what it looks like when a country loses its mind.

It looked like this in Germany in 1938 on Kristallnacht, in Rwanda in 1994 when the Hutus savaged the Tutsis, in America in 1942 when the Japanese were herded behind barbed wire.

My point is explicitly not that Muslims face mass vandalism, genocide or internment. Lord only knows what they face. Rather, my point is that the psychological architecture of what happened then is identical to the psychological architecture of Murfreesboro now. Once again, we see people goaded by their own night terrors, hatreds, need for scapegoats, and by the repetitive booming of demagogues, until they go to a place beyond reason.

And in that place inevitably lies a dark night of malice, destruction and awful deeds that seem like good ideas at the time. When it passes, like a fever, we — the doers and those who simply observe — are left shivering in a cold dawn as reason reasserts itself, wondering how barbarism overtook us, what broke loose inside us and vowing that it will never happen again. Never again.

Me, I don’t fear Muslims. I fear Muslim extremists. I fear extremists, period. And that group in Murfreesboro, make no mistake, is extremist.

Against their extremism, I find bitter succor in the inevitability of that cold dawn. Yes, there will come a morning after.

But first we must learn how dark this night will be.

Comments (62)

LW Exclusive: Shocking Video of Geert Wilders Hate Speech on US Soil

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LW Exclusive: Shocking Video of Geert Wilders Hate Speech on US Soil

Posted on 26 May 2011 by Garibaldi

Geert Wilders in Nashville at the Cornerstone Church

The Southern United States and the Midwest have been ravaged by violent forces of nature in the past few weeks; massive flooding has threatened to erase whole communities from Tennessee to Alabama, and over the past few days behemoth-like tornadoes, whipping in fury and frenzy swallowed and spit out whole towns.

The cataclysmic events of the Rapture predicted by Christian radio broadcaster Harold Camping may not have come to pass but these tragedies have altered lives forever, and our thoughts and prayers should be with those affected. I encourage everyone to contribute in whatever way they can to relief and support efforts in those regions.

“Heartland USA” as this region is otherwise known is too often ignored, some forget that beyond the confines of our large urban cities there is a whole other America that is rural, conservative and vibrant.

It is here that another force has taken hold and is setting up the perfect storm of intolerance, bigotry, racism, xenophobia and hatred.

This force is a product of the wedding of Islamophobia across the Atlantic, between right-leaning populist politicians and Christian and Israeli/Jewish Zionists that has led to a feverous increase in anti-Democracy and anti-Muslim activity.

This is the real monster that should worry us, not some eight-headed dragon beast that might emerge from the sea and usher in the Second Coming of Christ.

Extremism on our Shores

On May 12, 2011 in Madison, Tennessee, a suburb of Nashville, Geert Wilders readily accepted an invitation from the Tennessee Freedom Coalition to speak at Cornerstone Church, a mega church with regular attendance exceeding 3,900 weekly. LW received exclusive video from Rob, a fan of LoonWatch who attended the event and taped the speeches of Wilders, Lou Ann Zelenik and Andy Miller. He was so upset by what he saw that he immediately sent us the footage he captured.

Wilders speech was a diatribe against Islam and Muslims in which all the familiar talking points were rehashed but with a little extra venom, undoubtedly playing to the sentiments of the crowd.

LW Exclusive: Shocking Video of Geert Wilders Hate Speech on US Soil Part 1:

Geert Wilders: “Its Islam Stupid (raucous applause). We must stop the Islamization of our countries, more Islam means less freedom”…”And now, now Europe is looking slowly but gradually like Arabia”…”It was the land of our fathers, it is our land now, it is our values, our values are based on Christianity, Judaism and Humanism and not Islam, it is that simple (applause)”…”and I have a message for all those people who want to rob us from our freedoms, and my message is stay in your own country (loud applause)”…”we are not going to allow Islam to steal our country from us (applause)”…”if Jerusalem falls, Athens, Rome, Amsterdam and Nashville will fall therefore my point is we all are Israel (applause)”…”the only place where Christians are safe in the Middle East is that beautiful country called Israel (loud applause)”…”Make no mistake, please make no mistake, Islam is also coming to America, in fact Islam already is in America. America is facing a stealth jihad, the Islamic attempt to introduce Sharia’ law bit by bit”…”what we need my friends, what we need to turn the tide is a spirit of resistance, what we need I repeat it again is a spirit of resistance”…”we must repeat it over and over again, especially to our children, our Western values and culture based on Christianity and Judaism is better and superior to the Islamic culture (applause), and leaders who talk about immigration without mentioning Islam are blind (applause)”…”we must stop the immigration from non-Western countries and we must forbid the construction of new hate palaces called mosques (applause)”…”the press calls it an Arab spring, I call it unfortunately an Arab winter (applause), Islam and freedom, Islam and democracy are incompatible (applause)”…”the so called Prophet Muhammad was a terrorist worse than Bin Laden ever was (applause)”…”neutrality my friends, neutrality in the face of evil is evil itself (applause).”

Why is a mega-church, an institution that professes to follow the teachings of Christ hosting such a hate-mongerer in the heartland of the USA? What is the Tennessee Freedom Coalition and why is it paying an extremist foreign politician who undermines “freedom” to speak at a Church? What are the ramifications for the rest of the West, the USA in particular when such an extremist is given a platform to incite hate?

Cornerstone Church

This mega-church is a bit like a franchise corporation. It has two locations: one in Bowling Green, Kentucky and the other in Madison, Tennessee. It is led by Senior Pastor Maury Davis,

Pastor Maury Davis was arrested at age eighteen for the crime of first-degree murder. Following his trial and conviction, he served eight and one-half years in the Texas Department of Corrections. During his incarceration, Pastor Davis found his Savior in Jesus Christ and led a revival among his fellow prisoners.

Can anyone imagine what would happen if say Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf had a rap sheet similar to Pastor Davis? Pamela Geller would be doing back flips through Manhattan.

Aside from boasting about its large attendance, the Church also has a Starbucks-esque Coffee shop and other amenities for the Faith-full shopper. It successfully marries capitalism and religion and also adds an ultra-extra helping of Nationalism.

When nearing the Church, the first thing one notices is the strikingly gargantuan American flag in front of the Church:

Inside the Church the backdrop is red, white and blue and the colors surround a white modern looking Cross that reminds one more of the lapel pin worn by Captain Kirk on Star Trek than a cross. I guess they really want you to know they are patriots.

The Church’s philosophy is based on a literal belief in the Bible. They are certainly evangelical and reaffirm the theology of the “millennial reign of Christ,” i.e. the Rapture or the-floating-into-the-sky version of the End Times.

They believe that the Bible, “both the Old and New Testaments, are verbally inspired of God and are the revelation of God to man, the infallible, authoritative rule of faith and conduct (2 Timothy 3:15-17; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:21).”

Danios wrote in his “Understanding Jihad” series about how most American Christians believe the above, and it adds further credence to his recent article, “The ‘But that’s just the Old Testament’ Cop-out.”

Tennessee Freedom Coalition

The Tennessee Freedom Coalition, led by Lou Ann Zelenik and Andy Miller is a right-wing organization that can be considered a part of the Tea Party Movement, the base of the GOP. The addition of the TFC to the long list of GOP organizations can be considered one more dark stain in the history of the Tennessee GOP. It was not long ago that their members were making racist remarks about the president:

On top of the racism, homophobia isn’t far behind, the Republican governor of Tennessee has until June 1st to consider an “anti-Gay bill that would prohibit the passage of anti-discrimination laws protecting LGBT individuals.”

Tennessee also happens to be the state where we have seen a rise in hate against Muslims (in fact it is quickly becoming the center of anti-Muslim hate). Courts have been considering whether Islam is a religion, lawmakers are likely to pass a “Ban Sharia’ law” bill inspired by a documented racist and extremist Zionist named David Yerushalmi. It is scene to the Murfreesboro mosque struggle which made headlines this past summer. A year ago Pamela Geller was a headline speaker for the Tennessee Tea Party convention, talk about insane.

For its part the Tennessee Freedom Coalition was passing out this pamphlet at the Church:

How do you promote tolerance by “fighting” a religion? What they really mean to say in light of Wilders speech is, “Promote Religious Tolerance by Working to Stop the Growth of Islam,” which is like saying “promote tolerance by being intolerant.” Obviously this puts Muslims, you know, those who practice Islam in quite the bind.

LW Exclusive: Shocking Video of Geert Wilders Hate Speech on US Soil Part 2:

Conclusion

This is not the first time Geert Wilders has spoken at the pulpit, previously he spoke at Synagogues and at Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller’s SIOA 9/11 hate rally. However his presence amongst 3,000 admiring followers on US soil is not only reprehensible, it is a development that bodes ill for all of us.

It will only increase the radicalization of the anti-Muslim movement which seeks at its fundamental level to curtail freedom of religion and expression, first the rights of Muslims (soft target) and then anyone else they disagree with.

A word must also be said about Wilders obsessive citation of Israel. It is a country which he boasts about visiting over “forty times” and which he cites as a paragon of virtue, freedom, liberty, justice and light. He cites the security of Israel as one of the reasons that the West must fight Islam.

Lets forget the war crimes, human rights violations and apartheid policies in Israel for a second and really look at the hate that is emerging in its name. Individuals and organizations with deep connections to Israel, both network-wise and theologically are calling for the destruction of Islam which they regard as evil incarnate.

Aubrey Chernick (one of the leading funders of Islamophobia), Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, Geert Wilders, David Horowitz, Brigitte Gabriel, Allen West, the BNP, EDL, SIOE, SIOA, BPE, JDL, large numbers of Christian and Jewish Zionists and others believe that as long as you are fervently pro-Israel you can be as anti-Islam/Muslim as you want without suffering any consequences. Such a position at the end of the day only harms Jewish moral interests, and this much has been expressed by brave voices such as Not in Our Name, Jews without Borders, Muzzlewatch, Richard Silverstein, Max Blumenthal, our very own loonwatcher Gefilte, Glenn Greenwald and others.

The spectacle of a racist, anti-Muslim Dutch politician arriving on our shores to warn us about Islam is quite ironic, but what is most disturbing is the reception he received from a large audience of Americans. It may seem far-fetched now but one day Geert Wilders or someone like him (Allen West?) may move on from addressing thousands of Church goers to addressing Congress–the question is will he receive as many applauses as Benjamin Netanyahu?

Comments (113)

We don’t want Muslims in America

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Hate message left on US Muslim family’s car

Posted on 26 May 2011 by Amago

Even though they took the time and effort to write the same message in Arabic, they failed to comprehend what an independent sentence is.

Hate message left on US Muslim family’s car

A hate message was left on the car of a Muslim family while they were inside a business in Redmond, the Washington state chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-WA) said Tuesday.

CAIR-WA said a Muslim mother reported that she found the message, which said, “We don’t [want] Muslims in America” in English and “We don’t want Muslims in our country, go away”, in Arabic, stuck to the family’s vehicle when she returned to it Monday afternoon after visiting a Redmond Starbucks.

“I can’t believe someone could hate me because of my religious beliefs,” the victim told KIRO 7. She asked us not to use her name or show her face.

The Muslim mother, who was with her 9-year-old daughter at the time of the incident, wears an Islamic head scarf.

Earlier this month, CAIR’s Michigan chapter called on state and national law enforcement authorities to investigate an incident in which a vehicle was vandalized and defaced with a racially-derogatory phrase and profanity.

CAIR-WA Executive Director Arsalan Bukhari said a coalition of some 60 interfaith and community leaders recently asked Everett Community College to drop an “Islamophobic” speaker scheduled to appear Thursday as part of an “Islam in America” lecture series.

Bukhari said that a growing number of hate incidents targeting American Muslims, those perceived to be Muslim and Muslim institutions have occurred in the days since the death of Osama bin Laden.

“Some of the issues we see happening are an increase in rhetoric against Muslims and an increase in mainstreaming of anti-Muslim speech,” Bukhari said.

CAIR-WA held a news conference Tuesday afternoon with the Muslim mother and her daughter to talk about the incident.

The victim said she isn’t angry about the note, but she’s shocked that it would happen in a community she’s grown to love. ”We are just regular people, and I hope this person realizes that they can’t make us afraid to go out and live our lives regularly,” she said.

KIRO TV, 24 May 2011

Comments (43)

116950_m

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Quran-shredding event may occur, but officials condemn it

Posted on 26 May 2011 by Amago

We have seen the Qu’ran burnt, put on trial and now about to be shredded. Is it a shock that this is in Allen West’s backyard?

Quran-shredding event may occur, but officials condemn it

By Rebekah Monson, Sun Sentinel

10:53 a.m. EDT, May 25, 2011

Boca Raton officials have condemned a man’s plan to shred a Quran in a downtown park on Memorial Day, but say they cannot stop the event.

“On behalf of the Mayor and City Council and the city administration, we find the prospect of the deliberate desecration of a sacred text to be abhorrently offensive. We request that you not proceed with this act,” Deputy City Manager George Brown wrote Wednesday in a letter to Mark Rowley, who requested a permit to hold the event in Sanborn Square.

City officials determined that the event does not require a permit because it is a free-speech action, Brown wrote. Rowley’s initial request, to burn a Quran in the park, was denied because the city prohibits fires in parks.

Comments (25)

180px-TYT_Logo_2010

Tags: , , , , , , ,

The Young Turks: Breakdown of Netanyahu’s Appearance in US Congress

Posted on 25 May 2011 by Amago

Netanyahu was applauded more than he was able to speak, in fact he was applauded more than any president has ever been.

Breakdown of Netanyahu’s Appearance in US Congress

Cenk Uygur breaks down Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s appearance in the U.S. Congress, Netanyahu’s speech and the reaction from our congress is discussed.

Comments (31)

Bob Dylan turns 70; still hasn’t Recanted Praise for Rabbi Meir Kahane

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Bob Dylan turns 70; still hasn’t Recanted Praise for Rabbi Meir Kahane

Posted on 25 May 2011 by Amago

Bob Dylan, born Robert Allen Zimmerman (Hebrew name Shabtai Zisel ben Avraham) to a Jewish family in Duluth, Minnesota, turned 70 years old yesterday.  His “protest songs” became classic anthems for many in the civil rights movement and beyond.

Songs such as The Times they are a Changin’ and Blowin’ in the Wind are part of our collective memory and have been played endlessly, having influenced mass culture across generations. Dylan’s songs are diverse: some criticize American politics such as With God on Our Side and Masters of War. Other songs deal with the narratives of injustice and racism, such as the one written about Medgar Evers (Only a Pawn in their Game) and Emmett Till (The Death of Emmett Till). Dylan continued delving into these topics well into the 70′s when he wrote the hit song Hurricane for Rubin Carter.

Dylan also saw Martin Luther King, Jr. during the March on Washington in 1963 and performed for the crowd.

But why is this iconic figure being praised by bigots like Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller?

Dylan songs have always been filled with Judeo-Christian imagery that has both fascinated and captivated his audiences. But something nearly inexplicable happened in the 70′s to Dylan that explains the praise from such prominent Islamophobes:

after a visit to Israel in 1971, [Dylan] even pronounced the late far-right Rabbi Meir Kahane “a really sincere guy.”

Rabbi Meir Kahane and his radical, racist, and terroristic views–and his support for extreme Zionist groups–are well known and have been documented by LoonWatch.

DissidentVoice.org says of Dylan’s support for such groups:

Over the past couple decades, Dylan has become a supporter of the Chabad Lubavitch movement, which holds a firm Eretz Israel line regarding the ongoing occupation of the West Bank.

Dylan seems to think that Israel cannot be questioned about how many civilians it kills because God is on Israel’s side:

In 1983, twenty years after he sang, “you don’t count the dead” and “you never ask questions, when God’s on your side,” Dylan penned a song in response to the international outrage over the devastating Israeli assault on Lebanon in 1982, which took the lives of nearly 18,000 Lebanese civilians and wounded about 30,000 others.

Nobody can deny Dylan’s lyrical talent and I don’t think he is a bigot, but his support for Israeli extremism is certainly troubling. Certainly, Dylan does seem to be contradicting himself with regard to civil and human rights.  Or are Palestinians not to be included in the human struggle? Perhaps Dylan should heed the message contained in his own song, “The Times they are a Changin’”:

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won’t come again
And don’t speak too soon
For the wheel’s still in spin
And there’s no tellin’ who that it’s namin’
For the loser now will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin’

Meanwhile, Dylan’s song Neighborhood Bully glorifies Israeli aggression and occupation, and for this reason was commemorated by Spencer on JihadWatch. Here are the lyrics:

Neighborhood Bully
by Bob Dylan
From the album Infidels

Well, the neighborhood bully, he’s just one man
His enemies say he’s on their land
They got him outnumbered about a million to one
He got no place to escape to, no place to run
He’s the neighborhood bully

The neighborhood bully just lives to survive
He’s criticized and condemned for being alive
He’s not supposed to fight back, he’s supposed to have thick skin
He’s supposed to lay down and die when his door is kicked in
He’s the neighborhood bully

The neighborhood bully been driven out of every land
He’s wandered the earth an exiled man
Seen his family scattered, his people hounded and torn
He’s always on trial for just being born
He’s the neighborhood bully

Well, he knocked out a lynch mob, he was criticized
Old women condemned him, said he should apologize.
Then he destroyed a bomb factory, nobody was glad
The bombs were meant for him. He was supposed to feel bad
He’s the neighborhood bully

Well, the chances are against it and the odds are slim
That he’ll live by the rules that the world makes for him
’Cause there’s a noose at his neck and a gun at his back
And a license to kill him is given out to every maniac
He’s the neighborhood bully

He got no allies to really speak of
What he gets he must pay for, he don’t get it out of love
He buys obsolete weapons and he won’t be denied
But no one sends flesh and blood to fight by his side
He’s the neighborhood bully

Well, he’s surrounded by pacifists who all want peace
They pray for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease
Now, they wouldn’t hurt a fly. To hurt one they would weep
They lay and they wait for this bully to fall asleep
He’s the neighborhood bully

Every empire that’s enslaved him is gone
Egypt and Rome, even the great Babylon
He’s made a garden of paradise in the desert sand
In bed with nobody, under no one’s command
He’s the neighborhood bully

Now his holiest books have been trampled upon
No contract he signed was worth what it was written on
He took the crumbs of the world and he turned it into wealth
Took sickness and disease and he turned it into health
He’s the neighborhood bully

What’s anybody indebted to him for?
Nothin’, they say. He just likes to cause war
Pride and prejudice and superstition indeed
They wait for this bully like a dog waits to feed
He’s the neighborhood bully

What has he done to wear so many scars?
Does he change the course of rivers? Does he pollute the moon and stars?
Neighborhood bully, standing on the hill
Running out the clock, time standing still
Neighborhood bully

The song seems to be a favorite of illegal settlers these days as well:

In 2001, the Jerusalem Post described the song as “a favorite among Dylan-loving residents of the territories“.[7] Israeli singer Ariel Zilber covered “Neighborhood Bully” in 2005 in a version translated to Hebrew.[8]

Nelson Mandela has clearly labeled the Israeli occupation as an apartheid system, saying:

Palestinians are not struggling for a “state” but for freedom, liberation and equality, just like we were struggling for freedom in South Africa…

Apartheid is a crime against humanity. Israel has deprived millions of Palestinians of their liberty and property. It has perpetuated a system of gross racial discrimination and inequality. It has systematically incarcerated and tortured thousands of Palestinians, contrary to the rules of international law. It has, in particular, waged a war against a civilian population, in particular children.

It remains to be seen if Dylan performs in Israel this coming June, or instead “opens his eyes wide” to the racist and apartheid treatment that is being meted out to Palestinians. Will he finally respond to the call to Boycott, Divest and Sanction Israel that other brave artists have responded to? Here is a list from Wikipedia of some artists who have:

Folk legend Pete Seger, Musicians Roger Waters and Brian Eno, Writers Eduardo Galeno and Arundhati Roy, film makers Ken Loach and Jean- Luc Godard, American singer Devendra Branhart and Irish Singer Tommy Sands, Guitarist Carlos Santana, Rocker Elvi Constello, Rap arist Gil Scott Heron, British bands The Klaxonss, Leftfields and Gorillaz Sound System, American band  Pixies,  American actress Meg Ryan, French Singer Vanessa Paradis

And here is a list from Tikun Olam:

Among the celebrities are Stephen Sondheim, Mandy Patinkin, Cynthia Nixon (Sex and the City), James Schamus (Ang Lee’s producer), Emily Mann (McCarter Theater), Eve Ensler (Vagina Monologues), Julianne Moore, Lynn Notage (Ruined), Bill Irwin, Kathleen Chalfant, Mira Nair, Oskar Eustis (Public Theater), Hal Prince (Broadway producer), Tony Kushner (Angels in America), Sheldon Harnick (Broadway lyricist), Ed Asner (Up), Theodore Bikel, Wallace Shawn, Miriam Margolyes, Ruth Reichl, and Vanessa Redgrave…

Musicians constitute a powerful voice for freedom and liberty that has helped liberate people in the past.  It is hoped that the Palestinians are not forgotten.

Comments (23)

agent

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Terrorism Act: ‘They asked me to keep an eye on the Muslim community’

Posted on 24 May 2011 by Danios

From The Guardian:

People from ethnic minorities are up to 42 times more likely than white people to be the target of a counter-terrorism power which allows the stopping and searching of the innocent yet grants them fewer rights than suspected criminals, official figures seen by the Guardian show.

The power is contained in schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which allows police to stop people at ports and airports for up to nine hours without the need for reasonable suspicion that they are involved in any crime.

But the rabbit hole goes deeper: MI5 officers are randomly stopping brown people “without the need for reasonable suspicion that they are involved in any crime”, then threatening to charge them with “crazy allegations” that they are terrorists unless they agree to become informants and spies.  If these allegations were true, why doesn’t the MI5 ever charge these people with a crime and give them a fair trial, or at least a farcical military tribunal?

Here is the article, again from The Guardian:

Terrorism Act: ‘They asked me to keep an eye on the Muslim community’

Asians tell of being targeted and cajoled by officers from MI5 and special branch

Asif Ahmed, 28, describes how he was detained and asked to spy:

Watch the video here

Just after landing at Edinburgh airport on 11 April 2010 Asif Ahmed was met by plainclothes officers and taken away from his wife. He was about to turn from model citizen into a terror suspect, one of 85,000 people who met a similar fate that year.

Officers met the couple just after they got off the flight from Stansted and told them Ahmed needed to come with them for a “normal check”.

The couple were returning from a weekend break and Ahmed saw no reason why he might be suspected of anything. Indeed, after London was attacked by terrorists in July 2005, Ahmed worked for the mayor of London and in Scotland to improve relations between Muslims and the rest of the population.

He was taken to a room by two officers who told him they were from special branch, a police department that deals in intelligence and security matters. Ahmed, 28, was told he was being questioned under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

When he asked why, an officer replied: “No reason, it is just a random stop.” Ahmed told them they had stopped the only two people on the flight who looked like Muslims.

They said they did not know he was Muslim, which he did not believe.

The officers Ahmed remembers were detectives – a sergeant and a constable. They did not give their names but did give their identification numbers.

Ahmed says he felt compelled to answer their questions: “I had no choice, I was told I had no right to refuse.” He says the officers told him that if he exercised the right to remain silent, he could be detained further and eventually face jail.

Ahmed says he was questioned about his job, where he prayed, the Muslim groups he was active in. He was asked for a definition of extremism and what he would do if he found out someone was going to carry out an act of terrorism. He got the answer to that correct: he would tell the police.

In another room his wife was questioned. She was upset about being asked details about her sister, who was seriously ill at the time. Ahmed says the policemen interviewing him kept saying that he and his wife, studying for a PhD in political science, were “interesting people”. Then one of the officers asked if he would become a spy: “They asked if I would like to work with special branch, to keep an eye on the Muslim community in Edinburgh … They asked me three times. They said do it covertly.” He refused.

A similar scene played out at Stansted on 31 December 2007. Abdullah, a youth worker from east London, had returned from a Haj tour in Saudi Arabia with a tour group. “I was told that there was a problem with my passport and two white men in dark suits approached me and said that they needed to talk to me.”

They were police officers and he was taken to a room: “I was told that I had been stopped under terrorism-related legislation … I was given a sheet of paper that basically said that they were allowed by law to do this to me and I needed to comply with questioning.”

He was asked about his family, how his trip had been paid for, which mosque he prayed at and if he had “any additional training or skills”.

His mobile phones were taken away and searched. Then his questioning was disrupted by the arrival of another man, who said he was called Matthew, and a woman. “They were casually dressed and took over from the previous two men. They introduced themselves as MI5. I was concerned why MI5 would want to speak to me and listened attentively.”

In a written statement Abdullah says the officers quizzed him and said his “name had come up in circles discussing terrorist activity and it was up to me to prove where I stood. They wanted my help in tackling potential terrorists and related activity”.

He added: “They showed me some photos of a number individuals. I knew most of them well as they were friends and local associates. Some I didn’t recognise and one I wasn’t too sure about.

“This was the one they pressed me on. They also wanted details about the individuals that I knew, which I provided. I tried to be as co-operative as possible and in the end they took my number and left me theirs.

“Strangely, Matthew insisted that I save it discreetly under work or taxi. I was then escorted out and was free to leave.”

Abdullah believes MI5 wanted to turn him into a spy. “Matthew called me several times to arrange a follow-up meeting. He said he wanted me to help him in the work MI5 does. We had a phone discussion and I said that I thought that what they were trying to do was noble but I had reservations about the way in which they operate on an ethical level and was uncomfortable with that. He insisted that I meet him and said that ‘it was in my long-term interest’ to do so.”

A meeting was arranged for 22 January 2008 outside a tube station.

“I was told to meet Matthew outside Farringdon station but was directed by phone from there to a nearby location and Matthew walked with me to a hotel.”

He said he was asked about “my personal and work details – past and present. I mentioned here that I had visited Egypt in the summer of 2004 for six months to study Arabic.

“I was asked about my future plans – I mentioned that I planned to return to Egypt shortly to continue with my Arabic and Islamic studies.

“He mentioned that he really wanted me to help him with the photos. I said that I had already told him what I knew.

“In the end Matthew said that he wanted to meet me again but I wasn’t so sure any more as I could see that something was wrong.”

Despite telling MI5 he was not interested, the barrage of calls and texts pleading for a meeting just kept coming.

After that “Matthew called me a few times to arrange a further meeting. He gave me a mobile number (07522 055 947) but I decided that I didn’t want to have any more contact.”

By mid-February Abdullah was fed up. “I texted Matthew to explicitly say I wasn’t interested in any further contact and for him not to contact me anymore,” he said. “I also mentioned that if I did have any information about any threat, terrorist or otherwise, that I would naturally report it to the police. I then called my phone provider and changed my number.”

In May 2008, Matthew obtained the new number and called again. He wanted information, which Abdullah said he did not have.

But the MI5 officer, Abdullah alleges, made a threat. “He said I needed to see him before I travelled to Egypt, for my own good. Otherwise I would find it difficult over there because they had ‘international partners’.”

Abdullah said: “He was threatening me – if I go to Egypt, I might be arrested and ill treated. I took it as a threat. They could have me arrested, and tortured there. It was quite clear.”

There is no independent evidence to support the claims that police and MI5 are abusing schedule 7 stop and search powers by trying to turn innocent people into informers.

But there is a consistency of testimony from those who have been stopped and pressured to inform.

Solicitor Alastair Lyon, who has advised dozens affected by schedule 7, said: “This is a power which has sowed fear in the most vulnerable of our communities. The security services and special branch are operating in an unregulated and unchecked way without legal observers, to put pressure on people. This is a legal black hole allowing them to question thousands of people about very personal details without any of the usual human rights safeguards.” He added: “It has created a legal black hole where personal and sensitive information is, on pain of imprisonment, forced from individuals who are told that in effect they have no rights. It is a complete abuse of authority.”

For youth worker Mohammed, the link between his being stopped under schedule 7 and other approaches is clear. For a year security service officers tried to recruit him, approaching him at home, in the street, even as he ate at a tandoori restaurant. One of them, called Jeff, showed him pictures of various people.

Then on 5 November 2008, he was stopped at Stansted airport while returning from Spain and taken to a room. Mohammed said: “Then Tim came in. [He] showed me a badge and said he’s from MI5. He spoke about Jeff. ‘He’s been trying to meet me but you haven’t responded,’ said Tim.

“He reminded me that he is working for my best interest: he doesn’t want this to come out, doesn’t want for my workplace to become dirtied, my reputation – as if I’ve got something to hide and I’ve done something wrong in the first place.”

He added: “We know that you went to a terror camp, transited in Dubai and changed passports. We know you went to Dubai in 2006 and met AQ figures.”

Mohammed said: “I told him these were crazy allegations and how would they have this info anyway.”

Tim said: “We don’t need to go there ourselves, we have info from locals.”

Mohammed was let go with the promise that Tim would be in touch. He did indeed call several days later, but Mohammed did not reply.

Does this “Gestapo crap” remind anyone of this:

Comments (26)

When White is Right: Asian people 42 times more likely to be held under terror law

Tags: , , , , ,

When White is Right: Asian people 42 times more likely to be held under terror law

Posted on 24 May 2011 by Danios

This reminds me of something from The Guardian in 2010:

Black people are 26 times more likely than whites to face stop and search

Analysis of government data shows shocking discrepancy in stop and search figures for England and Wales

Black people are 26 times more likely than white people to be stopped and searched by police in England and Wales, the most glaring example of “racial profiling” researchers have seen, according to an international report.

The analysis of government data has brought claims of discrimination from campaigners who say the findings corroborate concerns that black and Asian Britons are being unfairly targeted. The US civil rights activist Jesse Jackson, who arrives in London today to launch a campaign aimed at curbing what he says is stop-and-search discrimination, described the figures as “astonishing”.

The figures relate to stop-and-searches under Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, which was introduced to deal with football hooligans and the threat of serious violence. It allows police to search anyone in a designated area without specific grounds for suspicion.

Analysis by the London School of Economics and the Open Society Justice Initiative found that there are 41.6 Section 60 searches for every 1,000 black people, compared with 1.6 for every 1,000 white people – making black people 26.6 times more likely to be stopped and searched. Asians were 6.3 times more likely to be stopped than whites, according to the analysis of Ministry of Justice figures for 2008-09…

And now this, also from The Guardian:

Asian people 42 times more likely to be held under terror law

People from ethnic minorities more likely than white people to be stopped under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act

People from ethnic minorities are up to 42 times more likely than white people to be the target of a counter-terrorism power which allows the stopping and searching of the innocent yet grants them fewer rights than suspected criminals, official figures seen by the Guardian show.

The power is contained in schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which allows police to stop people at ports and airports for up to nine hours without the need for reasonable suspicion that they are involved in any crime.

The figures have led to accusations that police have resorted to “ethnic profiling”, which they deny.

British Muslims have given written statements to the Guardian alleging that the police and the security service MI5 are abusing the power by holding people and pressing them into becoming spies.

Those stopped have no right to maintain their silence, and failure to answer questions can be a criminal offence.

Questioning can begin without a lawyer present and those stopped must pay for one themselves if they want legal representation.

The authorities fear the random nature of schedule 7 means a legal challenge could see the power struck down for being arbitrary, a counter-terrorism official said. This is what eventually happened to the part of the act that allowed stop and search in the street without any suspicion, which was ruled unlawful by human rights judges.

The uncovering of official figures by the Guardian is the first time an ethnic breakdown of who is stopped under schedule 7 has been made public.

The calculation that 42 times as many Asians are stopped as white people is based on comparing the percentage of Asians in the UK population to the percentage of those stopped under schedule 7. Ethnic breakdowns for those entering and exiting the UK are not available.

The disproportionality faced by ethnic minorities is at its most pronounced where a person is stopped and questioned for over an hour. White people make up 19% of stops, Asian people 41%, black people 10% and others (including Middle Eastern and Chinese) 30%.

Asians make up 5% of the UK population, black people 3% and others 1%. White people make up 91% of the population.

Where people are stopped and held for under an hour, the breakdown is: white people, 45% of stops; Asian people, 25%; black people, 8%; other ethnicities, 22%.

One of those stopped, Asif Ahmed, 28, said he was asked to spy after landing at Edinburgh airport.

He said he was separated from his wife and taken to a room and told he must answer questions about his beliefs and faith. “They asked if I would like to work with special branch, to keep an eye on the Muslim community in Edinburgh. They asked me three times. They said do it covertly.”

Despite official claims that profiling on the basis of ethnicity is banned by the police, the official figures give strength to the argument that people are having their human rights infringed on the basis of what they look like and which god they pray to. Those stopped can also have their DNA taken and stored.

Ben Bowling, professor of criminology at King’s College London, said the data undermines claims ethnic profiling is not being used. “They lend weight to the view that ethnic profiling is going on,” he said. “The use of these powers at the border should be based on reasonable grounds and in ways that are properly transparent and accountable. At present they are opaque and unaccountable and seem little more than arbitrary and discriminatory, especially from the point of view of the person detained without reason.”

One person subjected to a schedule 7 stop has provided a written statement alleging an MI5 officer tried to recruit him as a spy. When he refused, he says he was threatened with torture abroad.

Another, Alam Sheikh, 29, was stopped under the counter-terrorism power in January at Gatwick airport after a short holiday with friends in Morocco.

He was baffled when asked by police if he was involved in the Arab uprisings: “They asked do you know anyone who is part of the protests?

“One of my friends is a trainee lawyer. Even he was shaking. It wasn’t fair. Most of us were smartly dressed. It wasn’t like we were wearing Arab clothing or beards.”

An exact figure on the disproportionate use of schedule 7 is difficult to arrive at because no figures are kept on the ethnicity of people entering and leaving the UK. Police forces have claimed releasing an ethnic breakdown of figures force by force could damage national security, and thus have previously refused to release them when requests were made under freedom of information legislation.

The figures published on Tuesday were released following a freedom of information request from the Federation of Student Islamic Societies.

In 2009 the National Policing Improvement Agency issued guidelines to officers about the use of the power, warning against ethnic profiling. “Examining officers must take particular care to ensure that the selection of people for examination is not based solely on their perceived ethnic background or religion,” the agency said. “The powers must be exercised in a manner that does not discriminate … to do so would be unlawful.”

The guidelines make clear that ethnic profiling would damage the police: “Officers should be aware that the way in which people are selected has a potentially far-reaching effect on the public and their acceptance of counter-terrorism powers.

“Misuse of the powers can damage the relationship between the police and sections of the public.”

But even some serving officers say the official selection criteria given to police makes it more likely officers will seek out those linked to Muslim communities. The guidelines talk of basing selection on “any information on the origins and location of terrorist groups” and “possible current, emerging and future terrorist activity”.

Zaheer Ahmad, president of the National Association of Muslim Police said: “We are concerned about the disproportionality reflected in the number of people stopped from ethnic backgrounds – we have seen no acceptable reason as to why this is taking place. The police service must take an intelligence-based approach to minimise the impact of this power on the travelling public.”

In 2009-10, 85,557 people were stopped and examined at UK borders under the schedule 7 powers. The government said: “A very low percentage of 220 million passengers travelling through UK ports were stopped, with only 0.03% of those travelling being examined.”

John Donlon, the Association of Chief Police Officers’ national co-ordinator for ports policing, said: “Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is important legislation in support of national security work at ports.

“The examining officers’ code of practice enforces that the examination of a person cannot be based solely on perceived ethnicity or religion. Activity is intelligence-led and officers deployed at ports do not single out particular ethnic groups for examination.”

We must keep White People Safe.

Comments (10)

tzleft.prothero2

Tags: , , , , , ,

My Take: This just in, Tennessee court says Islam is a religion

Posted on 23 May 2011 by Amago

Anderson Cooper slams Laurie Cardoza Moore on her misinformation.

My Take: This just in, Tennessee court says Islam is a religion

Editor’s Note: Stephen Prothero, a Boston University religion scholar and author of “God is Not One: The Eight Rival Religions that Run the World,” is a regular CNN Belief Blog contributor.

By Stephen Prothero, Special to CNN

A few months ago I spoke at an interfaith forum at the University of North Alabama. One of the speakers on my panel was Ossama Bahloul, imam of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro.

Bahloul began his talk by observing that God must have a sense of humor to have given him a name as problematic as Ossama. But the heart of his talk concerned the compatibility of Islam with American values.

What surprised me about Bahloul, in both his public talk and our private conversations, was his deep and abiding faith in America. Signs at the construction site for his planned mosque had been vandalized twice and federal investigators had determined that a fire at the site was intentionally set. Efforts to build that mosque, appropriate for a growing congregation that had been active in the area for roughly two decades, were met not only with protests but also with a lawsuit.

Follow CNN’s Belief Blog on Twitter

Yet Bahloul continued to believe that what was right would win out in the end.

In the lawsuit, opponents of the mosque argued, among other things, that Islam was not a religion and therefore was not entitled to the free exercise protections and special zoning treatment given to religious organizations. But last week, a Murfreesboro court ruled for the Islamic center.

In his ruling, judge Robert Corlew announced “that Islam is a religion.” The fact that a court of law in the United States would actually have to make such a finding is a sad commentary on where we are today in the United States in terms of religious literacy.

Tennessee imam: My mosque was torched

Islam is not just a religion. It is the second largest religion in the world, with over 1 billion adherents. And as the Murfreesboro case demonstrates, some of these Muslims are our neighbors.

There is still one legal issue unsettled in this case—a technical matter concerning whether a prior proceeding allowing the mosque construction had followed the rules of a local open meetings ordinance. But, as the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro noted on its web page yesterday, the building permit is now in hand.

And, at least for now, the First Amendment is still the law of the land in Tennessee.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Stephen Prothero.

Comments (14)

r-DUTCH-CATHOLIC-CHURCH-PEDOPHILIA-large570

Tags: , , , , , ,

Dutch Catholic Priest Pedophilia Endorsement Shocks Church

Posted on 23 May 2011 by Emperor

Robert Spencer co-religionist supports pedophilia. Will we be seeing this story on JihadWatch? Imagine if these priests were Muslim, Islam would be blamed instantly.

Dutch Catholic Priest Pedophilia Endorsement Shocks Church

AMSTERDAM — The Dutch Catholic Church and the Salesian order are investigating revelations that a Salesian priest served on the board of a group that promotes pedophilia with the full knowledge of his boss.

The order’s top official in the Netherlands, Delegate Herman Spronck, confirmed in a statement that the priest – identified by RTL Nieuws as 73-year-old “Father Van B.” – served on the board of “Martijn,” a group that campaigns to end the Dutch ban on adult-child sex.

The group is widely reviled but not outlawed.

“Of course we reject this and distance ourselves from this personal initiative” on the part of the priest, Spronck said in a statement. “Membership in such organizations does not fit with the ethos of the Salesian order.”

However, Spronck’s own superior in Belgium said he will investigate both Spronck and Van B., after both men were quoted by RTL Nieuws as saying such relationships aren’t always harmful.

Superior Jos Claes told Belgian television on Saturday he “couldn’t imagine” that both men would not be disciplined, but said he must make sure of the facts first.

“Society thinks these relationships are harmful. I disagree,” RTL quoted Van B. as saying. He served on Martijn’s board from 2008 until 2010, when its founder was arrested for alleged possession of child pornography, a case that is ongoing.

Van B. told RTL he remains a member of Martijn and now lives in a retirement home in eastern Netherlands.

In a second interview, RTL quoted Spronck as saying he was aware of Van B.’s pedophilia and membership in Martijn, and even of two instances where the priest had been fined by police for exposing himself in public. But he said he didn’t think that was sufficient reason to ban him from the order.

Comments (20)

The “But That’s Just the Old Testament!” Cop-Out

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The “But That’s Just the Old Testament!” Cop-Out

Posted on 22 May 2011 by Danios

This article is part 8 of LoonWatch’s Understanding Jihad Series. Please read my “disclaimer”, which explains my intentions behind writing this article: The Understanding Jihad Series: Is Islam More Likely Than Other Religions to Encourage Violence?

We showcased violence in the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) in parts 1234, and 6 of this Series.  Even though this list of Biblical verses was hardly exhaustive, it was more than enough to refute the claim–made by Islamophobes like Robert Spencer (and unfortunately accepted as fact by the majority of Americans)–that the Quran is more violent than the Bible.

In response, many Christians rely on a “fall back” argument: they claim that this “doesn’t count” since “it’s just the Old Testament!” and supposedly Jesus Christ rejected the violent legacy of the OT.  It is of course of paramount importance to the anti-Muslim Christians–as well as to “culturally Christian” atheists and your run-of-the-mill Islamophobes who need to prove the “uniquely” violent nature of Islam’s holy book–to neutralize the Old Testament.  After all, if the Old Testament “counts”, then it would be a case of Mutually Assured Destruction (M.A.D.) to attack the Quran for its alleged violence: the Old Testament is by far the more violent book.

There are numerous reasons the “But It’s Just the Old Testament!” Defense doesn’t do the trick:

1) There is no explicit  or categorical textual proof from the New Testament that supports the idea that the Old Testament (or the Law) “doesn’t count”.  For every verse cited to prove such a claim, there is another that can be cited for the opposite view.  In fact, it seems that the textual proof for the opposite view is greater, even overwhelming.  For example, Jesus says in the Gospels:

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

5:19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

And Jesus also said:

Luke 16:17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for one dot of the Law to become void.

There are other verses that similarly seem to affirm the importance of keeping the Law.  On the other hand, the evidences used to counter this view are less explicit and less direct.

2)  Both the Old and New Testament are considered by all mainstream branches of Christianity to be “just as inspired as the New Testament.” The New Testament itself affirms the accuracy of the Old Testament:

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

3:17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

“All Scripture – This properly refers to the Old Testament…it includes the whole of the Old Testament, and is the solemn testimony of Paul that it was all inspired.” More importantly, as Catholic.com says (emphasis is ours): “Scripture — all of Scripture — is inspired by God (2 Tim. 3:16). This means that the Old Testament is just as inspired as the New Testament and thus an expression of the will of Christ.”

[Update I: A reader pointed out the following: Christians see Jesus as God. That means that he was also the God of the Old Testament. The same God who commanded all those killings and the author of all those violent and disgusting commands as listed in your previous articles. So the violence Jesus supports and predicts is not only evident in the New Testament, but he is supposedly also the author of said violent commands in the Old testament as well. Not only then is the Old Testament "an expression of the will of Christ"--it is Christ.]

Protestant Christianity, as seen on this popular Evangelical site, also agrees with this assessment:

Jesus is always in perfect agreement with the Father (John 10:30), so we cannot argue that war was only God’s will in the Old Testament. God does not change (Malachi 3:6James 1:17).

3)  On this note, Jesus Christ himself is depicted in the New Testament as being very violent during his Second Coming (see part 5).  Even if we completely sweep the Biblical prophets and the Old Testament under the rug (which is exactly what anti-Muslim Christians do in debates with Muslims), it doesn’t change the fact that Jesus in the New Testament is very violent: he promises to kill or subjugate all of his enemies, which includes those whose only crime is to refuse to believe in him.  So, even if we completely disregard the OT, this wouldn’t solve the “problem”.

More importantly, the fact that Jesus promised to kill his enemies (a promise he made during his First Coming)–even if he is yet to fulfill this promise–shows that Jesus did not reject the violent ways of the earlier Biblical prophets.  He simply was not in a position of authority or power to carry out these acts of unbridled violence.  He wouldn’t have promised violence if he truly rejected the OT’s violence.

When we published an article about the violent Second Coming of Christ, many critics cried “you can’t compare Jesus’ supposed violence in the future with what Muhammad actually already did!”  (How quickly anti-Muslim Christians can turn something they believe in with all their might and which they believe is central to their faith–the Second Coming of Christ–into a “supposed” event makes us wonder if this is not Christian taqiyya?)  Yet, it was during his First Coming that Jesus made the promise to kill all those who did not believe in him; the action–a violent threat to ruthlessly slaughter infidels (i.e. Luke 19:27)–has already been made.

4)  Christians not only routinely cite the Old Testament, but they specifically cite it with regard to Jesus.  Various prophecies in the OT are attributed to Jesus: these prophecies depict the Messiah as a violent conquering king who brutally vanquishes his enemies.  (Please read the section entitled “Christians Affirm Militant Old Testament Prophecies” in part 5 of the Understanding Jihad Series.)  This reinforces point #3 above: Jesus is seen as fulfilling, not rejecting, the violence of the Old Testament.  After all, the violence of the OT was “an expression of the will of Christ.”

5)  The official views of the Church itself do not endorse the idea of “tossing the Old Testament aside”: even when it comes to formulating a doctrine in regards to war, the OT must be taken into consideration.  It is argued that there is concordance, not dissonance, between the Old and New Testaments.  As the esteemed theologian Prof. Samuele R. Bacchiocchi concluded:

An attentive study shows that the NT complements, rather than contradicts the teachings of the OT regarding warfare…A balanced reading of the NT texts suggests that there is a basic agreement between the Old and New Testaments on their teaching on warfare.

The violent wars in the OT are reconciled by arguing that Biblical Israel was justified in its declarations of war and was only acting in self-defense: “At various times in the Old Testament, God commanded the Israelites to defend their nation by force of arms.” Of course, this is not supported by the facts: the Israelites were clearly the aggressors, annihilating and/or running off the indigenous populations of a land that they believed was divinely given to them.  They were only “defending themselves” insofar as any aggressive occupier will “resist” those they occupy.

6) The fact of the matter is that all mainstream Christian groups affirm both the Old and New Testament as canon.  The Church fought off any attempts to “throw away the Old Testament”.  In the second century of Christianity, Marcion of Sinope rejected the Old Testament because of the violence, war atrocities, and genocide contained therein.  He was denounced by the Church, and his views towards the Old Testament were officially damned as heresy.  Tertullian, the Father of Western Christianity, issued a rebuttal against Marcion.

We read:

Marcionism. Marcionism owed its existence to Marcion, an individual who gained popularity in Rome in 140-144. His theology was influenced heavily by the Gnostics, and he denied the power of the God of the Old Testament. He promulgated the use of a limited form of the New Testament, including Luke’s Gospel and Acts, and many of the Pauline epistles, the former since Luke was a Gentile and the latter since he was sent to preach to the Gentiles. He found the God of the Old Testament contradictory and inhumane. The “orthodox” Christianity of the time rejected his argumentation, upheld the value of the Old Testament, and dutifully began the work of canonization of the Old and New Testaments. The specter of Marcion loomed large enough so as to merit refutation by Tertullian at the end of the second century; nevertheless, Marcion’s movement mostly died out or assimilated into other Gnostic groups.

Marcionism died out, thanks to the Church and its insistence of the Old Testament’s validity.  The Catholic Encyclopedia calls the Marcionist sect “perhaps the most dangerous foe Christianity has ever known.”  Today, there are some modern-day believers, called New Testament Only Christians, who reject the Old Testament due to its inherent violence, war atrocities, and genocide.  This group is a very small minority, a “heretical” group that is at odds with the main body of Christianity.

So, unless you happen to be a New Testament Only Christian, the “But That’s Just the Old Testament!” Defense simply doesn’t apply to you.  The existence of the New Testament Only Christians, however, is actually indicative of just how violent the Bible is: it couldn’t be reconciled, so more than half of it had to be jettisoned.

* * * *

None of this is to say that Christians must interpret the Bible in a violent manner.  But what we are saying is that a softer reading of the Bible requires textual acrobatics, convoluted argumentation, and theological mind-bending.  The reasons given why the Old Testament Law are no longer in effect are far more complex to grasp then the simple, straight-forward understanding one gets from reading Jesus’ seemingly simple, straight-forward statements, such as:

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

5:19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

This reinforces a point made in an earlier part of this Series:

Why is it that these anti-Muslim ideologues allow theological and textual acrobatics when it comes to the Bible, but meanwhile they forbid the contextualization of Quranic verses?  Certainly it is much easier to “constrain” the violent verses of the Quran than it is for the Bible, since the Quran itself almost always cushions these verses in between mitigating verses.  This contrasts quite considerably with the Bible, which has violent verses wrapped in violent passages.

Anti-Muslim Christians point to various verses of the Quran that they claim are intrinsically violent.  When it is pointed out to them that their own holy book is replete with violent passages, they respond by explaining why and how they interpret these Biblical passages in a peaceful manner.  In the same breath, however, they forbid Muslims from doing the same to the Quran.

Rejecting the Old Testament is a perfectly fine way for a Christian believer to theologically constrain the violence of the Bible, one that we wholeheartedly support.  But such a believer should know that his holy book requires such theological mechanisms to constrain its violence, and this should logically endow upon him some religious modesty when it comes to the holy books of others.

* * * *

7)  Perhaps the most important reason why the “But That’s Just the Old Testament!” Defense doesn’t work is that it doesn’t do a damned thing for Jewish followers of the Hebrew Bible.  Jews don’t believe in the New Testament or Jesus.  In fact, their most holiest of books is the Torah, which is the first five books of the Old Testament (known as the Tanakh or Hebrew Bible to Jews).  These include Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy–some of the most violent books of the entire Bible, replete with holy war and divinely ordained genocide.  To Jews, the Torah and the Hebrew Bible are 100% active and applicable, with no New Testament to overrule or abrogate them.

When we published articles showcasing the violence of the Bible–especially after our article about “the Bible’s prescriptive, open-ended, and universal commandments to wage holy war and enslave infidels”–pro-Christian elements were quick to throw the Old Testament (and their Jewish comrades) under the bus: The God of the Old Testament was a god of war, whereas the New Testament is a god of love.

In order to prove their claim against Islam, the anti-Muslim ideologues must prove the “uniqueness” of the Quran’s violence.  Certainly, this is Robert Spencer’s clear-as-daylight argument on p.19 of his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades):

The Qur’an is unique among the sacred writings of the world in counseling its adherents to make war against unbelievers.

Short of proving the uniqueness of the Quran’s violence, Spencer et al. have failed in what they set out to do.  If it can only be proved that the Quran is only as violent as the Tanakh (or the Torah)–or that Islam is just as violent as Judaism–then what big deal is this?  If Spencer wants to fear-monger about Islam, and if–using the same standards–it can be proven that Judaism is just as violent as Islam (nay, more violent)–then will Spencer also fear-monger about Judaism?  Can we expect a JewWatch.com website coming soon?

In fact, such a site already exists, and it looks like JihadWatch, just against Jews instead of Muslims.  Indeed, if the same conclusions about Islam were applied to Judaism, then all this would be exposed for what it really is: wholesale bigotry.  But it is much easier to get away with bigotry against Muslims than it is against Jews.

How can Robert Spencer hide behind the “But That’s Just the Old Testament!” Defense when his comrade-in-arms is Jewish?  Pamela Geller of the Atlas Shrugs blog is a partner in crime with Spencer and company.  Clearly, the anti-Muslim Christian right is linked at the hip with Zionist Jews in their shared hatred of Muslims.  Why is one side of this unholy alliance willing to throw the other under the bus, and why is the other side ominously quiet when they hear arguments such as “But That’s Just the Old Testament”?

Our argument has never been that the Quran has no violence in it.  Rather, our argument is: all holy books, including the Quran but also the Bible, have violence in them; in fact, the Bible is far more violent than the Quran. This is in response to the question that most Americans answered incorrectly: is Islam more likely than other religions to encourage violence? Most importantly, this argument of ours is a response to a claim made by Robert Spencer.

This argument of ours is also based in our deeply held conviction that religions and religious scriptures are just what their readers make of them, as stated in the introduction of this Series:

The reader should not think that I believe that a certain religion or another is violent.  Rather, there exist peaceful and violent interpretations of religion.  I reject the view held by religious orthodoxy that the human mind is simply an empty receptacle that unthinkingly “obeys” the divine plan.  Hundreds of years after their prophets have died, believers (of all faiths) are forced (by virtue of not having a divine interlocutor) to exert their own minds and ethics to give life to texts, to render 3D realities from 2D texts.  Such an elastic idea–that a religion is whatever its believers make it into–is certainly anathema to orthodox adherents who simply desire a step-by-step instruction manual to produce human automatons.  But the truth is that even these orthodox adherents necessarily inject into the religious texts their own backgrounds, beliefs, and biases.

One can see why I do not think that simply showing a Biblical verse here or there would prove that Judaism or Christianity are violent faiths. There is a long journey from what is on the page to what is understood and put into practice.  And once this reality is comprehended, it is hoped that Jews and Christians will gain a larger perspective when they approach Muslims and their religion.

Opponents have claimed that this Series so far has just been a case of tu quoque fallacy: yet, this is fundamentally misunderstanding the purpose of this Series, which is certainly not designed to convert the readers to Islam, but rather to refute the commonly held notion that Islam is somehow more violent than other faiths, a view that the majoritarian group can easily hold (and demagogues like Robert Spencer can reinforce) unless dissenters like ourselves challenge it.

Update I:

See page II of this article for our follow-up piece.

Comments (107)

Volen Siderov, leader of Bulgaria’s nationalist party “Attack”, attends protest in front of Banya Bashi Mosque in central Sofia

Tags: , , , , ,

Bulgarian National Radio Goes Off Air as Far-right Leader Clashes with Political Opponent

Posted on 22 May 2011 by Emperor

via. Islamophobia-Watch. Are the ultra-nationalists getting more violent?

Bulgarian National Radio goes off air as far-right leader clashes with political opponent

A Bulgarian National Radio (BNR) talk show about the May 20 clash between Ataka and Muslims outside Sofia’s Banya Bashi mosque went off air for some minutes after Ataka leader Volen Siderov and independent MP Korman Ismailov clashed in the studio.

The broadcast of the Nedelya 150 programme on May 22 was replaced by music for about five minutes after matters became heated, with Siderov telling Ismailov: “you are bearers of radical Islam. You are bearers of extremism. You are a danger to the entire Europe”.

There has been widespread condemnation of Ataka for the May 20 incident which led to injuries and arrests after ultra-nationalists protesting against the use of loudspeakers to relay the call to prayer got into a fight with Muslims outside the mosque.

BNR’s Velichko Konakchiev told Bulgarian National Television that Siderov had started the clash with Ismailov, who said that the Ataka leader was ruining Bulgaria’s image. Ismailov said that people at the mosque had simply been defending themselves against assaults by Ataka supporters.

Siderov said that there should be a stop to hypocritical statements about ethnic peace when Sofia’s city was a “nest of Islamists”. It was a mistake to turn a blind eye and it would be too late, according to Siderov, “when one of them blows up the underground railway in Sofia”.

Bulgarian media reported that an online petition had been launched to ask Prosecutor-General Boris Velchev to request Parliament to vote to lift Siderov’s immunity as an MP from prosecution, while in response to an online campaign, people have been visiting Banya Bashi to lay flowers in a gesture of apology to Bulgaria’s Muslims for the May 20 incident.

BNR director-general Valeri Todorov said in a statement that it was unacceptable for the airwaves of the country’s public broadcaster to be used to incite ethnic, religious and national animosities.

Sofia Echo, 22 May 2011

Update: See “Bulgarian nationalists want to strip Turkish leader of MP immunity”, Novinite, 22 May 2011

Comments (36)

arap-medya

Tags: , , , , ,

Negative image of Arabs tied to rising Islamophobia in the West

Posted on 22 May 2011 by Emperor

Negative image of Arabs tied to rising Islamophobia in the West

(Today’s Zaman)

The lingering perception problem with regard to Arabs in the Western media is very much connected to rising Islamophobia in Europe and in the US, experts at the 10th Arab Media Forum held in Dubai last week said. “Islam has become the new perceived enemy of the West after the fall of the Soviet Union,” said Philip Seib, professor of journalism and public diplomacy at the University of Southern California, during a panel discussion at the forum, which attracted over 2,400 media professionals from 40 countries.

Seib stressed that more continual and balanced news coverage from the region was needed to overcome challenges of stereotyping of Arab citizens. “People want to know about the region, which was reflected when Al Jazeera’s English news website registered a phenomenal increase in the number of hits after Egypt’s revolution,” he added.

Abdullah Bozkurt, Today’s Zaman Ankara bureau chief, also shared Seib’s concerns in his speech and said the anti-Muslim platform in Europe has developed itself from being the agenda of fringe, far-right parties into a mainstream political debate.

“With the minaret ban in Switzerland and the Burqa ban in France, the anti-Muslim rhetoric became part of the law of the land. Islamophobia even became institutionalized with the gains of far-right parties in some European countries, and they are now set to become part of the coalitional governments. This is an alarming development,” he explained.

During the 10th Arab Media Forum there were also discussions on whether or not the recent protest movements that swept the countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa have changed the image of Arabs. It explored whether there were signs of change from references in the Western media of Arabs being “violent, betraying, backward-thinking and women’s rights-snubbing” to that of people who have the same aspirations and expectations as everybody else.

Comments (37)

bilde

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Vandalism unable to deter group’s faith in community

Posted on 21 May 2011 by Emperor

Tennessee is getting worse.

Vandalism unable to deter group’s faith in community

(DNJ) –Scott Broden

MURFREESBORO — Islamic Center of Murfreesboro volunteers who pick up trash on Bradyville Pike encountered something they can’t clean — black spray paint on their adopt a highway sign.

The culprit covered up the word Islamic on the ICM sign near mile marker 26 on a portion of state Route 99 southeast of Murfreesboro.

“It’s unfortunate that some people have this view toward Islam,” said Imam Ossama Bahloul, the religious leader for the Muslim congregation.

The act of vandalism is the latest in a string of vandalism directed at the congregation and its plans to build a new mosque on Veals Road, which is off Bradyville Pike. In January 2010, a vandal spray painted “Not Welcome” on the congregation’s sign announcing its future site. Another sign on the site was later broken in half and someone torched construction equipment on the site last summer.

The center obtained a building permit Friday to get started onconstruction of its new mosque, beginning with 12,300 square feet.

To make a difference in the community, the ICM entered into a contract with the Tennessee Department of Transportation to volunteer four times this year to clean up two miles of Bradyville Pike between mile markers 24 and 26, said ICM member Ihsan Ansari.

He led a group of seven members in early April in cleaning trash from the road and its ditches even before the state, at no cost to the Muslim congregation, erected a pair of signs acknowledging that the ICM adopted this portion of the highway.

Another volunteer crew will go out sometime during the first two weeks in June, Ansari said.

Community service is something I love doing,” said Ansari, noting that helping the community is a way to purify one’s soul. “Many of our Muslims always give back. Muslims are part of the community and only want to enhance and better the community instead of defacing and tearing it down.”

Only one other sign of spray paint appeared between mile markers 24 and 26 along Bradyville Pike, and it was in blue swirls on a tan wall of what appeared to be an old, abandoned Dilton Store at the intersection of Dilton-Mankin Road.

Comments (44)

Why-is-it-called-the-rapture-759287

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

May 21, 2011: The End of the World?

Posted on 20 May 2011 by Amago

I am trying to prepare for tomorrow but I might not be ready. What would happen if an Imam went on TV and warned everyone that the rapture was coming?

May 21, 2011: The End of the World?

by Elisha Goldstein, Ph.D

Well, tomorrow, May 21, 2011, is supposed to be the end of the world. Wait, I thought the Mayans said it was supposed to be December 21, 2012? Either way, it gets a lot of publicity. (This post is a good example.)

Christian Family Radio station in Oakland, Calif. has been spending of lot of time, money and effort letting people know that if they step up and believe, they will be beamed to heaven when the giant worldwide earthquake hits tomorrow, while the rest will be left to suffer.

So what’s the truth?

The quick and dirty answer is who knows? But these claims have been made for centuries on end, and each time, the next day comes. So my guess is that the probability of this happening is smaller than I can even imagine.

So what is it about the need to find a definitive date in religious or spiritual teachings when all things will come to an end?

Why strike fear into people’s hearts and minds?

It doesn’t get us anywhere to judge the people who are lighting up this movement, but it is more helpful to get curious about it. My guess is that it’s not intentionally vindictive; there is a deep belief that this is true. If a person who believes is reading these lines right now, it’s highly likely that they think I am ignorant and feel sad for me as I will likely go to hell. They’re sure of this.

But how does that happen? How do these deep, unshakable beliefs come to be, and how is it reconciled when the next day comes?

I think these are all important questions to ask because to some degree, we all have deep-seated beliefs that we aren’t even aware of.

We believe we have to dress and act a certain way to belong. We may believe that deep down we’re unlovable, or that we’ll never be able to write a book, get that job or lose weight. Beliefs are probably the most powerful subconscious thoughts that exist as they color the way we see life and influence our behaviors moment to moment.

We don’t know when beliefs start, exactly, but we do know that from the moment we open our eyes in this world, we are sponges for how things work, and we absolutely buy what we see and hear in our environments. Our brains are in critical stages of formation and the wiring is happening quickly. So we wire together beliefs based on our experience. If you were abused as a child, it’s highly likely that you felt unworthy or unlovable. If you were brought up in a loving and attuned environment, you may believe that you can do anything you set your mind to.

However, beliefs can be brought to light, and if they are unhealthy, they can be shattered.

Certainly many African Americans believed deeply that there would be no way they would see a black president in their lifetime, but it happened, and the glass ceiling disappeared.

Practice:

Consider whether you have any beliefs suggesting you are unlovable or unworthy, or that you just can’t do something. See if you can ride the string back to earlier times in your life and see where that message came from. Then each time you experience those thoughts, let the emotion, whether it’s fear, shame, etc., as it comes up in your body, ground you to the reality of the present moment. Then see if you can see an alternative vantage point.

Try this out as a practice over and again and see if you start to see cracks in your beliefs. It’s through these cracks that the light shines through.

And by the way, if you’re reading this post after May 21, congratulations, we’ve all made it!

As always, please share your thoughts, stories and questions below. Your interaction provides a living wisdom for us all to benefit from.

This piece is adapted from Elisha Goldstein’s publication on Mentalhelp.net.

Comments (33)

mikefair

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sponsor Of South Carolina Anti-Sharia Law Claims 99% Of Terrorist Acts Committed By Muslims

Posted on 20 May 2011 by Amago

All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t? This is not the first time and this is not the last time.

Sponsor Of South Carolina Anti-Sharia Law Claims 99% Of Terrorist Acts Committed By Muslims

By Lee Fang

At least a dozen states have proposed nearly identical laws designed to ban “Sharia law” in American courts. In South Carolina — despite the testimony of a law professor noting there is no evidence of Muslim traditions being imposed in judicial settings — a group of legislators have joined the anti-Sharia bandwagon and offered a bill. Earlier this month, ThinkProgress sat down with State Sen. Mike Fair (R-SC), the chief sponsor of the anti-Sharia legislation, to hear his views on the issue.

Fair explained that although his inspiration for the bill stemmed from his fear of Muslim influence in America, it would prohibit all foreign laws from being used in American courts. Fair said he began worrying about the Sharia after 9/11, and said that after reading several books on Islam, he came to the conclusion that “99 percent” of terrorist acts since the Beirut Marine barracks bombing were carried out by “Middle Eastern men who happen to be Muslim advocates of the Islam religion.” He went on to say that he would not want to hear the Muslim prayer call made from the building of the South Carolina capitol, and was troubled that some airport already “accomodate Islam” by storing prayer shawls for Muslim taxi drivers:

FAIR: Most, and when I say most, 99 percent probably, acts of terrorismaround the world since at least since the killing of the two hundred plus Marines in Lebanon, in the car bomb or whatever it was, have occurred, all these acts of terrorism, have occurred at the hands of Middle Eastern men who happen to be Muslim advocates of the Islam religion. […]

The prayer shawls in such a public airport, built by public dollars at no cost to the people who want to store their prayer shawls. That’s a stretch by the way, but it is an accommodation of religion. Well anyway, that might help explain some of the thinking behind the popping up.Really the bill we have is an affirmation, it would be an exclamation point behind the law.

Watch it:

Fair’s calculation, that nearly every single act of terrorism for the past couple of decades was committed by Muslim men, is off base. In reality, in the last ten years alone, nearly twice as many terrorist plots were hatched by non-Muslims in America than by Muslims.

Even Fair admits that his bill doesn’t actually change anything and his examples of the Sharia issue are incredibly flimsy. Rather than protecting Americans from some type of creeping religion problem, Fair’s bill threatens to isolate and persecute a minority group that already faces regular smears from both public officials and right-wing media.

Click more for an extended transcript.

FAIR: Most, and when I say most, ninety nine percent probably, acts of terrorism around the world since at least since the killing of the two hundred plus Marines in Lebanon, in the car bomb or whatever it was, have occurred, all these acts of terrorism, have occurred at the hands of Middle Eastern men who happen to be Muslim advocates of the Islam religion. […] There’s a willingness in certain areas of the country. And I think this is what’s stirred a response by people like me, who want to be proactively trying to place barriers around similar kinds of things. In Columbia, South Carolina, that beautiful state house right over there […] you gotta walk through its gorgeous, but no horns sounding five times a day at times of prayer, which I’m told – haven’t been to Michigan in a long time – been told that there are Islamic communities where there have […] in Dearborn, that’s exactly right, where with taxpayer dollars they’re doing certain funded, doing certain things to accommodate Islam. That’s wrong, according to an interpretation of our Constitution, that’s wrong, why they are accommodating them. Are they afraid? I don’t know. Airports where prayer shawls are stored for taxi cab drivers to be given the ability to pick and choose. […] The prayer shawls in such a public airport, built by public dollars at no cost to the people who want to store their prayer shawls. That’s a stretch by the way, but it is an accommodation of religion. Well anyway, that might help explain some of the thinking behind the popping up. Really the bill we have is an affirmation, it would be an exclamation point behind the law. It says you will practice the law. If you need reminding, foreign law does not prevail over South Carolina law, notwithstanding the various exemptions we talked about where federal law does prevail in treaties and so forth.

Comments (9)

Osama-bin-Laden-room-007

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Jezebel Turns Osama bin Laden’s Daughter into a Killing Machine

Posted on 20 May 2011 by Emperor

Jezebel Turns Osama bin Laden’s Daughter into a Killing Machine

(MuslimahMediaWatch) -Lara

Though one expects a whopping media event like the death of Osama Bin Laden to produce speculative stories on an industrial scale, it is to be hoped that the speculation is at least based in reality. Blogs engage in wild speculation, but serious media blogs are still behooved to be based on facts; otherwise, we might as well read slash fiction.

None of this quibbling for Anna North at Jezebel, who ponders the future of Osama bin Laden’s 12-year-old daughter, Safiyah, in a recent post. By ponder, I mean indulge in wild speculation with lashings of Orientalist and Islamophobic tropes.

The post, which has united commenters in disgust (one of whom, notably described the post as being written in  “Islamophobinese”), is boldly titled, “The Future of Bin Laden’s Daughter.” The article is inexplicably illustrated by a black and white photograph of a girl’s eyes. The eyes actually appear to be blue (Safiyah’s are likely to be brown), so already the indications are clear that a creepy agenda is ahead.

The first few paragraphs repeat what is known: her age, that she witnessed OBL’s death. From then, the fate of the children is discussed. North misquotes Canadian paper, The Star, stating that some want the children to be sent to madrassas in Pakistan, which would turn them into “jihadis.” What the article actually said was that the notorious Lal masjid had offered the children places, in what is almost certainly a bid for attention. By not making this clear, North perpetuates both the stereotype of madrassas as sinister hotbeds of nascent terrorism (rather than the actual meaning of the word: “schools”) and also the idea that there is a clamour in Pakistan to radicalize these children.

Safiyah’s very name is a cause of suspicion to North, who mentions the OBL quote that he’s named her after a woman who killed a Jewish spy, hence her very name is a “connection to jihad.” A bit of Islam 101 would have revealed that Safiyah (RA) was actually a Jewish convert to Islam and a wife of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh), hence the popularity of this name amongst Muslims.

Anyway, enough facts! It’s time for some pop culture references, however tasteless they may be when discussing a bereaved teenager. You see, Safiyah’s life is just like the film Hanna, about a girl who is raised and trained as an expert killer. Despite the fact that there is no evidence at all of Safiyah being trained to kill.At all.

However, we are not in a place of facts, truth, or evidence, so North happily states that the whole life imitating art should have Safiyah undergoing super-secret training and then avenging her father’s death, because as we know, the only Arabs/Muslims in films are Reel Bad ones.

From that “if my granny had wheels, she’d be a bus” level of reasoning, North finally concludes it is the role, nay, the “job” of the U.S. to stop this happening.

Right. So the U.S. is now duty-bound to prevent something happening that happens in films, not real life—something that there is no evidence to indicate will happen. There is also the whole issue of national sovereignty and how much right the U.S. has to interfere with the lives of foreign citizens in foreign countries who have not actually committed any crime against the U.S. or anyone else. Admittedly that last issue has often been hazy in practice, but history does not show U.S. intervention to be hugely positive, let alone worthy of encouragement in a supposedly progressive blog.

Therein lies the source of disappointment. From decidedly unpromising beginnings, Jezebel has attempted to improve its coverage of Muslim women, even featuring the work of several MMW writers. Yet someone saw fit not only to write this dreck, but allow it to be published. While recent kerfuffles would indicate that the “New” Jezebel is not massively concerned by reader criticism, such emphatic criticism should surely not be ignored. Until then, in a reversal of the usual statement: skip the post, read the comments.

Comments (6)

ansari

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Open Letter to President Obama from a Muslim Family

Posted on 20 May 2011 by Amago

A good piece from Kari Ansari.

Open Letter to President Obama from a Muslim Family

Dear President Barack Obama,

Along with many American Muslims, my family and I listened to your speech today on the Middle East and North Africa. While I appreciate your encouraging statements to the people of the Muslim world — particularly to those who are currently fighting for dignity and civil rights in their own lands — I also couldn’t help feeling that many Americans are not setting the example of which you spoke when it comes to our own Muslim citizens.

Currently, 20 states have introduced anti-Muslim legislation, with more pending. Some of our country’s lawmakers and politicians have made very bigoted inflammatory comments about Muslims and Islam. Very recently, Tennessee, under extreme pressure, rewrote a bill that would have made it a crime punishable by 15 years in prison for Muslims to worship together in groups of two or more. Organized groups are staging hate rallies against Muslims building houses of worship around the country. Local municipalities are playing the zoning game by zoning Islamic schools and mosques out of the community. Mosque playgrounds are being torched. Muslim family homesproperty, and mosques are being vandalized. Children are being bullied and harassed because they are Muslim. Shockingly, last week the Editor of the Gainesville Times in Florida published a letter that called for the expulsion of all Muslims from America. Recently, several Muslim clerics, and also a young Muslim woman were pulled off airplanes for no other reason other than they were dressed in recognizable Muslim attire. This is all being seen through the modern technology’s “window into the wider world” that you mentioned in your speech, but like all windows, you can also look from the world outside and see what’s happening inside.

What does it say to the world when our President speaks about rights for people in the Muslim world that “include free speech; the freedom of peaceful assembly; freedom of religion” when our own people are being hindered from building mosques, and schools, and our right to worship freely is even being threatened?

Mr. President, Muslims in America know that you do not stand with this kind of bigotry and hatred. During your announcement of the killing of Osama bin Laden you said,

As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not — and never will be — at war with Islam. I’ve made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam.

We appreciated this statement, however, judging by the uptick in anti-Muslim incidents since the death of bin Laden, the words weren’t enough to resonate with those in America who feel threatened by their Muslim neighbors.

Mr. President, Muslims need your leadership, your strong voice, and your support in this regard. You are a friend to the world’s Muslims, especially those fighting for their freedom, but Muslims need your friendship here on our own soil. Anti-Islam bigotry is getting worse in America — not better.

In our home, we love and respect you as our President; will you show us the same love and respect as a patriotic American family by speaking out strongly against this growing trend of anti-Muslim bigotry?

Follow Kari Ansari on Twitter: www.twitter.com/KariAnsari

Comments (6)

mosque-protestor

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Mosque Protester, Police Put Miami Neighborhood On Edge

Posted on 19 May 2011 by Amago

Via IslamophobiaToday

At this point in time the Imams are “accused” of material support for terrorism, that doesn’t mean they are guilty, in this country we sill believe in due process of law. Even if they are convicted it does not mean the mosque or the people who pray in it should be punished, that is guilt by association and collective punishment. Also, when corruption leaks in churches or synagogues do we have people demand the site to be closed? No, we put the accused on trial, not the faith or race. (If you haven’t already, join Americans Against Islamophobia fan page on Facebook)

Mosque Protester, Police Put Miami Neighborhood On Edge

MIAMI (CBS4) – The South Florida Imams accused of terrorism were arrested right in front of their mosques, disrupting the neighborhoods around them. Monday night, one of those neighborhoods saw more commotion.

Mosque protester Mark Dubynsky says standing outside the Flagler Mosque in West Miami-Dade with a sign demanding the mosque be razed to the ground was about self-expression.

“This is not about hate, this is about not keeping a shrine that promotes hate in the neighborhood,” he told CBS4′s Natalia Zea.

Mosque worshipper Samad Nassirya feels differently.

“That’s a threat, he’s threatening us,” he told Zea.

Dubynsky drove from Palm Beach to the mosque to make a statement, after the mosque’s imam Hafiz Khan was arrested and charged with funneling money to terrorists.

“I think if your leader, your church, your mosque is supporting terrorism then I think that building, that mosque needs to be torn down,” said Dubynsky.

Nassirya called police Monday evening, saying Dybynsky and his sign were scaring fellow Muslims away from their evening prayer service.

“People come here five times to pray and now all the women and children are scared to come here and we’re gonna lose all our people,” he said.

Nassirya is especially upset, because he doesn’t believe the allegations against his imam.

“It’s ridiculous. He’s a saintly man, he’s a saintly man.”

Neighbors don’t know who is right, but they do know their once quiet neighborhood is now dealing with police presence, protest, and press.

“Wow man, I had to close my door because of everybody knocking on the door,” said Jorge Gonzalez.

It’s affected neighbor Edna Wright too.

“I usually go walking around the neighborhood,” said Wright. “I just stay in my house now because I don’t know what’s going on.”

Comments (15)

Tennessee’s Anti-Muslim Bill is an American Disgrace

Tags: , , , , ,

Tennessee’s Anti-Muslim Bill is an American Disgrace

Posted on 19 May 2011 by Emperor

Tennessee is quickly becoming a hotbed of extremist anti-Muslim hatred.

Tennessee’s Anti-Muslim Bill is an American Disgrace

(Huffington Post) Daniel Tutt

In a matter of days, Tennessee’s state legislature is expected to pass a bill ostensibly designed to combat radical Islamic terrorism in Tennessee known as the “Material Support” bill or HB 1353. While the bill has removed direct references to Islam or Muslims at the pressure of civil rights groups such as the ACLU and others, if it is passed, it will seriously harm our security by alienating our biggest allies in combatting homegrown terrorism: our fellow American Muslims.

The impact of this bill on Muslims in Tennessee was on display in a recent training I conducted in Murfreesboro for educators and law enforcement officials. The training brought together local Muslim leaders and more than 80 civic leaders to look at ways to respond to a spike in bullying towards Muslim youth and rising reports of prejudice. Last summer, Murfreesboro was rocked by a series of protests against a mosque building project that resulted in two hate crimes directed toward the 1,000 person Muslim community, followed by a national media expose by CNN called, “Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door.”

Through my discussions with community leaders in Murfreesboro, the problem seems not so much one of a widespread level of fear or bigotry toward Islam and Muslims by average Tennessean citizens. On the contrary, they felt a sense of embarrassment about what they see as a new type of anti-Muslim sentiment.

It’s important we understand the agendas and ideas that compose this movement to ban sharia in Tennessee and now more than 15 other states. On a national level, David Yerushalmi, a self-appointed expert in Islamic law and its intersection with Islamic terrorism and national security, wrote the original bill that serves as the template for each of the bills. Yerushalmi’s organization, the Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE) is deemed a “hate group” by multiple civil rights groups including the Anti Defamation League. SANE’s founding mission is resonantly white supremacist as it declares that historically America was “the handiwork of faithful Christians, mostly men, and almost entirely white.”

Yerushalmi and his associates at the Center for Security Policy have published a recent report, “Sharia and the Threat to America,” that has served as the basis for anti-sharia bills currently under vote or review in more than 14 states. In a 2007 report, Yerushalmi wrote on homegrown terrorism in the American Muslim community, called the Mapping Sharia Project, he urged Congress to declare war on the “Muslim nation,” which he defined as “Shari’a-adherent Muslims,” and further asked Congress to define Muslim illegal immigrants as alien enemies “subject to immediate deportation.”

A right-wing citizen group called the Tennessee Eagle Forum was the first group to push the bill into the state legislature. In a recent video produced by the group, “Losing Our Community,” they conflate all Tennessee Muslims with Islamic theocracies in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and seek to smear Muslim leaders in Tennessee with radical clerics such as Anwar Awlaki, without providing any tangible evidence of this association.

While Yerushalmi and his associates seek to institutionalize a series of Islamophobic bills into state legislators, American Muslims are left on the sidelines feeling isolated and alienated.

Understanding Sharia and its Meaning for Muslims

As David Schnazer of Duke University discovered in a recent comprehensive study of homegrown terrorism, “Anti-Terror Lessons of the American Muslim Community,” American Muslims are at the forefront of combatting potentially radicalized members of their community. For example, of the surprisingly small number of domestic terror threats initiated by American Muslims since 9/11 (154 in total), 46 of these perpetrators were turned over to the authorities by the American Muslim community.

The Center for American Progress has recently put forward a new policy brief, “Understanding Sharia Law,” designed to challenge the conception of sharia that Yerushalmi and others are proposing in these bills. The idea of sharia being a purely “legal-political-military doctrine” is far from accurate according to actual Islamic legal opinion and the ways that Muslims themselves interpret sharia.

Dr. Sherman Jackson, a respected scholar of Islam at University of Michigan, points out that most Muslims tend to speak not of sharia but of fiqh, which literally means “understanding” and underscores the distinction between God’s prescriptions on the one hand and the human attempt to understand these on the other.
While the common translation, “Islamic law,” is not entirely wrong, it is under-inclusive: Sharia includes scores of moral and ethical principles from honoring one’s parents to helping the poor to being good to one’s neighbor. In most all laws, sharia prescribes no “earthly punishments” for those who violate the dictates. Reward and punishment in these areas are the preserve of God in the Afterlife.

Despite Being a Non-Issue, HB 1353 Will Hurt Tennessee’s Economy

The movement to ban sharia is a non-issue both for Muslim scholars, who overwhelmingly support Muslims living by the U.S. constitution as the law of the land, and also as clearly laid out by the Supreme Court. More than half a dozen leading Muslim clerics in the United States recently produced a video PSA, “Injustice Cannot Defeat Injustice,” condemning homegrown terrorism and the misinterpretation of Islamic theology that supports it.

In a 1990 Supreme Court case, Employment Division vs. Smith, over the use of peyote for religious practices, Justice Antonin Scalia deemed that all religious laws must adhere to the law of the land, the U.S. Constitution. In other words, for law to be respected and followed, Scalia declared that the United States can have only one law.

Just last week, as legislators gathered for a hearing on the bill, 350 concerned Tennessee Muslims gathered at the Capitol to urge lawmakers not to vote in favor of the bill. They argue that the bill is more than simply anti-Muslim; it’s harmful to Tennessee’s economy. As it is currently crafted, the bill gives an unprecedented and unchecked designation of power to Tennessee’s attorney general and the governor. This consolidation of power into one lawmaker is something that citizen groups such as the Tennessee Eagle Forum ought to despise.

The bill seriously hampers the economy of Tennessee by undermining the effect of trade and commerce with Muslim-majority societies throughout Tennessee if the bill becomes law. For example, international airports such as the one in Memphis may see a marked decline in flights coming from Muslim countries. Nearly every hospital in Tennessee has a substantially high number of Muslim doctors. Dr. Gary Gunderson of Memphis notes that the bill will have serious economic repercussions for all Tennesseans because of an anticipated flight of Muslim doctors from Tennessee.

A recent survey has reported that more than 75 percent of Tennesseans are worried about the economy and jobs as their first priority, making the economic implications of the bill especially important for lawmakers weighing the bill’s legitimacy.

Daniel Tutt is the Outreach Director of Unity Productions Foundation, and a fellow at the Institute forSocial Policy and Understanding, a non-partisan think tank. An activist, speaker and Ph.D. student in philosophy and communication, his work seeks to build greater understanding across religious and cultural lines, with a particular emphasis on Islam and Muslims.

Comments (3)

Evolutionary Psychologist Says Black Women are Scientifically Ugly, Advocates Muslim Holocaust

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Evolutionary Psychologist Says Black Women are Scientifically Ugly, Advocates Muslim Holocaust

Posted on 18 May 2011 by Danios

The internet is abuzz with this recent controversy: Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics, recently published an article on Psychology Today entitled “Why Are Black Women Less Physically Attractive Than Other Women?”  In this racist pseudo-scientific piece, Kanazawa tries to explain why black women are, on average, scientifically uglier than women of other races.  Public outrage forced Psychology Today to remove the article from its website.  (It is still available to view here.)  For a response to the article and why it’s a load of crock, check out Salon’s article here.  (Never does it cross Kanazawa’s mind that perhaps people often tend to be more attracted to people of their own ethnicity, and that therefore if one uses majority white men to rank women that this may influence the outcome?)

This is the same Kanazawa who earlier published articles against Muslims.  In an article entitled “What’s Wrong with Muslims” the crazy psychologist claims that there are “about 120 million ready suicide bombers worldwide”, or about 30% of the world’s Muslim population.  Is it not strange that this comment did not receive even close to the outrage that the “black women are ugly” claim?  He is effectively saying that 3 out of 10 Muslims you meet in your day to day life are soon-to-be suicide bombers.  [See Update I below for issues with the math.]  Imagine if someone said that 3 out of 10 black men are criminals, murderers, or rapists.  Surely, being a suicide terrorist bomber is worse than any of these.

It is strange that a “scientist” like Kanazawa would routinely rely on his own bigoted opinions as opposed to facts.  His writings are full of wild presumptions, devoid of any scientific method.  Even when he states objective “facts”, they are nothing but falsities.  For example, in the same article Kanazawa stupidly says that “most Muslims speak the same language – Arabic – but not all.”  This laughable claim exudes profound ignorance, and places his awareness of Islam and the Muslim world to less than the level of an eighth grader.  After all, isn’t it in junior high or high school that students study world history and find out that “only about 12 percent of Muslims worldwide are Arabs.” With blatant errors like this, one wonders what sort of standards Psychology Today has?

Not only is Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa a racist and bigot: he is a genocidal maniac.  In an article urging Americans to hate Muslims (“the enemy”), Kanazawa argues that it is justified to target civilians including women and children because our enemies are not nation-states:

We have always hated our enemies purely and intensely. They were “Japs,” they were “Krauts,” they were “Gooks.” And we didn’t think twice about dropping bombs on them, to kill them and their wives and children. (As many commentators have pointed out, the distinction between combatants and civilians does not make sense in World War III, and the Geneva Convention — an agreement among nations — is no longer applicable, because our enemies are not nation states.)

(Maybe you didn’t know but we’re actually in World War III already.)

Kanazawa then approves of nuking 35 Muslim countries and killing women and children:

Here’s a little thought experiment. Imagine that, on September 11, 2001, when the Twin Towers came down, the President of the United States was not George W. Bush, but Ann Coulter. What would have happened then? On September 12, President Coulter would have ordered the US military forces to drop 35 nuclear bombs throughout the Middle East, killing all of our actual and potential enemy combatants, and their wives and children. On September 13, the war would have been over and won, without a single American life lost.

Yes, we need a woman in the White House, but not the one who’s running.

(That’s the last sentence in the entire article, in case you are wondering if I took that out of context.)

Naturally, Ann Coulter would want to nuke the most well-known cities in the Islamic world, so we could estimate about 10 million per city.  So, Kanazawa is approving of killing 350,000,000 Muslim men, women, and children–almost sixty times as many Jews that died in the Holocaust.  He is advocating for a Muslim Holocaust.

Public pressure forced Psychology Today to remove the “black women are ugly” article from its website, but to this day the articles labeling 3 out of 10 Muslims as “terrorists”–and advocating nuclear annihilation of Muslim cities–continue to grace their website with hardly a peep from the internet world.

Can one imagine the reaction if some prominent Muslim had advocated nuking 35 Israeli cities?  It would be social and career suicide to say such things against Jews (rightfully so) and against black people (again, rightfully so), yet one can say almost anything against Muslims with almost no repercussions.  Muslims are at the absolute bottom of the totem pole of social hierarchy.

Wasn’t it after all Bill O’Reilly who said many years ago that the most attractive women in the world are from Norway and Thailand and the least attractive are women in Muslim countries?  His career did not take any hit from this comment, unlike Kanazawi who is now considered an absolute clown.  Saying black women are ugly is unacceptable, but saying the same for Muslim women is perfectly fine–at least, it is worthy of serious discussion by Serious Pundits.

I’d absolutely hate to be a black woman who is Muslim.  Then I couldn’t attract the stunningly beautiful specimens, those gifts to womankind and Adonis incarnates: Bill O’Reilly and Satoshi Kanazawa.

Update I:

Readers have pointed out some problems with the math above: after rereading Kanazawa’s article, it seems that he meant 30% of 50% of the Muslim population (i.e. the men only)–not 30% of the total Muslim population (as I originally thought he was saying)–are suicide bombers.  So, let me reword what I wrote above: Kanazawa is saying that 3 out of 10 Muslim men are suicide bombers, not Muslims overall.  This hardly mitigates the atrociousness of his claim.

Additionally, he uses an incorrectly low estimate for the total number of Muslims in the world, something that Islamophobes tend to do.

Lastly, I was off by an order of magnitude with regard to the 35 million number–it should be 350 million.  Having said that, one reader pointed out that there are only a few Muslim majority cities in the world that have a population of 10 million or more.  Therefore, let’s ballpark and say something like 150 million people–more than 25 times the number of people killed in the Holocaust.

As readers may have figured out, math is not my strong suit.  The last time I ever studied math was back in the first couple years of college, and it bored the living daylights out of me.  But in all seriousness, it hardly makes any difference to the point of the article whether the number is 35 million or 350 million or somewhere in between: it’s millions of innocent civilians we’re talking about and that’s the bottom line.

Comments (104)

abc_anti_muslim_harrasment_nt_110513_wg

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Army Investigation Over False Accusations Ruined Our Lives, Say Muslim Soldiers

Posted on 18 May 2011 by Amago

"I was like, 'What's going on here?' This is not America, that's not why I joined the Army," said one of the men, 34-year-old Khalid Lyaacoubi on the right walking with another Muslim recruit, 27-year-old Yassine Bahammou. (ABC News)

Even while serving in the Army, Muslims suffer harassment and suspicion.

Army Investigation Over False Accusations Ruined Our Lives, Say Muslim Soldiers

By JOSEPH RHEE AND CHRIS CUOMO

May 13, 2011

Five Muslims who joined the Army to work as military translators say their lives and careers were ruined after they were falsely accused of trying to poison their fellow soldiers. In an interview for ABC News, two of the men say an Army investigation into the matter has cast a stigma on their lives, preventing them from gaining citizenship and employment.

“I was like, ‘What’s going on here?’ This is not America, that’s not why I joined the Army,” said one of the men, 34-year-old Khalid Lyaacoubi.

The men are all citizens of Morocco who were permanent “green card” residents of the U.S. They joined the Army in 2009 as part of a special program called “09 Lima” that would train them to work as Army translators in Iraq and Afghanistan, one of the most dangerous jobs in the military. In return for their service, the men would be fast tracked for U.S. citizenship.

“We want to prove to Arabic nations, ‘we are Arabic and we live here. We lived with Americans and socialized with Americans.’ We know they are good,” said Lyaacoubi.

“The United States is known for fighting for other people’s freedom, and I like it and I wanted to help doing that,” said another Muslim recruit, 27-year-old Yassine Bahammou.

Trouble at Fort Jackson

The five men successfully completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, which they say was a positive and rewarding experience. However, it was during specialized training as translators at the Advanced Individual Training school on base that they say their lives were upended. They say it all began in November of 2009 when Major Nidal Hassan opened fire on his fellow soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas, killing 13 people and wounding 31. In the wake of the shooting, Lyaacoubi and Bahammou said some of their fellow soldiers began to turn on them, calling them “terrorists” and “Hajis” behind their backs.

Then in November of 2009, the five Muslim recruits were arrested by the Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) over a tip that they were allegedly plotting to poison their fellow soldiers at Fort Jackson. The news of the investigation broke on the Christian Broadcasting Network and quickly became national news.

Without being formally charged with a crime, the men were questioned about the poisoning allegation and accused of larceny, mutiny and conspiracy. The recruits were detained in their barracks building for 45 days and were escorted by guards wherever they went, including the bathroom. They said they were prohibited from speaking Arabic to each other or to family members on the phone. All along, the men said they told investigators they had no idea where the poisoning allegation came from and they vigorously maintained their innocence.

During this time, the men also said they were subjected to anti-Muslim harassment and abuse by authorities. The recruits claim they were told they would be sent to Guantanamo and one of the men said a CID agent told him he would be sent back to Morocco “in a box”.

“They were treating us as a terrorist,” said Lyaacoubi. “I never forget what this agent, she told me. She was like, “We are at war against Islam and you are a Muslim. Well, what are you going to do about that.”

“I see that my religion is the problem, or the part of the world that I am from is the problem,” said Bahammou. “I asked them to take me to church so I can change my religion, if that’s the problem.”

Investigation Lingers On

>> Continue reading: Army Investigation Over False Accusations Ruined Our Lives, Say Muslim Soldiers

Comments (18)

Wave of Horrific Islamophobia in Athens

Tags: , , , , , ,

Wave of Horrific Islamophobia in Athens

Posted on 18 May 2011 by Emperor

Athens at this point sounds like Geert Wilders idea of heaven. (hat tip: Elizrael)

by Sara (via. her website: Neocolonialism and its Discontents)

I just got back from a study trip to Athens, Greece, and it was definitely an interesting experience. Although my specialization is gender, the trip ended up being more about migration and race-relations in Greece.

Before we went there, we had no idea that Greece is having a huge immigration problem. Some things we found out while we were there:

–Mosques are not allowed to be built in Athens, which means that there are only informal mosques in basements.
–Over the past few years, right-wing Greek people have trapped Muslims inside these informal mosques and then thrown petrol bombs inside, killing everyone.
–The second day we were there, a Greek man was robbed and then killed by 3 “dark-looking people” who were assumed to be immigrants. Later that night, neo-Nazi TV channels (yes) and blogs called for Greek people to go out and attack and beat immigrants.
–The next day over 17 immigrants ended up in the hospital after being stabbed.
–There was also a clash between the left-wing and the police, who are overwhelmingly right-wing (surprise, surprise).
–There is a huge back-log in terms of applications for legal status as a migrant, and some have to wait up to 20 years. Thus they can be arrested at any time, and they are kept in 2-by-2 cells with no toilets, little food, and no dignity.
–There are reportedly 2 million undocumented migrants in Athens, who are now at risk of being attacked.

While Athens is certainly extreme, these discourses can be found all over Europe now, including the Netherlands. Anti-Islam rhetoric has become so widespread and acceptable, it is no surprise that in some countries, like Greece, it has led to violence.

Some feminists criticize porn because they say it leads to violence against women, since it objectifies and dehumanizes them. The same can be said about discourses on Islam in Europe today. By dehumanizing, stigmatizing, and insulting Muslims, violence is only a few steps away.

And why exactly is Greece allowed to have a neo-Nazi channel if it is a member of the EU? Honestly, the EU needs to stop criticizing other countries when it has members who 1) have neo-Nazi media outlets, and 2) do not allow Muslims to build places of worship.
Uffff.


On a positive note, Greek men are very good-looking!

Comments (20)

capt.photo_1305595804161-1-0

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Lockdown for Queen Elizabeth’s landmark Ireland visit

Posted on 18 May 2011 by Emperor

(hat tip: JD)

There has been a rise in terrorist activity in Ireland from the same type of groups that Rep. Peter King used to support. Imagine if these groups were Muslim?

Lockdown for Queen Elizabeth’s landmark Ireland visit

DUBLIN (AFP) – Queen Elizabeth II starts her historic state visit to Ireland Tuesday amid a massive security lockdown after the threat of Irish republican terrorism resurfaced with a coded bomb threat in London.

The historic four-day trip, the first by a British monarch to the Republic of Ireland since it gained independence from London in 1922, is a landmark moment aimed at normalising relations between the two neighbouring states.

However, a visit intended to underline the progress made following the hard-won peace in Northern Ireland is taking place surrounded by the highest security.

Central Dublin was in a police clampdown amid Ireland’s biggest-ever security operation, while dissident republicans opposed to the peace process and the sovereign’s visit made a coded bomb threat in London on Monday.

Police sealed off roads near Buckingham Palace and carried out a controlled explosion after the first coded warning outside Northern Ireland for 10 years.

Such warnings have traditionally been used by Irish republican paramilitaries before attacks.

Dissidents opposed to the peace process have been resurgent in Northern Ireland in recent months, murdering a Catholic policeman in a car bombing in April.

Opposition to the queen’s visit persists among hardcore and violent republicans, who want Northern Ireland to become part of the Republic.

Comments (7)

Muslim Immigrant Seeks Stay of Execution for His Attacker, a Convicted Anti-Muslim Murderer

Tags: , , , , , ,

Muslim Immigrant Seeks Stay of Execution for His Attacker, a Convicted Anti-Muslim Murderer

Posted on 17 May 2011 by Danios

Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, said: “Show mercy so that you may be shown mercy, forgive people so that you will be forgiven by God.” (Musnad Ahmad)

And he also said: “The merciful will be given mercy by the Most Merciful. Have mercy on those on earth and the One in the heavens will have mercy upon you.” (Sunan Abu Dawud)

Immigrant in Texas seeks stay for attacker

DALLAS, TX – Rais Bhuiyan saw Mark Stroman and his gun in the reflection of the window.

Then came the question a robber wouldn’t ask, Bhuiyan thought. “Where are you from?”

“Excuse me?”

Within seconds, Bhuiyan, a store clerk, fell to the floor of the convenience store on Buckner Boulevard, bleeding profusely from a head wound from the gun blast. It blinded his right eye but miraculously didn’t damage his brain.

Stroman, a white supremacist, would later confess he was out for revenge against those of Middle Eastern descent in Mesquite and Dallas days after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Already, Stroman had killed one Pakistani immigrant; two weeks later, he’d kill an Indian immigrant.

Now, Bhuiyan wants to forgive.

He’ll be asking for a stay of the July 20 evening scheduled execution of Stroman, and a stop to the “cycle of violence,” as he calls it.

“Sometimes, we human beings make mistakes out of anger,” said Bhuiyan, 37, in an interview Monday with The Dallas Morning News. Stroman, a former stonecutter, was convicted of the Oct. 4 killing of Vasudev Patel, an Indian of the Hindu faith who owned a gas station and convenience store in Mesquite.

Stroman also confessed to the Sept. 15 Dallas killing of Waqar Hasan, an immigrant from Pakistan and a Muslim, in what is believed to be the first hate crime in the U.S. after the attacks. He was charged in the shooting of Bhuiyan, a Bangledesh immigrant, on Sept. 21.

Bhuiyan said his Islamic faith led him to realize “hate doesn’t bring any good solution to people. At some point we have to break the cycle of violence. It brings more disaster.”

Bhuiyan shows little sign of the shooting. A slim man with thinning hair and large, wide-set brown eyes, he can only see from his left one. He carries about 38 pellet fragments on the right side of his face, he said.

Bhuiyan said the event changed him and he now celebrates Sept. 21 as his new birthday because it was then he got his life back. Bhuiyan has a full-time job in information technology but wants to return to college. Last fall, he contacted Dr. Rick Halperin, the director of the human rights education program at Southern Methodist University.

It was a coincidence that Halperin already knew many details of Bhuiyan’s story. Stroman had been corresponding with the professor, an anti-death-penalty activist, for two years.

Bhuiyan explained how the event had shaped his life, how he grew introspective about his faith and how he found answers to why he lived and others died.

The events, Halperin said, “raise questions about compassion and healing and the nature of justice.”

As for Bhuiyan, Halperin said, “I am amazed at the calm with which some can forgive the unforgivable.”

Hadi Jawad of the Dallas Peace Center said Bhuiyan’s actions serve as a lesson for others at a critical time for the nation and the world.

“With the 10th anniversary of 9/11 coming up, we need a narrative of compassion and healing. The world has gone through so much darkness,” Jawad said.

Halperin said that a stay of execution in favor of a lifetime sentence for Stroman will be difficult, but they are committed to trying. Stroman is scheduled to die by injection at about 6 p.m. in Huntsville, said a public information officer for the Texas Department of Corrections.

Within six months of Sept. 11, there were 1,717 incidents of harassment, violence or discriminatory acts against Muslims, or those perceived to be Muslims, according to the D.C.-based Council on American-Islamic Relations.

Bhuiyan said he still has fears he’ll be attacked again, particularly when he sees men with tattoos. Stroman had many. “I try to ignore them (fears), but I am a human being,” he said.

Bhuiyan is one of eight children, but he has no siblings or relatives in the United States. He and his former fiancée in Bangladesh went separate ways as he coped with his physical and psychological wounds. His parents wanted him to return home, but he “wanted to give it a fight.” And last November, he deepened his roots here by becoming a U.S. citizen.

He has prepared a petition drive for the stay of execution and is about to launch a website.

“You may not like me because of my skin color or because of my accent . . . but don’t hate me. We can educate people.”

Comments (26)

Pamela Geller: American patriot or extremist firebrand?

Tags: , , , , , ,

Pamela Geller: American patriot or extremist firebrand?

Posted on 17 May 2011 by Danios

Robert Chalmers meets the right-wing blogger to find out

(cross-posted from The Independent)

Among the many new things I have learnt from the work of Pamela Geller is that President Obama reputedly used to knock around with a crack whore.

“That,” the author, blogger and broadcaster insists, “is not what I said. You are taking this out of context. The post [on her website atlasshrugs.com] was pointing out how people were reporting lie after lie about Sarah Palin. I said to myself, there is so much about Obama we don’t print. In his youth,” she continues, repeating a story for which there exists absolutely no foundation, “he supposedly liked a girl who was a crack whore. I never reported it as fact. They say all these vile things about Palin but do we ever talk about Obama and the crack whore?”

The incredibly libellous post, entitled: “IT’S TIME TO EXPOSE THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA” appeared on 1 August 2009. “Why not tell the truth about Obama and his reported strange sexual predilections?” Geller wrote. “It is well known that he allegedly was involved with a crack whore in his youth. Very seedy stuff … Find the ho, give her a show! Obama allegedly trafficked in some very deviant practices.”

You may not have encountered the writing of Geller, one of the more controversial ascending stars of the American extreme right. Politicised, as she says, by the events of 9/11, she inspired, then orchestrated, opposition to the construction of the planned Muslim cultural centre two blocks away from the former site of the World Trade Center, which Geller named the “Ground Zero Mosque”. A pivotal figure in the so-called “birther” movement, she has – in common with other robustly conservative figures such as Donald Trump, broadcaster Glenn Beck and her writing partner Robert Spencer – tirelessly queried details of President Obama’s ancestry, and hence his entitlement to office. Geller still has many questions in this area, despite the recent release of the “long form” of the president’s birth certificate, proving that he was born in the American state of Hawaii.

A glance at her voluminous blog reveals her disdain for institutions such as the UN (for employing “child-raping peacekeepers”) The New York Times (“Jew-haters”) and other famously subversive voices such as that of our own Sun newspaper (for whom “Jewkilling is OK, everything else is terror”) and Pope Benedict XVI (“Maybe Jew-hating,” she writes with reference to the German pontiff, “obliterates rational thought”). She didn’t like the way Campbell’s Soup went about producing a halal recipe and has described liberal Jews as “self-hating wretches”. An infamous post on Atlas Shrugs suggesting that Barack Obama was the love-child of Malcolm X was, Geller insists, not written by her. The image she posted of Obama urinating on an American flag was “a very well-circulated cartoon – so what?”

“I believe you once said that President Obama ‘wants jihad to win’.”

“I don’t know if he wants it to win, but he is certainly Islamophiliac. He is certainly aiding jihad.”

To help discourage him, Geller has provided a one-click link from her site to what she describes as “pornographic” photographs of Obama’s late mother. These are actually rather sad black-and-white pictures no more offensive than the images on hand-cranked peep-show machines from the early 20th century.

The Southern Poverty Law Centre, the US’s leading political watchdog group, has classified “Stop Islamization of America” (the group she founded with professional partner Robert Spencer) as a hate organisation. She continues to defend Radovan Karadzic, whose trial she has likened to the Nuremberg hearings. Geller speaks fondly of kindred spirits such as the far-right English Defence League (EDL) and the Dutch extremist Geert Wilders, whose rhetoric recently resulted in what she calls a heresy trial.

“Wilders is generally regarded as a racist lunatic, isn’t he?”

He is, Geller insists, a “lovely man. In Pakistan, you speak against Islam and you are put to death. Here in the West, your character is assassinated. You are a racistislamophobe-republicantimuslimbigot.” The speed, not to say pride, with which she delivers what has become a one-word catchphrase, is undeniably impressive. “You get called something enough times,” she smiles, “you say it plenty fast.”

The intensity, if not the ethnic focus, of her views on national identity, recalls the correspondence between H Rider Haggard and Rudyard Kipling, in the course of which they discuss “the Jewish problem” [ie there are Jews, some of them in England]. On the evidence of her writing alone, you might assume its author to be a male octogenarian in tweeds carrying a 12-bore.

But Geller (whose blog carries video of opponents, referring to what they perceive to be the results of cosmetic surgery, screaming: “whore – your face is melting”) looks younger than her 53 years. She arrives for our meeting at Manhattan’s Four Seasons Hotel wearing tight jeans, boldly luxuriant eyelash extensions and a quantity of mascara and eyeshadow that wouldn’t have looked out of place in the days when, as she recalls, she used to dance to the Cramps at clubs such as CBGB’s.

She occasionally records video blogs wearing a bikini. In one clip, which defends another prominent right-wing activist Ann Coulter, Geller performs an a cappella version of Morrissey’s “Some Girls are Bigger than Others” while stroking a small dog.

A practised and articulate guest speaker on TV channels including Fox News and CBS, she isn’t fond of the American media, dominated as it is by “Obama’s serfs”. Recently, Geller tells me, she declined an interview request from the BBC. She switches on a digital recorder. “Normally,” she says, “I don’t have to use this.” But she’s dealing with “a lefty newspaper” which carries reports by Robert Fisk.

Whatever you might think of Pamela Geller, you can’t accuse her of lacking courage. Her website reproduced cartoons of the prophet Muhammad, first published in 2005 by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, which led to an attempt on the life of artist Kurt Westergaard.

“Going through my notes,” I tell her, “I find you quoted as asking: ‘Does Obama know anybody that isn’t wacky, radical, militant, Judeophobe, Socialist, Marxist and Paedophile?’ Next to which I appear to have written: ‘Possibly Diana Krall.’”

“Actually I didn’t say that but I did say something that echoes that, so I don’t have a problem. There is no one in his cabinet that is not radical.”

America, argues Geller (she uses the noun to apply to the United States rather than the whole continent), is at war with evil – a force whose most pernicious incarnation is Islam, or to be more precise, “creeping Sharia”. Towards the end of what turns out to be an animated two-hour conversation I will ask her whether, had her contributions been articulated on a public stage in the UK, she would have been arrested. Under British law, she says she doesn’t know. “In Holland,” she concedes, “probably.”

She recalls how Terry Jones, a fundamentalist minister, achieved international fame after he declared he was going to burn the Koran, an action he performed in Florida, in March. “Who cares if some fringe pastor is going to burn a Koran? You burn a Bible, nobody says ‘Boo.’”

“Can you think of any good Muslims?” I ask her. “Because reading your book – The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America [co-authored with Robert Spencer]– I can’t find any.”

“That’s not true. I love Muslims. I hate an extreme ideology that oppresses women… we have seen a 1,400-year history of 270 million victims of jihadi wars.”

Geller doesn’t mind, she insists, what anybody regards as sacred. “I don’t care if you worship a stone,” she says. “I don’t care if you worship a little rock.”

“How did you know about Gordon?” I ask her. “I left him in the hotel room.”

The writer, who is, remarkably, not without a sense of irony, permits herself a smile.

“I can think of one Muslim of my acquaintance – Yusuf Islam, formerly Cat Stevens,” I tell her, “who I don’t believe would hurt a fly.”

“No. But he has said some things.”

“As he’s often explained, he was very naive at that time and he was entrapped by a British newspaper. He’s said that he would not repeat or endorse those statements as reported, and I believe him.”

“OK.”

“So who are the good Muslims that you know?”

“Secular Muslims.”

“Isn’t that a bit of an oxymoron?”

“No. If you adhere to the Koran… the last chapters are very violent.”

“Have you read Deuteronomy? Ask Saladin what he thought about Richard I.”

“But there was an enlightenment. Islam has had no enlightenment. You cannot criticise Islam. You cannot speak candidly of Islam…”

“You seem to be giving it a good go.”

“Listen, you think it’s easy being me, dear? I get threats. I have my contacts at law enforcement.”

Geller has even managed to fall out with former sympathiser Zuhdi Jasser, an Arizona-based critic of what he terms “political Islam”. Jasser, once a lieutenant commander in the US Navy and no shrinking liberal, is a regular guest on shows hosted by attack dogs of conservative broadcasting, such as Sean Hannity – a man who, even Pamela Geller concedes, “is right-wing”.

“Geller and Robert Spencer’s comments… show that they are against any solution from within the House of Islam,” wrote Jasser, who is of Syrian descent, earlier this year. “This only aids and abets all Islamists. But that doesn’t matter if their target includes all Muslims and their only viable solution is conversion of one-fifth of the world’s population.”

Everything in Geller’s motivation comes back to 9/11. One of the many ways in which the United States was changed forever by the atrocity was a more widespread acceptability of the kind of hateful diatribe that had previously been the preserve of a handful of shock jocks.

Five years ago, referring to 9/11 widows who opposed George W Bush, Ann Coulter told NBC’s The Today Show: “They believe the entire country is required to marinate in their personal agony. These broads are millionaires, lionised on TV, k revelling in their status. I have never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much.”

In May 2010 Geller began her campaign against the project then called Cordoba House (a title she considered deliberately offensive in its evocation of the Moorish conquest of Spain) and now named Park 51. As currently planned, it would involve the construction of a 13-storey building on the site of a damaged factory a tenth of a mile away from the World Trade Center. Its advocates, such as chief organiser Imam Rauf, assert that – housing as it would a memorial, theatre, swimming pool and baseball court as well as a prayer site – it is neither at Ground Zero, nor a mosque.

The title of her blog on 6 May last year read: “MONSTER MOSQUE PUSHES AHEAD IN SHADOW OF WORLD TRADE CENTER ISLAMIC DEATH AND DESTRUCTION.” She raised funds for posters on New York buses, which depicted an image of the burning towers, with the slogan: “Why There?” Her campaign was supported by the New York Post and resolute conservatives such as Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich.

Geller has recently completed work on a film called The Ground Zero Mosque: The Second Wave of the 9/11 Attack. “The Ground Zero Mosque is deeply insulting, deliberately provocative and offensive,” she argues. “To build a megamosque in a building that was destroyed in the 9/11 attacks is the height of insensitivity.”

Among the people likely to visit the facility, I suggest, “will be honest believers, some of whom lost relatives and fellow Muslims in the attack”.

“I don’t separate the Muslims that died from the non-Muslims. Many moderate Muslims,” she asserts, correctly, “are against it. It is an Islamic pattern to build triumphal mosques on the cherished sites…”

“Pardon?”

“Let me finish, sir. On the cherished sites of conquered lands. There has not been one mosque of reconciliation, ever, on the site of a jihadi attack.”

“Maybe this is a good chance to start.”

“I don’t think you are going to get it from Imam Rauf.”

Geller launches into a swift character assassination of the imam, who said recently: “If I’d known that this would happen; that the project would cause this kind of pain, I wouldn’t have done it.”

“No matter how [Geller mouths the word "fucking"] much we progress, the human condition never changes. The battle is eternal and the battle is between good and evil. I think the fundamental problem today is the inability, or reluctance, to distinguish between good and evil.”

She has carried the fight all over the world, from New York to the Black Country. Geller learnt of reports of clashes in April 2010 between right-wing demonstrators and West Midlands police in Dudley, during protests against an application to build what she blogged was a “Monster Mosque”.

“Senior EDL leadership,” she wrote in the 5 May 2010 issue of the conservative online magazine American Thinker, “informed me that thousands of Muslims began rioting in Dudley… showing the true face of Islam.” Muslims, she went on, in what may come as news to residents in Sue Lawley’s home town, “are policing the streets in cars… and the dhimmi [non-Muslim living under Sharia law] Dudley police are doing nothing about it.”

I tell Geller that I’d assumed that the experience of meeting her would be similar to an uncomfortable afternoon I once spent with Arianna Huffington. That was when the Greek-American thinker was in her right-wing, Newt Gingrich period, before she performed a remarkable volte face and established herself as a prominent liberal and founded the left-leaning news website The Huffington Post. Geller isn’t flattered by this at all, and it’s true that the two women could hardly be more different. Huffington always looked like a Republican vice-president’s wife, and seemed, at least back then, more driven by ambition than ideals. Geller, by contrast – quite amazingly, given the nature of her beliefs – has the ability to laugh at herself and, as I mentioned to a well-known journalist who has studied her ascent, has a strange habit, even at the most intense moments of disagreement, of flashing you a look of what I can only describe as girlish vulnerability.

“Pamela Geller is a Ground Zero in herself,” he replied. “Angry yet fragile. Just occasionally, that flash in her eyes that you mention betrays what I interpreted as a longing to be loved. I sensed a deep insecurity in her; the time I spent with her left me feeling deeply uncomfortable.”

Geller grew up in the affluent New York suburb of Hewlett Harbor, Long Island, the daughter of Reuben, a textile entrepreneur who she describes as “a tough guy from the old school”.

“Like John Wayne?”

“Well… from the Frank Sinatra era. Robert Mitchum. You know: masculine.”

Of her three sisters, two are doctors, one a teacher.

“Do they share your views?”

Politically, Geller says, “we are all on the same page”.

As a young woman, she was heavily influenced by Atlas Shrugged, the 1957 novel by Ayn Rand, which praised the virtues of individualism, as opposed to state intervention.

In the 1980s she worked in marketing at the New York Daily News, then became a senior executive at The New York Observer. Her enthusiasms back then were fashion and music. (Geller, who has four children, left the Observer in 1994 to look after her family.)

Before 9/11, she says, she was “more socially liberal”.

She began blogging on littlegreenfootballs.com, run by the professional musician and software expert Charles Johnson. Between 2004 and 2007, she posted thousands of entries. “She was always as reactionary,” he tells me, “as you see her now.”

Johnson, who, as that remark would suggest, does not share Geller’s opinions, is described as a “mental patient” on Atlas Shrugs.

“I know Pamela Geller often calls me crazy,” he told me. “But I’m not the one who talks about the president’s birth certificate being faked or says that he’s the illegitimate son of Malcolm X, and I’m not the one who defends a war criminal and makes alliances with white supremacist groups. That would be Ms Geller. She has a very long record of absolute lunacy, mixed with bigotry and racism and I am far from the only person to point this out.”

These days, she expresses a view of the superiority of her nation reminiscent of the more entrenched kind of British patriot in the golden age of Empire. “What would be the good,” Geller asks, “of subjecting America to international norms? America has always been a light to the world.”

There is no reason, in other words, for the United States to account for its actions to the International Criminal Court, or the UN.

“I can see how that’s a very attractive view of the world,” I tell her, “but I find it difficult to accept the USA as the embodiment of perfection that all other nations should aspire to” – a recurrent theme in Geller’s writing.

“I don’t care what other nations do. I don’t care about them. I care about America.”

In order to “get America”, she argues, “you have to grow up in America. Obama is missing the DNA of the USA. It’s just not in him,” she adds, like a missionary speaking of a heathen who has never heard the name of Christ. “Through no fault of his own.”

The USA, Geller believes, is unique and superior to any other nation. “America is not an ethnicity, it’s not a creed, it’s not a colour, it’s a shared value system. And in order to get it, you have to have grown up here, or yearn for it.”

“If I was from Bruges and talked like that about Belgium, what would you think?”

“All power to you.”

“I think you’d assume that I’d gone off my rocker.”

“Why?”

“Because I would be elevating respect for a nation beyond what most people would regard as sane.”

“Respect for an ideal is insane?”

“But what you mean by America and what [say] Steve Earle or Randy Newman mean by America are two very different things.”

“That’s the beauty of America.”

The day before we met, I’d entered the words “Pamela Geller” and “mad” into a search engine.

“You come in at 606,000 hits. That’s just behind King George III; he scores 771,000 and he talked to trees.”

“Yeah,” Geller replies, “but he was cured of that, wasn’t he?”

One American she does consider “crazy” is the legendary comedian Dick Gregory: role model for Richard Pryor, diet coach to Muhammad Ali and now a full-time civil-rights activist. “I talked to Gregory recently about Barack Obama,” I tell her, and he said: ‘Imagine what they’d have done to him if he’d been useless.’ Do you see Obama as evil, or stupid?”

“I don’t see him as either. I just don’t see him as a man who loves America. In my book I explain that here is k a man who was raised, from the ages of six to 12 [others say six to 10] in a Muslim country [Indonesia] and who,” Geller claims, “studied Islam. When he came to the States he went [back] to Hawaii, which had only become a state two years before his birth.”

She has asserted that Obama visited Pakistan in 1981 looking for “jihad or drugs”.

“That was a joke.”

On a more serious note, Geller has claimed that: “The only reason there is any semblance of peace around the world is because of the military presence of the US.”

Considering her nation’s recent military excursions to Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, can she point to any place where its intervention can be said to have worked? Libya, she says, was “a disaster. I don’t see what we’re doing there at all.”

“Would it bother you if the Americans had gone in there purely because of the oil?”

“Of course not. Why would it bother me?”

“Thousands of civilian dead?”

“They’re dying anyway. Isn’t that what we’re doing, saving them? Why not get oil at the same time? Why is China getting Iraq’s oil? Our blood,” she adds, in a phrase which might have come from the Crusades, or indeed The Sopranos: “our treasure.”

The phrase “war on terror” I suggest, has been a catastrophe in the way that it’s given carte blanche to any nation with enemies.

“It’s not [a war on] terror. It’s a war on jihad.”

“Where has it worked? In Iraq?”

“Iraq is now a fledgling democracy.”

“It’s a basket case. They have no fresh water; they have no electricity.”

“You telling me Iraq was the height of civilisation prior?”

“If you define civilisation by being able to turn on the tap.”

“Over there,” Geller replies, “maybe that is how they define it.”

“Is there anything Israel has done that you’re ashamed of?”

“Only Oslo,” she says (referring to the 1993 accord which allowed for the creation of the Palestinian National Authority). “And surrendering in instalments.”

“The Jenin Massacre” – a term commonly used to describe the Israeli Defence Force’s April 2002 entry into a West Bank refugee camp, in bulldozers – was, she believes, Palestinian “propaganda”.

“How about Tom Hurndall, the peace volunteer shot by the IDF while he was trying to pull an infant to safety?” Hurndall, who was wearing an orange fluorescent jacket, died in 2004 after spending nine months in a coma; the sniper responsible was sentenced to 11-and-a-half years for manslaughter, of which he will serve eight, by an Israeli court.

“I don’t believe that. I don’t believe the Israelis ever fire where there is no threat.”

Geller would like to see more settlers in the Occupied Territories (though neither of the last two nouns are ones she would recognise).

“It’s not ‘settlers’. It’s the Jewish homeland. Settler is an anti-semitic term.”

“How about Joe McCarthy [the senator responsible for the Communist witch trials of the 1950s]? How do you feel about him?”

“McCarthy was right. He went overboard, but he was right. The Communists were infiltrating and they have been very successful here in America.”

“Let’s talk about people who are white and racist.”

“I don’t know any.”

“[The South African white supremacist] Eugène Terre’Blanche? I’ve seen you described as a supporter of his.”

“He was viciously murdered. I never knew who he was, but when he was hacked to death, I condemned it. I have no interest in his ideology.”

“Can you think of any others, apart from Hitler?”

“No. Because I don’t travel in those circles.”

“I mean from history.”

“I guess the Ku Klux Klan.”

“I guess.”

“No, I’m saying that. But I don’t believe in white supremacism. Islamic supremacism is the threat I see right now.”

Pamela Geller, as you might expect for someone so powerfully attached to certain ideas and theories, has had to suffer her own conspiracy theorists.

“You married [car dealer] Michael Oshry in 1990?”

“Yes.” (The couple divorced in 2007; Oshry remarried, but died of a heart attack the following year.)

There are reports on the web concerning Oshry’s company, Universal Auto World, that offer a scenario worthy of a thriller writer such as James M Cain. A car salesman, Collin Thomas, was killed on the evening of 11 January 2007, with a single bullet, while closing one of the company showrooms, on Long Island. The subsequent police investigation revealed a large-scale fraud perpetrated by employees, who had used credit records of other individuals to obtain finance for luxury vehicles.

“My ex was a very good man,” Geller says. “He had a number of dealerships. In one there was a crook who was part of a gang. Michael was never arrested or indicted. When my ex-husband died, the whole thing was over. The guy went to jail. My ex-husband was a victim in this.”

Geller doesn’t want to say whether she is currently in a relationship. Her priorities are “working 20 hours a day, and raising my family”.

It’s noticeable that no recent developments – not even Obama’s recent tour de force of a satirical speech to the White House Correspondents Association, tormenting Donald Trump and other birthers with a self-deprecating wit and comic timing that would have done credit to Woody Allen in his prime – have diminished her zeal.

Where are Obama’s college records? asks Geller. Where are his medical records? Where is his law practice client list?

And the killing of Osama Bin Laden, on Barack Obama’s watch? “I am thrilled he signed off on it. Could Obama have said no to this operation, and gotten re-elected in 2011?”

Conversation with Geller, unless you share her world view, is invariably confrontational, and this is something you sense she enjoys. Her attitude to critics is that of a woman faced with someone who believes the world to be flat, and obstinately refuses to be persuaded otherwise.

Once she’s no longer speaking for publication, the mood lightens considerably. She sits for a while and enthuses about music: the Ramones, Al Green and Loudon Wainwright III.

There are two well-known songs, I tell her, that kept coming to mind while I was listening to her: Bob Dylan’s defiant hymn to Israel, “Neighborhood Bully” (“I love that”) and, especially, Nick Lowe’s “What’s So Funny ‘Bout Peace, Love and Understanding”.

“I used to love dancing to that,” she says.

“So what is so funny about it?”

“Nothing. But both sides have to want it.”

Our one point of firm agreement, in what has been an afternoon of sometimes tense discord, is that, given the current climate in America, the political tendency she represents is well-placed to advance. This belief is confirmed by the rising popularity of her blog – currently ranked 28 in the category of US politics – and a resurgence in interest in the novel Atlas Shrugged.

“If that’s all I ever achieved,” she says, in reference to Rand’s book, “I’d be happy.”

Does she see herself as a mirror reflecting pubic opinion, or a beacon for them to turn to?

“Neither. I’m happy that I am influencing the national dialogue, and disseminating information that the media refuses [to publish]. I believe I am providing a very important public service. I see myself as a quintessential American.”

Perhaps the best image of her place in the field of American politics would be as a magnifying glass capturing, focusing and intensifying the blinding prejudices of her compatriots (if such opinions can credibly be compared with sunlight) and directing them towards a pile of kindling. For a woman blessed with so many certainties in her life, you suspect that even she could be surprised at quite how fierce, alarming and widespread the eventual conflagration might be.

Comments (36)

Law School Asks Students To Choose “God’s Law” Over Man’s Law

Tags: , , , ,

Law School Asks Students To Choose “God’s Law” Over Man’s Law

Posted on 17 May 2011 by Rousseau

Imagine if they were Muslim: Liberty Law School teaches God's Law over Man's Law

Just imagine if a Muslim school taught this in the United States. Instead, an accredited law school here in the United States is actively instructing its students to place religious law above the laws of the United States. Apparently, so long as it is Christianity, and not Islam, no one needs to fear.

Religion Dispatches – Liberty Law Exam Question on Notorious Kidnapping Case Pressured Students to Choose “God’s Law” over “Man’s” by Sarah Posner

Late last month, after federal authorities arrested a Tennessee pastor on charges of aiding and abetting an international parental kidnapping, students at Liberty University Law School saw one of their exam questions come to life.

The pastor was charged with helping Lisa Miller, an “ex”-lesbian, abscond to Nicaragua with her young daughter Isabella after she flouted a series of court orders requiring Isabella’s visitation with Miller’s former partner, Janet Jenkins. According to the criminal complaint and FBI affidavit, Miller has been in hiding with Isabella since September 2009, living in the beach house of Christian Right activist and businessman Philip Zodhiates, whose daughter Victoria Hyden works as an administrative assistant at Liberty Law School.

Students at Liberty Law School tell RD that in the required Foundations of Law class in the fall of 2008, taught by Miller’s attorneys Mat Staver and Rena Lindevaldsen, they were repeatedly instructed that when faced with a conflict between “God’s law” and “man’s law,” they should resolve that conflict through “civil disobedience.” One student said, “the idea was when you are confronted with a particular situation, for instance, if you have a court order against you that is in violation of what you see as God’s law, essentially… civil disobedience was the answer.”

This student and two others, who all requested anonymity for fear of reprisal by Staver (who is also the law school’s dean), recounted the classroom discussion of civil disobedience, as well as efforts to draw comparisons between choosing “God’s law” over “man’s law” to the American revolution and Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail. According to one student, in the Foundations course both Staver and Lindevaldsen “espoused the opinion that in situations where God’s law is in direct contradiction to man’s law, we have an obligation to disobey it.”

Deborah Cantrell, a professor at the University of Colorado School of Law, and an expert in both legal ethics and family law, said that discussions of civil disobedience in law school classrooms must “be transparent that this is not a simplistic conversation.” She added that a law professor should emphasize that the discussion is a “normative” one, and that civil disobedience has consequences, including jail, and, for a lawyer who advises a client to disobey a court order, possible loss of their license to practice law.

That semester’s midterm exam, obtained by RD [see excerpts of the actual exam here], included a question based on Miller’s case asking students to describe what advice they would give her “as a friend who is a Christian lawyer.” After laying out a slanted history of the protracted legal battle, the exam asked, “Lisa needs your counsel on how to think through her legal situation and how to respond as a Christian to this difficult problem. Relying only on what we have learned thus far in class, how would you counsel Lisa?”

Students who wrote that Miller should comply with court orders received bad grades while those who wrote she should engage in civil disobedience received an A, the three students said. “People were appalled,” said one of the students, adding, “especially as lawyers-to-be, who are trained and licensed to practice the law—to disobey that law, that seemed completely counterintuitive to all of us.”

Still, some knew what they needed to “regurgitate,” in order to get a good grade. “It was obvious by the substance of the class during the semester the answer that they wanted,” said one of the students. “The majority of people that I am acquainted with who did get As wrote that because it was expected of them.”

One of the students who got an A said, “I told them she needed to engage in civil disobedience and seriously consider leaving the country,” adding, “I knew what I needed to write.”

Given what was expected of them on the exam, and the tenor of the class, there is “not a lot of shock among the students about the current developments,” said one of the students, referring to the revelation that Miller is in hiding in Nicaragua. “Everybody semi-suspected that Liberty Counsel had something to do with her disappearance.”

A Protracted Case of Biblical Worldview

The protracted custody battle between Miller and Jenkins, which has spanned eight years and multiple courts in two states, has been a celebrated case for Liberty Counsel, the nonprofit law firm of which Staver is the chair and which is affiliated with the law school. Liberty Counsel’s publicity for its relentless litigation on Miller’s behalf has exploited several religious right tropes: that gay and lesbian people can be made straight through Christ; that “activist judges” are subverting biblical principles; and that the very health of the republic is at risk because gay and lesbian people can be parents.

In an October 1, 2008 posting on its website, Liberty Counsel asked supporters “to help us spread the word about the ongoing legal case that directly impacts the life of six-year old child Isabella and the future of this Nation,” adding that, if Vermont courts ruled against Miller, “then, on the issues of marriage and family, our country will no longer be the United States of America but instead will be the United States according to Massachusetts, California, or Vermont.”

The posting included a letter written by Lindevaldsen, asking for prayers and help for “Lisa Miller—my client, my friend, my sister in Christ.” The letter, dated September 22, 2008, claimed that Miller “is one of thousands across this nation who have left the homosexual lifestyle through the redeeming power of Jesus Christ.” The three-page plea was an homage to Miller’s elevation of Scripture over court orders, noting, “Lisa could be thrown in jail for refusing to expose her child to Janet’s harmful and destructive lifestyle,” as a result of her refusal to comply with the visitation orders from the Vermont court.

“Lisa’s desire to raise her child according to the truths of Scripture are [sic] under attack,” Lindevaldsen concluded. “At times like this, the Church needs to stand united before our Lord to intercede on Lisa and Isabella’s behalf.”

Lindevaldsen also created a Facebook group—since defunct—“Only One Mommy: The Story of Lisa and Isabella Miller,” and maintains a blog called “Only One Mommy.” Its tagline: “helping to restore God’s design for marriage and family.”

In the fall of 2008, when Liberty Counsel was making these pleas and Miller was making appearances in her lawyers’ Foundations class, she had long been in violation of the law. She had been held in contempt of several court orders requiring Isabella’s visitation with Jenkins dating back to 2004. Despite those contempt orders, Miller and her lawyers persisted with their arguments, relentlessly appealing rulings against them, charging that they were in contravention of the Bible.

The U.S. Supreme Court denied review of her appeal from a Virginia court holding that Vermont courts should decide the custody matter. The Vermont Supreme Court had ruled as early as 2006 that “the record supported the conclusion that Lisa was in contempt of court for willfully violating” a 2004 visitation order. In March 2008, in ruling on yet another appeal by Liberty Counsel, a clearly frustrated Vermont Supreme Court panel held that it had already resolved all the issues in its 2006 order. Writing that there was no new evidence that would change its prior legal conclusions, the court also noted that Miller’s arguments were “disingenuous in light of the family court’s unchallenged findings regarding the child’s best interests and plaintiff’s [Miller’s] contemptuous conduct.”

Did Liberty Counsel Know Miller had Fled to Nicaragua?

Neither Staver nor Lindevaldsen responded to RD’s requests for comment, but Staver told theNew York Times last month that they had not had contact with Miller since 2009 and had always advised her to obey the law. Staver and Lindevaldsen did, however, teach their students that “civil disobedience” was a proper response, and persisted in their efforts to reverse court orders with relentless appeals claiming that court orders were in contravention of Miller’s Christian beliefs.

In August 2009, just one month before the FBI believes Miller fled to Nicaragua, Liberty Counsel attached a 20-page affidavit signed by Miller to a brief it filed in court in opposition to Jenkins’ request to transfer custody of Isabella to her. Miller claimed, among other things, that the case was “about having Vermont courts choose between two diametrically opposed worldviews on parentage and family,” that the Bible deems homosexuality a sin, and that gay parenting “is not consistent with the truth in the Bible.”

She concluded, “I simply do not understand how a system of government that recognizes that there are certain unalienable rights that are given to us from God, and therefore cannot be taken away by government can declare Janet a parent and give her custody of my child.”

Three months later, the Vermont family court ruled in favor of transferring custody of Isabella to Jenkins. In response to Jenkins’ attorney’s January 2010 motion to hold Miller in contempt of court for not complying with that order to transfer custody, Lindevaldsen reacted with a motion to withdraw from the case (but not from its then-pending appeal—its third—to the Vermont Supreme Court). Lindevaldsen claimed Miller could not be found, and that she had had no contact with Miller and could not represent her since she did not know what her wishes were.

Jenkins’ attorney charged in a court filing that Liberty Counsel demonstrated “a clear attempt to assist their client in ducking service by withdrawing.” The court denied Liberty Counsel’s motion.

After Miller had been in contempt of court for disregarding both the multiple visitation orders and the judge’s order that she turn over custody of Isabella to Jenkins, the Vermont family court issued an arrest warrant for her. At the time, Staver told a reporter, “We don’t know where she is and we don’t know anybody who does know her whereabouts,” adding that he hadn’t had contact with her since the previous fall. On April 27, 2010, a federal court in Vermont charged Miller with one count of parental kidnapping “with intent to obstruct the lawful exercise of parental rights.”

A Law School with a Christian Worldview

The law school, founded in 2004, “upon the premise that there is an integral relationship between faith and reason, and that both have their origin in the Triune God,” claims a vision “to see again all meaningful dialogue over law include the role of faith and the perspective of a Christian worldview as the framework most conducive to the pursuit of truth and justice.” The law school received accreditation from the America Bar Association last year.

The Foundations class is unlike anything offered at secular law schools, its purpose being to guide students toward a “Christian worldview” of the law. In the 2008-09 academic year, the required texts included David Barton’s Original Intent, which Barton’s website describes as “essential resource for anyone interested in our nation’s religious heritage and the Founders’ intended role for the American judicial system,” and Francis Schaeffer’s Christian Manifesto.

But the students who spoke to RD worry that these Christian credentials will not serve them well after graduation. “If you walked into court and argued what Liberty wants you to,” said one, “you’d be laughed out of the room.”

Staver’s views, they said, are “militant” and “fundamentalist.” He brooks no criticism from students or faculty. “He rules the law school like Moammar Gaddafi runs Libya,” said one of the students.

In “Revolutionary Hall,” alongside likenesses of King, Reagan, Ghandi, Mother Teresa and others, the school has installed a painting of Staver arguing before the Supreme Court. It depicts him arguing McCreary v. Kentucky, defending a constitutional challenge to a public Ten Commandments display—which he lost.

What’s more, the fundamentalist worldview imposed on students there may be having the opposite effect than Liberty intends. One of the students told RD, “I came in the type that watches Fox News all the time and was a pretty hardline right-winger,” but the law school “changed my viewpoints and now I would consider myself a conservative-leaning moderate.”

Comments (13)

anti-jew-hate-crime

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Jewish and Muslim leaders join forces to combat xenophobia

Posted on 17 May 2011 by Emperor

A very worthwhile and important effort.

via. Islamophobia Today

Jewish and Muslim leaders join forces to combat xenophobia

By Shlomo Shamir at Haa’retz

Russian and Ukrainian Jewish and Muslim leaders meet in Kiev to discuss rise in Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia as part of month-long European efforts to heighten awareness and fight racism, extremism and discrimination.

80 leading Jewish and Muslim leaders from across Ukraine and Russia met in Kiev on Thursday May 12, pledging to work together to fight a rising cascade of Islamophobia and anti-Semitism in the two countries.

In the first-ever “Muslims and Jews United Against Hatred and Extremism” conference held in the Ukrainian capital, community leaders from both countries heard chilling accounts of discrimination and abuse.

Conference participants spoke of the beating and harassment of Muslims and Jews in the two former Soviet republics, desecration of Muslim and Jewish cemeteries and bombings as well as other attacks on communal institutions of the two faiths.

The leaders pledged to work together to combat forces of extremism and hate and to put pressure on their local authorities to take a more assertive stand in fighting perpetrators of Islamophobic and anti-Semitic attacks.

Rabbi Marc Schneier, president of the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding (FFEU) and vice president of the World Jewish Congress, hailed the historic event in Kiev, commenting; “The Foundation for Ethnic Understanding, together with our partners, is gratified to be standing in support of joint actions by Muslims and Jews in the former Soviet Union and across Europe.

He added that the meeting’s “purpose is to make clear that Jews and Muslims will be there for each other if either is being unfairly attacked, and will stand united in support of principles of democracy and pluralism that will ensure a decent future for all Ukrainians and Russians.”

The Kiev conference was sponsored by the Ukrainian Jewish Committee and the Institute of Human Rights and the Prevention of Extremism and Xenophobia under the leadership of the noted Member of Parliament and business leader Oleksandr Feldman, in cooperation with FFEU.

80 Muslim and Jewish leaders from across Ukraine and Russia participated in the historic conference.

The Kiev conference was one of nine Muslim-Jewish events being held in countries in Europe during the month of May in commemoration of Europe Day.

Events opposing racism, extremism and prejudice against Muslims and Jews are being held in Britain, France, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Netherlands, Belgium, in addition to the Ukraine throughout May, and are sponsored by FFEU, the World Jewish Congress, European Jewish Congress, World Council of Muslims for Interfaith Relations and the Muslim-Jewish Conference.

The events will culminate in Brussels on May 30, when top Jewish and Muslim leaders are to present a joint declaration to European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, committing to “resolve to work together to counter efforts to demonize or marginalize either of our communities. Bigotry against any Jew or any Muslim is an attack on all Muslims and all Jews. We are united in our belief in the dignity of all peoples.”

Original post: Jewish and Muslim leaders join forces to combat xenophobia

Comments (4)

Where does Geert Wilders grab his “facts” from?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Where does Geert Wilders grab his “facts” from?

Posted on 16 May 2011 by Emperor

Geert Wilders in Nashville at the Cornerstone Church

Geert “ban the Quran” Wilders has been on a recent North American tour. Bringing his hateful anti-Muslim rhetoric to our shores. Just a few days ago we received exclusive footage of Wilders’ speech at Cornerstone Church, a mega church in Tennessee. (hat tip: Rob)

In the following shocking footage Geert Wilders reveals where he grabs his “facts” from. Enjoy!:

We will be following up this video with an exclusive feature piece on Geert Wilders’ maniacal anti-Muslim diatribe and the crazy response from a massive zealous Christian crowd applauding his anti-Freedom agenda.

It makes you wonder who the real enemies are to our Constitution, values and principles?

Comments (25)

Ruben_Diaz

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Scenes From New York’s Anti-Gay Marriage Rally: ‘Those Who Practice Such Things Are Worthy Of Death’

Posted on 16 May 2011 by Emperor

Sen. Ruben Diaz was present at the rally

Robert Spencer’s co-religionist says “gays are worthy of death” at anti-Gay marriage rally, imagine if a Muslim were to say that? (Hat tip: Om)

Scenes From New York’s Anti-Gay Marriage Rally: ‘Those Who Practice Such Things Are Worthy Of Death’

by Igor Volsky

(Think Progress)

Several thousand people rallied in the Bronx, New York yesterday against the impending push to legalize same-sex marriage. Organizers, including state Senator Reverend Ruben Diaz, several Spanish radio stations and churches, argued that marriage should be defined as a union between “one man and one woman” and urged the state government to abandon their effort or put the initiative up to a vote. “Let the people decide. If the people say yes, we’ll shut up,” Diaz said at the steps of the Bronx court house. “Bring it to the people, bring it to the people…look at the people!” he yelled to the crowd of several thousand Hispanic Americans.

Diaz stressed that he was not condemning gay people, telling a small group of protesters gathered across the court house that his granddaughter — who was taking part in the counter demonstration — was a lesbian. “We respect you and we love you. You’ve never heard from me a word of insult to you. You’ve never heard me say — you never seen me call for homophobia or violence,” Diaz said, as organizers and police brought Erica Diaz to the main podium to stand with Diaz. “This is my granddaughter,” he said, stressing that he had “respect” for her “decisions.” “She does what she wants,” Diaz told the crowd.

And while the march and rally focused on the Christian message of “love,” the event remained deeply homophobic, with speakers routinely condemning gay people as “sinners” and describing same-sex relations as something wholly unnatural or perverse. In fact, just minutes before Diaz took to the microphone to stress his respect for gay people, Rev. Ariel Torres Ortega of Radio Visión Cristiana said that the gay people are “worthy of death”:

Committing sexual acts between man and man. And receiving the retribution of the things that they have done from straying away. And because they did not take God in count. God gave them over to reprimand their mind to do things that are not right, being against all justice, fornication, perversity, aberrations, malignity…those who practice such things are worthy to death, not only do they do it, but those who also practice it. God bless this earth. That is the word of God.

Watch a compilation:

Demonstrators held signs that read “God’s Marriage = 1 man & 1 woman” and “Gay Marriage Is Against the Word of God.”

A group called ‘The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Prosperity’ (TFP) led off the march and provided the musical accompaniment. One member distributed hundreds of flyers to passerbys explaining “why homosexual ‘marriage’ is harmful and must be opposed.” The print-out describes same-sex marriage as “evil,” against “natural law” and argues that allowing gay people to marry would “obscure certain basic moral values, devalue traditional marriage, and weaken public morality.”

“If homosexual ‘marriage’ is universally accepted as the present step in sexual ‘freedom,’ what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior?” the flyer asks.

For more coverage of the rally, click over to Good As You, LGBTQ Nation, and JoeMyGod.

Comments (41)

DIGIPIX

Tags: , , , , , ,

Rabbi Convicted of Molesting Soldier on Plane, What if he were Muslim?

Posted on 16 May 2011 by Amago

Rabbi Gavriel Bidany was convicted last week of a fondling 23-year-old Israeli soldier sleeping in the seat next to his on a transatlantic flight.

If this rabbi had been an Imam, every major news source would have been reporting this story non-stop, and the anti-Islam blogosphere would have run amock. (hat tip:Disill)

Offspring of rabbi convicted of molesting soldier on plane begs judge: He has to help us

Don’t lock up our dad – he has to help us get married!

That was the plea from the children of an Orthodox rabbi convicted of molesting an Israeli soldier on a plane.

“I have reached an age [22] where I need to find a groom and start a family,” Eden Bidany wrote in a letter to Magistrate Ramon Reyes.

“And without my father it is very difficult,” she added.

Gavriel Bidany, 48, was convicted last week of a fondling the 23-year-old lieutenant sleeping in the seat next to his on a transatlantic flight.

Gavriel Bidany, a marriage counselor and father of 11, faces up to six months in prison when he’s sentenced Thursday in Brooklyn Federal Court.

His son also begged for mercy.

“Today I am 21 and I need to start my own family … and without my dad it is impossible,” said Avishar Bidany.

“It would hurt my match-making possibilities.”

Another son said if he finds a bride soon, having a father in jail would ruin the wedding.

“I would like to get married properly with my father at my side please,” Ariel Bidany wrote.

Also asking for leniency was U.S. Army Capt. Jonathan Gross, an assistant professor of law at West Point.

In a note written on Department of the Army letterhead, Gross said Gavriel Bidany should be held accountable, but not incarcerated.

Gross, who did not return a call for comment, said the rabbi once helped him and his wife “with a particularly difficult situation.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney David Sarratt urged the judge to punish the rabbi with several months of jail time for the assault and for perjuring himself on the witness stand by claiming he was asleep at the time of the attack.

jmarzulli@nydailynews.com

Comments (11)

wilders-as-nazi-scaled

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Geert Wilders Opposes Cartoon About His Party

Posted on 16 May 2011 by Emperor

I thought only the evil Mooslims were offended at cartoons?

Geert Wilders is upset that his party the (anti)Freedom party was accurately compared to the Nazis. He wants it to be removed. Hypocrisy-much?

While this is not a clear legal attempt by wily Wilders to ban a cartoon, he obviously wanted it censored and he is still an advocate of banning the Quran.

Disillusioned Citizen informs us that the cartoon has been removed from the offending site:

I went to the site and this is what I saw in Dutch: “De cartoon ‘Wordt vervolgd’ die hier te zien was sinds 11 februari 2011 is op 24 februari verwijderd na ernstige bedreigingen aan het adres van VARA-medewerkers.”

I popped that on to Google translate and this is what it says (sorry I don’t speak Dutch):

“The cartoon “Continued” was shown here since February 11, 2011 to February 24 after removal due to serious threats against VARA staff.”

I guess Geert Wilders has learned a thing or two from the Jihadis: threat of death gets things done.

Wilders angry about cartoon

Freedom party leader Geert Wilders is angry at Dutch public broadcaster VARA for publishing a cartoon on its website Joop.nl which compares a Freedom Party (PVV) plan to Nazi practices. The party recently proposed building so-called ‘scum villages’ for anti-social people. In the cartoon, the residents of such a village are being led to a shower, the same way the prisoners of Nazi destruction camps were led to ‘showers’ where they were gassed.

Mr Wilders said on Saturday it was “a disgusting cartoon. It must be removed from that website immediately, or the PVV will not attend the VARA provincial elections debate scheduled for next Wednesday.” Mr Wilders spoke of “sick minds” at the VARA.

The Joop.nl website is funded by VARA, but has full editorial independence. Francisco van Jole, the website’s editor-in-chief, said Mr Wilders remarks were tantamount to blackmail and that the programme which the Freedom Party was scheduled to attend had nothing to do with Joop.nl. He said he would not remove the cartoon: “This is the opinion of an opinion maker who we are offering a platform. This does not mean we necessarily always share his opinion. It is simply intended to spark debate.”

Mr van Jole said he found it odd that a politician would seek to ban this cartoon. “I understand he is upset … but it forms part of the social debate.” He said Mr Wilders was trying to smother the debate. A VARA spokesperson said the organisation did not necessarily share the opinions presented on Joop.nl and would very much like the Freedom Party to attend Wednesday’s provincial elections debate, but had no intention of ordering Joop.nl to remove the cartoon.

(gsh)

© Radio Netherlands Worldwide

Comments (21)

Bin Laden Death Reminds Local Man To Disfavor Muslims

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Bin Laden Death Reminds Local Man To Disfavor Muslims

Posted on 16 May 2011 by Guest

Darius Emadi

Guest contributor to Loonwatch

Local man James Delaney told reporters Monday that the death of Osama Bin Laden re-sparked his hostility towards American-Muslims.

“Years after the shock of September 11th, I became a little lost,” Delaney remembered. “I thought before I spoke, I watched documentaries on the history and culture of Islam, I made the distinction between Islam’s approximate 975,000,000 members and the handful of terrorists in the world – I just wasn’t feeling like myself.”

The change came as a result of the Osama bin Laden killing. According to Brock Alden, a friend of Delaney, who was with him the night the news was announced, Delaney logged onto Twitter and read several Islamophobic tweets posted by notable comedians, admired colleagues, and strangers around the country.

Delaney recalls the night.

“I read one tweet from a comedian that said, ‘To celebrate, New York City should grant each citizen to punch a cab driver in the face!’ I thought, boy, that sounds a lot like my earlier years when I found relief by placing my fears and insecurities on vulnerable members of a minority. That sounds like fun!’”

After reading several Islamophobic tweets, Delaney felt inspired to write one himself:

Posted by Delaney was the following: Death to America? Death to all Muslims and Islam – we won!!! #TeamUSA

“Honestly,” said Alden. “I hadn’t seen James feel that much pride since after September 11th when he faxed an Imam a drawing of Porky Pig. He recently went through a divorce, so I was just glad to see him excited again.”

Within minutes of sending his last tweet of the night, ideas fired through Delaney’s head.

“I was killing it,” Delaney recalls.

According to assistant Imam Muhammad Abid of the East Center Mosque, Delaney had sent the mosque’s Imam an email saying, ‘Take that, camel jockeys! Your leader’s dead!’, along with an attached mp3 of Delaney signing the American national anthem.

Said Delaney, “It’s a blessing to feel alive again.”

When asked if Delaney had listened to President Obama’s speech reminding Americans to distinguish the difference between bin Laden and American-Muslims, Delaney shook his head, and responded, “Yes. It’s good to make that distinction. But if Bin Laden’s death taught me anything it’s that you can go at any minute. Do I really want to waste more time making distinctions?”

Delaney shared his plans for the future. “Well, to be honest, I have kind of calmed down as of late – I’ve been busy grading my students’ chemistry homework.  But, hopefully, with the AP exams done and over in June, I’ll get some free time. I have an amazing idea for a graphic T – it’s great to have a hobby again.”

Imam Hasan Akbar, the recipient of Delaney’s hate mail, was unavailable for comment. According to the assistant Imam Muhammad Abid, Akbar had left to buy 10 American flags.

The piece is satire. Darius Emadi is a writer comedian based in Seattle, WA.

Comments (16)

Houston Mosque Set on Fire, Arsonist on the Loose

Tags: , , , , , ,

Houston Mosque Set on Fire, Arsonist on the Loose

Posted on 15 May 2011 by Danios

KHOU, Greater Houston’s CBS affiliate television station, is reporting that a mosque was most likely set afire by an arsonist who is still on the loose (hat tip: JD):

Authorities investigate suspicious mosque fire in southwest Houston

HOUSTON – Authorities are investigating after a suspect allegedly started a fire at a mosque in southwest Houston on Saturday.

Authorities said the fire started at the Madrasae Islamiah Mosque in the 6665 block of Bintliff Drive around 3:30 a.m.

HFD said the suspect broke a window and poured an accelerant on a rug in one room inside the building. Damage was confined to that one room, officials said.

No injuries were reported.

Authorities said there was surveillance video but it failed to catch a clear image of the suspect.

Comments (16)

America’s Right Wing: YES to Quran-burning, NO to Flag-Burning

Tags: , , , , , , ,

America’s Right Wing: YES to Quran-burning, NO to Flag-Burning

Posted on 14 May 2011 by Danios

When LSU graduate student Benjamin Haas planned to burn the U.S. flag to protest the clamping down of civil liberties and the right of due process for “students and suspected terrorists alike”, an angry mob of over 1,000 people came out to stop him.  Haas “sustained physical and verbal taunting” and in fact received numerous death threats.  Had the police not been there to protect him, Haas might have been seriously hurt.  (Haas backed down from burning the flag.)

Here’s a video of the despicable mob (hint: any time you see Americans wrapped in the flag chanting “USA! USA! USA!” more often than not they are war-mongers):

But how on earth could those Primitive Muslim Barbarians get so angry when the Quran is burned or the image of the Prophet Muhammad is depicted in an offensive way?

This angry mob of American “partriots” lost its mind over a 5 by 8 foot piece of cloth.  That certainly sounds stupider than being upset at someone from a “rival” religion for burning one’s holy book.

Being the uber-liberal that I am, I naturally support the right to burn a flag, a holy book, or a blunt.  (However, my belief in tolerance and good manners would prevent me from supporting a person who burned a flag or holy book.  There is a difference between supporting a person’s right to do something offensive on the one hand, and supporting the offensive act itself on the other.)

This video should explain to incredulous Americans why Muslims in the Islamic world get so riled up when they hear about Americans burning the Quran or disparaging the image of their prophet.  The U.S. flag is not just worth its material value (a piece of cloth) but rather has far greater symbolic value: burning it is a symbolic assault on one’s American identity.  It’s a purposeful provocation.  Likewise, the images of Muhammad were not “just cartoons”; they were a symbolic affront to their Islamic identity, a purposeful provocation and incitement.  It seems to confirm what the Muslims already suspect: they are being attacked, occupied, and killed for their religion.

The burning of the U.S. flag occurred in a certain context: it happened around the emotional time of Osama Bin Laden’s assassination.  Had this flag burning taken place twenty years ago, it would likely not have evoked much reaction.  But in the context of the War on Terror, the flag burning serves to affect Americans on a deeper level.  (Considering that I think the U.S. is waging a War of Terror, I don’t get my panties in a bunch by flag burning.  That is, after all, the same flag that is so proudly planted on the ground of those whose lands we illegally occupy–so, while I certainly don’t condone it, I could understand why people would want to burn it.)

Likewise, the violence in the East sparked by symbolic offenses against Islam in the West come in a certain context: they occur in a time in which the United States is waging multiple illegal wars against several Muslim countries, occupying their lands, and killing hundreds of thousands of Muslims.  If Bin Laden, who has killed three thousand Americans (and that too over ten years ago), could evoke such a visceral reaction from Americans at LSU, just imagine the reaction if Muslims had committed a yearly or monthly 9/11  since 2001?  How do you think Americans would react to flag burning if Muslim terrorists had killed not 3,000 but 300,000 U.S. citizens?  This is the level of death and destruction that our military afflicts in the lands of the Saracen barbarians.

No doubt the Islamophobes will react by arguing that one simply can’t compare the LSU mob with what happens in the Islamic world (actual violence and death, not just water balloons and chest thumping).  But to this, I say: the angry mob would most likely have hurt Haas had the police not been there–and he did receive numerous death threats.  But beyond that, our country is not being militarily occupied by an enemy, nor are hundreds of thousands of Americans being slaughtered.  If Americans had blood lust in their eyes after 9/11 (the nation reacted by waging multiple illegal wars that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents), one can only imagine the hypertrophied reaction that angry mob would have had if we had been at the losing end of a war against us.

Lastly, I’d like to comment on what the belligerent U.S. soldier said to Benjamin Haas: “My brother died for you!” , a phrase he repeated multiple times.  This of course is a common refrain used by U.S. “patriots”: whenever uber-liberals like myself are protesting America’s wars and the military complex, they will say, “you should thank us for defending your right to do so.”  That’s a load of hog-wash, of pure propaganda.  By invading and occupying Muslim lands, the military has done absolutely nothing to protect my own freedom and liberty.  Had the U.S. not invaded or attacked Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Pakistan, etc., does anyone here think I wouldn’t be free any more?

If anything, our wars abroad have served only to curtail our civil liberties (refer to Glenn Greenwald’s excellent column on Salon.com).  Furthermore, these wars of ours take away from the Muslim populations their right to self-determination, of liberty and the right to be free from military occupation.  How is my right to freedom being supported by taking away the freedom of Muslims abroad?

The sad truth is that America’s young men are dying not “for you”, or for me, or for Benjamin Haas–but for nothing.  For worse than nothing.  That’s one of the reasons our chicken-hawk leaders who order these wars (but don’t fight them) should be stopped from doing so and held accountable.

As the great Muhammad Ali put it: “I ain’t got no quarrel with the Vietcong.”

Update I:

After recounting some of the routine killings of Muslim children in just the last few days (what’s another few Muslim children killed?), Glenn Greenwald says:

Just imagine the accumulated hatred from having things like this happen day after day, week after week, year after year, for a full decade now, with no end in sight — broadcast all over the region.  It’s literally impossible to convey in words the level of bloodthirsty fury and demands for vengeance that would arise if a foreign army were inside the U.S. killing innocent American children even a handful of times, let alone continuously for a full decade.

Update II:

Some right-wingers have criticized me for “defending” Benjamin Haas’ right to burn the U.S. flag, while not doing the same for Pastor Terry Jones’ right to burn the Quran.  One right-wing nut job said: “to LoonWatch.com it’s speech that’s only their speech being protected.”  Moving beyond this right winger’s poor command of the English language (WHY DON’T THESE DAMN IMMIGRANTS LEARN ENGLISH!), it’s just a completely false accusation to begin with: I have clearly said in the article above:

Being the uber-liberal that I am, I naturally support the right to burn a flag, a holy book, or a blunt.

Perhaps he not only has poor grammar but also poor reading comprehension.  In any case, believing in freedom of speech means protecting the right of speech one considers offensive and even odious.  Therefore, although I dislike the idea of burning flags or books (holy books in particular), I believe it is part of freedom of speech to allow it.  This is why I supported Glenn Greenwald’s article against banning the right to burn the Quran.  (Like Greenwald, I believe this whole “we can’t burn the Koran because then those crazy Muslims will kill us” was a smokescreen to hide the real reason “why they hate us”: namely, because we kill them, bomb them, and occupy them.)

I support Terry Jones’ right to burn the Quran as I do Benjamin Haas’ right to burn the U.S. flag, even while I dislike both actions.  This does not mean, however, that I believe there is a moral equivalence between Terry Jones and Benjamin Haas.  Pastor Jones is a mustachioed clown, an uneducated hick of the most vulgar sort, with absolutely nothing to give this world but hate, ignorance, and intolerance.  On the other hand, Benjamin Haas is a thoughtful, educated, and tolerant young man, as his intelligent speech indicates.

One reader commented about Benjamin Haas:

He’s still an idiot just like Terry Jones was.

I beg to differ.  While I don’t ever support flag burning, Benjamin Haas–from what little I have read of his writing–seems like a bright young man.  He’s certainly not to be compared to the ignoramus that is Terry Jones. Furthermore, unlike Terry Jones who did go through with his Quran-burning, Benjamin Haas did not go through with the flag-burning (much to the adulation of the right-wing) and decided instead to simply give a speech.  How then can we compare the two?

Additionally, even though I dislike burning flags, it is less offensive to me than burning holy books.  This does not simply apply to the Quran.  For example, I would find it much more offensive to burn the Talmud than to burn the Israeli flag.  Burning flags has always been a form of protest, whereas burning holy books has a very dark history. Where they burn books, they will ultimately burn people also.  And historically, where they burned holy books, religious pogroms were not far behind.

Comments (57)

Social Conservative Bryan Fischer: Muslims Are Stupid Because Of Inbreeding

Tags: , , , , , ,

Social Conservative Bryan Fischer: Muslims Are Stupid Because Of Inbreeding

Posted on 13 May 2011 by Danios

(from TPM)

Social conservative Bryan Fischer said Thursday that centuries of inbreeding has resulted in “an enormous cost in intellectual capacity” among Muslims.

Fischer, the “Directory of Issues Analysis” for the American Family Association, said on his Focal Point radio show that “Muslims have been [inbreeding] for fourteen hundred years and because this is what Muhammad did, they always will do this, they will always defend it, they will always practice it.”

“And this kind of inbreeding results in an enormous cost in intellectual capacity, intellectual quotient among the Islamic people,” he continued. “It’s just a plain fact. You can’t argue with it, it’s just simply the truth. And you get hammered for saying it, but that’s because the truth has now become hate speech, the truth has now become bigotry.”

Watch:

Fischer, aside from being staunchly anti-bear, is also a frequent purveyor of anti-Islam sentiment. He once argued that the U.S. should restrict immigration of Muslims, and deport some of those already in the country. Fischer’s also said that Muslims don’t deserve First Amendment rights, and that the U.S. should havee “no more mosques, period.”

That hasn’t stopped a number of conservatives from appearing on his show (and alongside him at the Values Voter conference), including Michele Bachmann, Mike Huckabee, and Tim Pawlenty.

h/t Right Wing Watch.

Comments (68)

Majority of Americans Believe the Bible is Literally True and the Word of God

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Majority of Americans Believe the Bible is Literally True and the Word of God

Posted on 12 May 2011 by Danios

This article is part 7 of LoonWatch’s Understanding Jihad Series. Please read my “disclaimer”, which explains my intentions behind writing this article: The Understanding Jihad Series: Is Islam More Likely Than Other Religions to Encourage Violence?

Robert Spencer and other anti-Muslim bigots fear-monger about Islam and Muslims by demonizing the Quran, calling it a “book of violence and war.”  This, they argue, is quite unlike other religious scriptures, and is especially unlike the Bible, which is a book of love and good morals.

We threw cold water on this argument by reproducing oodles of violent passages found in the Bible (see parts12345 , and 6 of this Series), showing that the Bible is in fact way more more violent than the Quran.

Instead of defending their initial argument (the oft-repeated claim that the Quran is a uniquely violent holy book, far more violent than the Bible) or even their “fall back” argument (the claim that the violent Biblical passages are merely “descriptive” unlike the Quran’s violent passages that are supposedly “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal”–a claim that we refuted in part 6 of this Series), Islamophobes quickly move on to their next “fall back” argument:

Jews and Christians no longer believe in the inerrant nature of the Bible, unlike the Muslims who take the Quran as absolutely accurate. We are told that Jews and Christians have moved beyond the Bible (even “tossed it aside!”), whereas the primitive Muslims continue to follow their archaic holy book.  Therefore, the argument goes, invoking the Bible is hardly relevant, since “most Jews and Christians no longer give credence to it.”

This argument is not grounded in fact, however.  A poll by Rasmussen Reports found that a majority of all Americans (63%) believe the Bible is literally true and the Word of God, with less than a quarter (24%) disagreeing with this belief.  This is quite amazing when one considers that about 20% of Americans are neither Jewish or Christian! The percentage of those who believe in the literal meaning of the Bible jumps to 70% for Protestants, and becomes overwhelming (89%) for Evangelical Christians in specific.  Meanwhile, 77% of Republicans believe in the literal truth of the Bible.

A Pew Research poll bore out fairly similar results, with 78% of Americans believing that the Bible is either the actual or inspired Word of God.  This view is held by 88% of Protestants, 82% of Catholics, and 91% of other Christian groups.  Contrary to the emerging scholarly consensus that the Biblical stories such as Exodus and Conquest are “best regarded as a myth”, only a minority of the public at large (19% of Americans, 11% of Protestants, 16% of Catholics, and 6% of other Christian groups) believe that the Bible is just “ancient fables, history, and legends.”

Quite the opposite of what our opponents claim, most Christian-Americans very much believe in the accuracy of their scriptural texts.  This explains, for instance, why only a minority of Christians in America believe in evolution, with “60 percent of Americans who call themselves Evangelical Christians…favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools altogether.”

Whether it’s evolution or abortion, Christian-Americans take the Bible very, very seriously.

* * * *

As always, our opponents will rely on a “fall back” argument and claim that the case of Europe is different, that the United States is far more religious than the “bastion of atheism” across the pond.  The Christians in Europe, we are told, aren’t that serious about their religion.

We will preempt this argument by pointing out that only a quarter of the world’s Christians are in Europe.  The other three-quarters are in North and South America, Africa, and Asia.  Latin America has as many Christians as Europe does, and they take their religion very seriously.  So too is the case in Christian Africa and Asia, which together accounts for far more Christians than in Europe.  It is a reasonable assumption that the Christians in Latin America, Africa, and Asia take the Bible very seriously.  Therefore, the “but Europe is different!” excuse is of limited utility.

The majority of Christians actually live in the developing world.  It is of course expected that our opponents will insist on comparing the minority of Christians in the First World to the Muslims in the Third World.

* * * *

The “official view” of the Church reinforces our assertion: “The Christian Church as a whole claims that the Bible is inspired and inerrant.” Both the Catholic Church and mainstream Protestantism (certainly Evangelical Christianity) view the Bible as accurate.  This is a doctrinal view that has always been held and continues to be held by “mainstream Christianity”.

Anti-Islam ideologues further misleading arguments when they exaggerate between the views about “inerrancy” between Christians and Muslims.  One “mainstream Christian view” posits that the Bible does have some “errors” in it.  The anti-Muslim ideologues shrug off the violent verses in the Bible by arguing that “well, we don’t believe that the Bible is without errors, unlike the Muslims!”  This deceptive argument implies that the Christians believe that those violent verses are erroneous/inaccurate.

Yet, this “mainstream Christian view” holds that the Bible is “98.5% textually pure” and “the 1.5% that is in question is mainly nothing more than spelling errors and occasional word omissions like the words ‘the,’ ‘but,’ etc.”  In fact, none of these errors “affect[] doctrinal truths.”  Certainly, these “errors” do not encompass the violent holy wars that are narrated about the Biblical prophets: “In fact, nothing in ancient history even comes close to the accuracy of the New Testament documents.”  Nor do they include the exhortations to violence (“prescriptive, open-ended, and universal” calls to holy war against infidels) found in the Book of Psalms.

What then is the relevance of this argument except to obfuscate the issue?  The fact is that only 6-16% of Christians in America recognize the Bible as “ancient fables, history, and legends.”  That having been established, we could care less about whether or not the word “the” should have been “a” or the other way around.

Neither is it relevant whether or not one believes the Bible is “literally” the Word of God or the “inspired” Word of God, as both amount to the same thing: a text that is considered accurate by its followers.  As one popular Evangelical site, GotQuestions.org, puts it: “Inspiration means the Bible truly is the Word of God…Because the Scriptures are the inspired Word of God, we can conclude that they are also inerrant and authoritative…Without a doubt the Bible is what it claims to be—the undeniable, authoritative, Word of God to humanity.”

As long as the majority of Christians don’t believe that the Bible is just “ancient fables, history, and legends” (which they don’t), whether they consider the Bible the literal or inspired word of God is largely inconsequential to the argument at hand.

* * * *

Unfortunately, we could not locate any poll about Jewish views towards the accuracy of the Bible.  But as far as “official views” go, Orthodox Judaism (the only strand of Judaism recognized by the state of Israel) takes the Hebrew Bible very, very seriously.

* * * *

Lastly, it is rather quite telling that the Islamophobes have now fallen back on the argument that “Jews and Christians have tossed the Bible aside”: is this not a sign of surrender and an implicit admission that the Bible glorifies and exhorts violence and that there is no reasonable way of denying this?  The need to invoke the argument (or rather, to fall back on it) is an indirect  admission that the contrary could not be convincingly argued.

Compare this reaction to Muslims, who instead of needing to rely on the “but we don’t take the Quran seriously” defense, can reasonably argue–using the mitigating verses of the Quran–that the Quran calls for war in self-defense only (Just War Doctrine).  Worded another way: the Bible is so violent that it simply can’t be defended, at least not using the same standards the anti-Muslim ideologues employ against the Quran.

Comments (111)

Ireland_Ulster

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Bomb Attacks on the Rise…in Ireland, What if they were Muslim?

Posted on 12 May 2011 by Emperor

Should we blame Catholicism for this rise in violence? Or Protestantism? If a Muslim nation were to see a rise in such violence you can be sure that Islam would be blamed. (hat tip: Mike)

Bomb attacks double in Northern Ireland

By Ian Graham

BELFAST (Reuters) – Bomb attacks in Northern Ireland have doubled over the last year, police figures showed on Thursday, evidence that dissident pro-Irish nationalists have stepped up activities to try to derail political stability.

A 1998 deal largely ended three decades of violence but small groups of dissidents say nationalists betrayed their cause by entering politics alongside pro-British unionists instead of pressing a fight for full independence from Britain.

A local election last week boosted the status quo when the ruling coalition was returned with a greater majority.

The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) said 99 viable bombs either exploded or were defused by army experts in the year to the end of March, compared with 50 a year ago.

The security threat level stands at severe and police officers — especially Catholics who have been encouraged to join the force — have been targeted.

At the beginning of April, a car bomb killed a 25 year-old Catholic constable. One man has been charged in connection with the bombing and a woman is being questioned by detectives.

Ronan Kerr was the second Catholic officer to be murdered in two years, several more have been severely wounded or had narrow escapes.

Security chiefs fear the dissidents will launch new attacks on either side of the Irish border to coincide with next week’s visit to the Irish Republic by Queen Elizabeth — the first by a British monarch since Irish independence nearly a century ago.

One dissident group, the Real IRA, used an Easter message to oppose the visit, saying she was wanted for war crimes.

The PSNI have loaned a specially adapted bomb and bullet proof Range Rover to the Irish authorities for the Queen to travel in during her four day visit.

Thursday’s police figures show that 188 people were arrested under the Terrorism Act, compared with 169 the year before. Those charged rose to 40 from 36.

As well as bombings there were 72 shooting incidents, 33 casualties resulting from paramilitary style shootings and 81 paramilitary style assaults.

Ordinary crime has hit a 13 year low and Chief Constable Matt Baggott said that was a reflection of the increasing acceptability of the PSNI in largely Catholic areas where the police were traditionally viewed with hostility.

“Despite the challenges we face, policing is working,” he said. “Falling crime shows that we have been embraced by the communities and we will repay the faith they are showing in us by working to sustain and improve our performance.”

(Editing by Carmel Crimmins and Elizabeth Piper)

Comments (17)

Richard Dawkins: “Islam” is an “Unmitigated Evil”

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Richard Dawkins: “Islam” is an “Unmitigated Evil”

Posted on 11 May 2011 by Garibaldi

Richard Dawkins, well known biologist and pop-atheist-guru (add goofball) recently brought up the question of whether or not atheists should support Christian missions in Africa. (hat tip: Rob)

He believes the answer is “still no,” (he doesn’t say why) but since Islam according to him is an “unmitigated evil” and atheism is not going to be making any inroads into Africa anytime soon it is a question worth “raising.”

His logic is based on a crudely partitioned breakdown of religious affiliation in Africa designed by a Christian site:

(Isn’t Dawkins supposed to question these sorts of things?)

Dawkins also believes ‘supporting missions’ may be justified on the basis that ‘the enemy of our enemy is our friend.’ That’s the extent of profundity provided by Dawkins! Such crass and cynical sentiments expose the bankruptcy of ideas and strategy in the leadership of the so-called New Atheists.

The statement is similar to “exposed as a fraud” Ayaan H. Ali’s call for Christian missionaries to evangelize Muslims. Such a call is really just a variation on the well worn Crusader-esque theme best expressed by the likes of Anne Coulter, “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.” (Or the recent statement by Christian Evangelical Bryan Fischer, “Muslims can either convert, or die”).

Don’t you love how some of these loony-out-for-a-buck-and-some-notoriety atheists are so quick to compromise their principles and sit at the table with the most hardcore Bible Thumpers out there? Does anyone think George Carlin would stand for that? Or Tariq Ali? Or As’ad Abu Khalil? Or Cenk Uygur? It just goes to show you that where you are born, your culture and history do have an impact on the decisions and positions you take, no matter how much you claim to be “objective” and motivated by “reason,” and the “scientific method.”

As for his comments that it is a “given” that Islam is “an unmitigated evil in the world today”…wow. First of all, what does that mean about the practitioners of Islam? Does it mean that they are all or mostly or significantly practitioners of “evil?” Because that is the import of Dawkins’ statement, I mean who else puts into reality what Islam is other then the followers of Islam?

Secondly, is anyone else taken aback by the quasi metaphysical language used here by Dawkins? “Unmitigated evil,” is the type of phrase one would expect in the sermon of a Puritan minister or perhaps as one commenter on Dawkins site asks,

Is the Professor now auditioning for a guest shot on Pamela Geller’s website for the barking mad and openly hostile? Very few things in this world are ‘unmitigated evils’: of all the things that might be unmitigated evils, I can absolutely guarantee that a major world religion practiced in a thousand different ways in a thousand different social and cultural contexts is not one of them. The chances of no good at all coming out of such a diverse multiplicity of contexts and forms of practice (that is, of any ‘evil’ not being mitigated) are almost zero. — CallumM

Thirdly, piggy-backing off of the “multiplicity” mentioned by the commenter, is Dawkins totally oblivious to the Arab Spring for instance? You know that thing sweeping the Middle East for the past 5 1/2 months, that many, including Dawkins’ friend Christopher Hitchens thought would fail or sizzle out?

Is it “unmitigated evil” when protesters in Tahrir Square mobilized in the hundreds of thousands, inspired by and chanting the Quranic verse, “God does not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves?” Was it “unmitigated evil” when they withstood the worst kinds of state violence and barbarity in prayer together, shoulder to shoulder? Was it “unmitigated evil” when Christians and Muslims united to protect each other?

Dawkins is out of touch with current events, and lets just say he won’t be playing in any Philosophy World Cups any time soon. The man’s field is Biology, he doesn’t know much about anthropology, sociology, history, comparative religions, or philosophy, that is why he and his buddy Sam Harris get their arse handed to them by real intellectuals such as Scott Atran and Robert Pape.

Maybe it is time for Dawkins to spend a little more time humbly learning about Islam and Muslims, engaging with critical intellectuals instead of rabid Islamophobes and probably dissecting a frog or two in the lab he’s been neglecting while pontificating on matters he has no grasp over.

Comments (102)

Michael_Heick_Bomb_Making

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

‘Bomb Making Next Driveway’ Posted Next to Mosque

Posted on 11 May 2011 by Emperor

The neighbor who made the above sign says,

“‘It does not say what driveway. It doesn’t say ‘at the mosque’,” he said. ‘If they feel it’s at them, that’s how they feel.’”

That’s as sincere as Pamela Geller saying she “Looooooves the Moooslims.”

‘Bomb Making Next Driveway’ posted next to mosque

AMHERST, N.Y. — Muslim leaders are upset that a homeowner who lives next door to a newly opened mosque has posted a sign on his front lawn that reads “Bomb Making Next Driveway.”

Michael Heick lives along a heavily traveled road in Amherst, a Buffalo suburb. The next driveway on the same side of the road is the entrance to the Jaffarya Center.

Heick told local media outlets that he put up the sign last weekend because he was frustrated with how the mosque and town officials handled his complaints that the mosque was built too close to his property and that its bright lights violate town code.

“The place is too close. I don’t care what people think. It doesn’t matter what people think,” he told the Buffalo News. “This is a way to get answers now. I get none from the town. The intent was to catch the eye of the people who I have a problem with.”

In an interview with local TV network, WGRZ, Commissioner of Building Thomas Ketchum described Heick’s allegation about the town as “absolutely false.”

He told WGRZ that outstanding issues had caused him to issue a conditional certificate of occupancy for the mosque. It allows the building to be occupied but under the condition that code violations are corrected.

Heick, for his part, insisted the sign was not directed at a particular group.

“It does not say what driveway. It doesn’t say ‘at the mosque’,” he said. “If they feel it’s at them, that’s how they feel.”

Mosque officials said the sign’s message is offensive and that Heick hasn’t responded to their requests for a meeting.

“I would really think it’s an incitement of hatred against Muslims,” said Dr. Syed Jaffri, an Amherst psychiatrist and member of the mosque’s board of trustees. “Law enforcement should take it very seriously. Tomorrow, somebody could say, ‘Oh they have weapons,’ and people believe it.”

Mubarak Abidi, mosque president, said he called Amherst police over the weekend about the sign and was told its posting wasn’t illegal.

“They said there’s nothing in the law that we can do anything about this sign,” he said.

The center planted shrubs along the property line that should grow to six feet in a few years, but Heick said he wants the center to put up a six-foot-tall fence.

Comments (19)

r-CHINESE-PERFORMANCE-ARTIST-SENT-TO-LABOR-CAMP-large570

Tags: , , , , ,

Performance Artist Sentenced To A Year In A Labor Camp For ‘Art Whore’ Exhibition

Posted on 10 May 2011 by Amago

Imagine if an Islamic country sentenced someone to a year in a labor camp for explicit public performance, we will not hear the end how the Muslim world is trying to suppress the Arts.

Performance Artist Sentenced To A Year In A Labor Camp For ‘Art Whore’ Exhibition

Cheng Li, a Chinese performance artist, was sentenced to one year of “reeducation through labor” (NSFW) for an explicit public performance on March 20. Cheng, whose attorney applied for administrative reconsideration last week, had performed “Art Whore,” in which he and a female partner engaged in unsimulated sex acts before a private audience at the Contemporary Art Exhibition Hall in Beijing. The performance included “sex scenes on a balcony and in a basement of the exhibition hall,” reports China’s Global Times (NSFW).

One unambiguous photo of the performance has been circulating, but it is unclear how many people actually saw the acts; Cheng’s case hinges on convincing the notoriously ironhanded Chinese judiciary that his performance, open only to a select group of invited artists, was not intended to create a disturbance and was not harmful to society. The Chinese government has been at the center of another art censorship controversy since April 3, when renowned artist and political dissident Ai Weiwei was taken into custody.

As for Cheng’s message, the artist stated that “the popular trend of commercializing art is nothing but a trade of sex for commercial benefits.”

Comments (22)

14602327_BG1

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Bossier Mosque Vandalized

Posted on 10 May 2011 by Amago

Reportedly, someone left pork on the door handles at a mosque.

Bossier Mosque vandalized

By Brittany Pieper - email

In the wake of 9-11 many Muslims suffered persecution. Today, in the days after Osama Bin Laden’s death, Muslims in the Shreveport -Bossier community feel they’ve been disrespected again.

They reported to police that a white male in a blue pick-up truck tampered with the doors at the Mosque. When he left, they discovered he had left pork on the door handles so people would have to touch it to go inside. Muslims do not eat pork, and try to avoid it because they consider it unclean.

Mosque members are not pressing charges, but reported the incident to police so it would be on file. Police say it could be considered a hate crime.

“It appears that the individual who did this tried to intimidate the individuals at this location,” said Mark Natale, a spokesman for the Bossier City Police Department.

Local leaders from other religions say they were saddened to hear about the incident.

“It’s kind of chilling. I mean, I know that nobody was physically hurt, but psychologically it’s hurtful,” said Susan Gross, the Executive Director of the North Louisiana Jewish Federation.

“It’s not helpful for anyone. Whether you’re Muslim, Jewish, or Christian, it’s not helpful. It doesn’t build bridges,” said Paul Martin, the Assistant Rector at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Shreveport.

Members of the Mosque say they just hope nothing like this happens again.

Comments (20)

David_Barenboim

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Daniel Barenboim: Peace Concert in Gaza

Posted on 09 May 2011 by Emperor

Peace through Music and justice.

Barenboim to conduct ‘peace concert’ in Gaza

JERUSALEM (AFP) – Israeli conductor Daniel Barenboim will on Tuesday lead an orchestra of European musicians in a peace concert in Gaza, in the first-ever performance there by such a prestigious international ensemble.

The rare concert, which will take place at lunchtime at the Al-Mathaf Cultural House, was announced on Monday by the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East peace process (UNSCO).

It will be the first time that Barenboim, an outspoken proponent of peace between Israel and the Palestinians, has visited the coastal territory, a spokeswoman for the chamber orchestra told AFP.

“It is the first time,” Judith Neuhoff confirmed, saying that the ensemble, which is made up of 25 musicians and known as the “Orchestra for Gaza,” had been put together especially for the visit.

In a statement released by UNSCO, Barenboim said he was “very happy” to be coming to Gaza. “We are playing this concert as a sign of our solidarity and friendship with the civil society of Gaza,” he said.

The musicians, who belong to five prestigious European orchestras, were expected to enter Gaza from Egypt on Tuesday, via the southern Rafah border crossing, a UNSCO spokesman said.

They will travel directly to the venue where they will play a programme of pieces by Mozart including Eine Kleine Nachtmusik and the G minor symphony to an audience of between 300 to 400 people, which will include music students and other members of Gaza’s civil society.

“The concert is to try and bring something to the people of Gaza,” he said. “It is not a political event in any sense.”

Ibrahim al-Najjar, director of Al-Qattan Music School, the only such establishment in Gaza, told AFP that he and a group of his students would greet the 68-year-old maestro and his delegation, which numbers around 50 people, at the Rafah border.

“This visit is very important to us for many reasons, both cultural and civil,” he told AFP.

Although a handful of musicians had visited Gaza in recent months to support the school and to teach classes, it was the first time such a large group of so many prestigious players was coming, he said.

The ensemble includes players from the Berlin Philharmonic, Staatskapelle Berlin, the Vienna Philharmonic, Orchestre de Paris and the Orchestra of La Scala di Milano.

“We love culture, and music is a way of expressing peace and showing that we Palestinians are civilised,” Najjar said, adding that it was important that people had a chance to meet the orchestra and get to know different musical instruments.

“And from a political perspective, it is important to show that Gaza is a safe place,” he said.

Israelis are forbidden by law to venture into Palestinian territory. Barenboim has previously been refused entry to Gaza by the Israeli army — most recently in April 2010 — meaning the only way for him to enter the Hamas-run territory is via Rafah.

The legendary conductor, who lives in Berlin and holds Argentine, Israeli and Spanish citizenship, also accepted honorary Palestinian citizenship in 2008, saying he hoped the move would be an example of the “everlasting bond” between Israelis and Palestinians.

He has long used his fame as a conductor and pianist to promote the cause of peace between Israel and its neighbours, and in 1999 co-founded a “peace orchestra” with his friend Edward W. Said, a Palestinian-American scholar who died in 2003.

Known as the East-West Divan orchestra, it brings together Israeli, Arab and international musicians, and in 2005 it performed in the West Bank city of Ramallah.

Barenboim performs regularly in the West Bank, but has never performed in Gaza, which has been subjected to a crippling Israeli blockade since 2006, which was eased somewhat last year following international pressure.

Comments (16)

hillary1

Tags: , , , , ,

Hasidic newspaper edits Hillary out of Situation Room photo

Posted on 09 May 2011 by Amago

Imagine if Al Jazeera or MAAN News did something along those lines, we would not hear the end of it.

Hasidic newspaper edits Hillary out of Situation Room photo

A publication brushed both women present out of the iconic image

Much ink has been spilled over the now-iconic Situation Room image, showing President Obama, Hillary Clinton and top national security officials watching a brief on Osama bin Laden’s killing.

Particular attention has gone to Clinton’s seemingly emotional expression (which she says may have been due to allergies) and to the one other woman in the shot, Audrey Tomasen, a counterterrorism analyst whom the media had never heard of before.

But instead of analyzing the two female faces in the photo, one Brooklyn-based Hasidic newspaper, Der Zeitung, took a simpler approach: They just photoshopped them out. The Yiddish publication left two empty spaces in place of the two women. According to the Jerusalem Post, the blog Failed Messiah was the first to pick up on Der Zeitung’s radically edited depiction of the Situation Room.

According to Jezebel, “the religious paper never publishes pictures of women, as they could be considered ‘sexually suggestive’.”

Here is the doctored shot in Der Zeitung, as captured by Failed Messiah:

Credit: Failed Messiah

And here’s the original:

Credit: AP Photo/The White House, Pete Souza.

Comments (16)

Tango in Paris with a Niqabi

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Tango in Paris with a Niqabi

Posted on 09 May 2011 by Emperor

A very interesting clip from a group called Red Rag Productions in which a Niqabi dances tango with her partner. It probably is a shocking clip for many to see as they consider Niqabis disenfranchised and inexpressive:

Probably not what you would expect on your morning commute to work!

Red Rag Productions describes itself as,

an independent film production company based in London. Red Rag is dedicated to making high quality documentaries and films on a range of controversial and contemporary issues, in particular those affecting minorities in European societies.

They are currently working on a documentary on the lives of 4 Muslim women in three different European cities and the tensions involved with “a Europe often reluctant to come to terms with women who are asserting their Muslim identities.” Check out there website: Red Rag Productions.

Comments (23)

r-MUSLIMS-KICKED-OFF-PLANE-large570

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Muslim Leaders Kicked Off Flight

Posted on 09 May 2011 by Amago

Reportedly, they were heading to an Islamophobia conference.

Muslim Leaders Kicked Off Flight

By RANDALL DICKERSON

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Two Muslim religious leaders say they were removed from a commercial airliner in Memphis on Friday and were told it was because the pilot refused to fly with them aboard.

Masudur Rahman, who is also an adjunct instructor of Arabic at the University of Memphis, said by telephone from the terminal at Memphis International Airport that he and another imam had already been allowed to board their Delta Connection flight to Charlotte, N.C., before they were asked to de-board.

Transportation Security Administration spokesman Jon Allen in Atlanta confirmed the incident and said it was not initiated by that agency.

A Delta Air Lines spokeswoman said the flight was operated by Atlantic Southeast Airlines, which is also based in Atlanta. ASA didn’t immediately respond to telephone calls seeking comment.

Rahman said he was dressed in traditional Indian clothing and his traveling companion was dressed in Arab garb, including traditional headgear.

Rahman said he and Mohamed Zaghloul, of the Islamic Association of Greater Memphis, were cleared by security agents and boarded the plane for an 8:40 a.m. departure.

The aircraft pulled away from the gate, but the pilot then announced the plane must return, Rahman said. When it did, the imams were asked to go back to the boarding gate where Rahman said they were told the pilot was refusing to accept them because some other passengers could be uncomfortable.

Rahman said Delta officials talked with the pilot for more than a half-hour, but he still refused.

The men were taken to a lounge and booked on a later flight.

They called the Council on Islamic-American Relations, a Muslim civil rights and advocacy group in Washington, D.C.

“It’s racism and bias because of our religion and appearance and because of misinformation about our religion.” Rahman said. “If they understood Islam, they wouldn’t do this.”

He said a Delta manager apologized for the pilot’s actions, but that he and Zaghloul never spoke directly with the pilot.

Ibrahim Hooper, of the Islamic-American organization, said the group will follow up with the airline and with the TSA to help ensure such incidents do not continue to occur.

Hooper said airline officials at Memphis tried to resolve the situation, but the pilot refused.

Comments (33)

The Bible’s Prescriptive, Open-Ended, and Universal Commandments to Wage Holy War and Enslave Infidels (IV)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Bible’s Prescriptive, Open-Ended, and Universal Commandments to Wage Holy War and Enslave Infidels (IV)

Posted on 08 May 2011 by Danios

This is page IV of IV.  To return to page I, go here.  To return to page II, go here. To return to page III, go here.

Many Westerners continue to think of the Quran as a book of violence, which stands in sharp contrast to the Bible, a book of love.  In his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), Catholic apologist Robert Spencer (kingpin of the anti-Muslim cyber-world) feeds into this Orientalism-on-steroids view of Islam.  Spencer claims that the Quran is the single most violent religious scripture on earth.  He dismisses any comparison to the Bible, arguing that “there is nothing in the Bible that rivals the Qur’an’s exhortations to violence.”

We responded by producing oodles of violent Biblical passages (see parts 1234, and 5 of this Series), which are in fact way more violent than the Quran.  The Bible, unlike the Quran, sanctions the targeting and killing of civilians (including women, children, and even babies); it sanctions genocide.  No such thing can be found in the Quran.  One simply cannot find any verse in the Quran that calls to kill babies like the Bible explicitly does.

Spencer et al. respond to these passages by claiming that the Biblical passages are merely “descriptive”, unlike the Quran’s violent passages that are supposedly “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal.”  Anyone who follows such debates knows how crucial this counter-argument is to the anti-Muslim camp.  It has been the shield with which they protect their hypocrisy, insulating themselves from Mutually Assured Destruction in these My-Holy-Book-is-Better-Than-Yours Holy Wars.

In this article (see pages  III, and III), that counter-argument (so loved and cherished by Islamophobes) has finally been laid to rest: it has been shot dead like bin Ladin.  Clearly, there are verses in the Bible that condone violence–passages that are prescriptive, open-ended, and universal commandments to wage holy war against unbelievers and to enslave them–at least according to the standards and methodology employed by Robert Spencer et al. against the Quran.

The Islamophobes have immediately reacted by claiming that “you can’t possibly compare those Biblical passages with the Quranic verses!” and then focus on (and magnify) some perceived insignificant difference between the phrasing of the two books.  Yet, if we place the two texts side by side, there seems little reason to appreciate any significant difference at all (at least in a way that would benefit the Bible).  If we consider the Quranic verses to be “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal”, then certainly the Biblical passages (discussed on pages 1-3) are as well.  In fact, there is ample reason to consider them more so.

The Bible, for instance, says:

Psalms 149:5 Let godly people triumph in glory. Let them sing for joy on their beds.

149:6 Let the praises of God be in their mouths, and a two-edged sword in their hands,

149:7 to execute vengeance on the heathen and punishment on the people,

149:8 to bind their kings with chains, and their leaders with iron shackles.

The only way Robert Spencer and his minions can explain why these verses “don’t count” is by arguing that these were psalms attributed to King David and that therefore should not be understood as universal commandments; rather, these apply only to a specific person (David) in a specific time (thousands of years ago) in a specific scenario (the divinely sanctioned war with the inhabitants of Canaan).

Yet, if these Biblical verses “don’t count” because of this reason, then the Quranic verses he cited should also “not count” either since the same exact reasoning can be employed.  These were Quranic verses revealed to a specific person (Muhammad) in a specific time (1,400 years ago) in a specific scenario (the war against the enemy tribes of seventh century Arabia).

Once again, Spencer’s own selection of quotes is all the proof that is needed to refute him.  Spencer writes (emphasis is ours):

Islamic apologists more often tend to focus on several Old Testament passages:

* “When the LORD your God brings you into the land where you are entering to possess it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you.  And when the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them.  You shall make no covenant with them and show no favor to them” (Deuteronomy 7:1-2)

* “When you approach a city to fight against it, you shall offer it terms of peace.  If it agrees to make peace with you and opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you.  However, if it does not make peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it.  When the LORD your God gives it into your hand, you shall strike all the men in it with the edge of the sword.  Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you.  Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes” (Deuteronomy 20:10-17).

* “Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately.  But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves” (Numbers 31:17-18).

Strong stuff, right?  Just as bad as “slay the unbelievers wherever you find them” (Qur’an 9:5) and “Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly on them” (Quran 47:4) and all the rest, right?

Wrong.  Unless you happen to be a Hittite, Girgashite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, or Jebusite, [the Seven Nations] these Biblical passages simply do not apply to you.  The Qur’an exhorts believers to fight unbelievers without specifying anywhere in the text that only certain unbelievers are to be fought, or only for a certain period of time, or some other distinction.  Taking the texts at face value, the command to make war against unbelievers is open-ended and universal.  The Old Testament, in contrast, records God’s commands to the Israelites to make war against particular people only.  This is jarring to modern sensibilities, to be sure, but it does not amount to the same thing.

Notice that he cites verse 9:5 as proof of the Quran’s “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal command to make war against unbelievers.”  Yet, on the very same page of his own book (p.29 of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades) Spencer quotes verse 9:13 of the Quran (just a few lines down from 9:5), which says:

“Will ye not fight a folk who broke their solemn pledges, and purposed to drive out the messenger and did attack you first?” [Qur'an 9:13]

You can read this verse at the top right hand corner on p.29 of Spencer’s own book (click the image below to view):

Clearly, the Quranic passage is not talking about any or all unbelievers for all time.  Rather, this Quranic passage was revealed with regard to a very specific situation and against a very specific group of “unbelievers”, namely those “who broke their solemn pledges [peace treaties]…and attacked you first”, and who even tried to “drive out the messenger” from the city.  Just as Spencer et al. argue that those Biblical verses apply only to nations that no longer exist, so too can Muslims today argue that this passage is only against those who “drove out the Messenger” (Muhammad).  Since the Prophet Muhammad is no longer alive, couldn’t it be said that there is no “folk” on earth who could drive him out, and therefore the passage does not apply to anyone any more?

Another key phrase in the passage is “they did attack you first”, which supports the idea that the Quran, quite unlike the Bible, endorses war in self-defense only.  This point will be explored in a future article in the Series.  But for now, we can safely say that the passage is–at least as much as the psalms are–speaking about a very specific situation and a very specific people: namely, “a folk who broke their solemn pledges, and purposed to drive out the messenger and did attack you first.”  If this explanation suffices for our opponents with regard to their own holy book, then why can’t Muslims also use it for their own scriptures?  What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Robert Spencer has also relied on another common tactic of deception used by Islamophobes to convince the reader that the Quran contains “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal” commandments to wage holy war with infidels.  He quotes verse 9:5 as follows: “slay the unbelievers wherever you find them.”  By wrenching this verse out of context, the conspiratorial Islamophobe convinces the reader that the Quran instructs Muslims to kill non-Muslims wherever, anywhere–even at the gas station, the bookstore, or even at the local Walmart!  If you see a pious Muslim at Walmart, be very careful, because his holy book commands him to kill you “wherever”!  (The Muslim’s failure to do so is only a reflection of his taqiyya or his ignorance of his own religion!)

This phrase found in 9:5 (“slay the unbelievers wherever you find them”) is actually a repetition of an earlier verse (2:191), which also says: “slay them wherever you find them”.  This was not, however, an open license to wage war against all unbelievers anywhere, everywhere.  In fact, the verse is mitigated by what comes before and after it:

2:190 Fight in the way of God against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities! For God loves not aggressors.

2:191 And slay them wherever you find them, and drive them out of the places wherever they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter.  And do not fight them at the Sacred Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you there, then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

2:192 But if they cease, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

2:193 And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for God.  But if they cease, let there be no hostility except towards those who practise oppression.

The word “wherever” was clarifying an issue that the early Muslims faced: was it permissible to fight in the Sacred Place (the environs of the Holy Kaaba)?  It was from this place that the pagans drove the Muslims out (and hence the command to “drive them out of the places wherever they drove you out”).

Many of the early Muslims felt uncomfortable fighting in the holy place where it was normally not permitted to do so.  According to Islamic belief, it is forbidden to hit anyone in the Sacred Place (the environs of the Holy Kaaba).  Even killing an insect within the Sacred Place is prohibited, so how could the Muslims fight and “slay” enemies therein?  To this, the Quran answers: “slay them wherever you find them”, i.e. even if it happens to be inside the Sacred Place.

The word “wherever” is not sanctioning violence everywhere; rather, it is permitting fighting in the Sacred Place if necessary.

Reading the entire passage altogether, it is impossible to conclude that this is an open-ended call for global warfare and unending aggression, especially since “God loves not aggressors.”  More importantly, the passage itself shows that it is about a very specific situation and against a particular people.

Spencer also cites  47:4, once again only partially reproducing the verse; here is Spencer’s rendition:

“Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly on them” (Quran 47:4)

It becomes very obvious why Spencer chose to omit the rest of the verse, which in its entirety reads:

47:4 Therefore, when you meet the disbelievers in battle, smite at their necks, until you have defeated them, then firmly bind them (as prisoners).  Afterward, free them out of generosity or by ransom–until the toils of war end. Thus are you commanded.  God could have defeated them Himself if He had willed, but His purpose is to test some of you by means of others. As for those slain in the way of God, He will not let their deeds be for nothing.

The verse is hardly a “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal commandment to wage holy war against infidels”.  Instead, it is a command given to the early Muslims with regard to a particular battle they were involved in.  The Muslims were instructed to fight the enemy (“smite at their necks” in holy speak), take the enemy soldiers on the battlefield as prisoners, and then free them “out of generosity” (grant them their freedom of out of grace) or free them “by ransom” (exchanging them for Muslim prisoners of war or for a fee).

Compare the Quran’s treatment of prisoners of war in these verses (of Spencer’s own choosing!) with the Biblical verses quoted by Robert Spencer himself:

Deuteronomy 7:2 When the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them.  You shall make no covenant with them and show no favor to them.

The Quran says that “[after] you have defeated them” and have taken them as prisoners, “free them”; on the other hand, the Bible says “[after] you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them”–which, as we have seen, in Bible talk means exactly that: ethnic cleansing and genocide.  The Quran says to free them out of generosity as a favor to them, whereas the Bible ominously warns: “show no favor to them”.

As can be seen, Spencer’s own selection of verses proves our assertion and what Prof. Philip Jenkins argued:

By the standards of the time, which is the 7th century A.D., the laws of war that are laid down by the Quran are actually reasonably humane. Then we turn to the Bible, and we actually find something that is for many people a real surprise. There is a specific kind of warfare laid down in the Bible which we can only call genocide.

Conclusion

As always, there is a need for an important disclaimer here.  Nowhere are we trying to say that Judaism/Christianity/Bible are violent, full stop.  Rather, what we are saying is that if we use the same methodology that Robert Spencer and the other Islamophobes employ against Islam/Quran, then in that case Judaism/Christianity/Bible are even more violent.  Therefore, any conclusions that follow should apply equally or more so.  Indeed, this becomes even more apparent when we expose the manipulation of texts, the misleading use of tactical ellipses, and the sleight of hand tricks employed by Robert Spencer et al.

There are many ways that moderate Jews and Christians “restrict” the violent verses of the Bible.  Insisting that Jews and Christians must understand their holy text in a certain way would not only be obtuse, it would be counterproductive.  Yet, why is it that these anti-Muslim ideologues allow theological and textual acrobatics when it comes to the Bible, but meanwhile they forbid the contextualization of Quranic verses?  Certainly it is much easier to “constrain” the violent verses of the Quran than it is for the Bible, since the Quran itself almost always cushions these verses in between mitigating verses.  This contrasts quite considerably with the Bible, which has violent verses wrapped in violent passages.

When we published pages I-III of this article, Islamophobes quickly responded by arguing that the Biblical passages we cited don’t actually call for open-ended and universal violence against heathens.  To “constrain” the meaning of these verses, they use various explanations and arguments: “these passages only refer to a specific situation, time, context, and people” or “that’s just the Old Testament”, etc. etc.  To bolster these claims, they look for proof in the Bible itself.

But the truth is that for every proof they provide for their argument, another can be found against it.  There is nothing in the Bible that clearly and unequivocally supports either of these or other such arguments.  Some would even say it’s “textual acrobatics”.  As we stated before, there is nothing wrong with mitigating the Bible’s violence in this way; it’s even quite laudable.  The question though is: why do these same people insist that absolutely no contextualization can be done with the violent-sounding Quranic verses?

Pound for pound, there is far more violence in the Bible than in the Quran.  Specifically, the Bible sanctions the killing of civilians (women, children, and even babies), and endorses wholesale genocide.  Moreover, there is more “explanation” necessitated and more textual acrobatics needed to mitigate these violent Biblical passages.  So why then focus on the Quran?  Here, an appropriate Biblical verse is applicable:

Matthew 7:5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.


Comments (52)

The Bible’s Prescriptive, Open-Ended, and Universal Commandments to Wage Holy War and Enslave Infidels (III)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Bible’s Prescriptive, Open-Ended, and Universal Commandments to Wage Holy War and Enslave Infidels (III)

Posted on 07 May 2011 by Danios

This is page III of IV.  To return to page I, go here.  To return to page II, go here.

No amount of ink has been spared by anti-Muslim ideologues fear-mongering about the traditional Islamic concept (now long abandoned and not implemented in a single Muslim country–not even in the ultraconservative Saudi Arabia or Iran) of jizya and dhimmi–the latter which is pejoratively (and incorrectly) referred to as “dhimmitude”. It is an incorrect usage (and certainly not academically accepted) since “dhimmitude” is an amalgamation of the words “dhimmi” and “servitude”; the dhimmi system was second-class citizenship but not servitude–a significant difference, as noted by Prof. Mark R. Cohen:

The dhimmi enjoyed a kind of citizenship, second class and unequal though it was…[in contrast to] Jews living in Latin Christian lands, where…[they were] legally possessed [as slaves] by this or that ruling authority.

On the other hand, the traditional Christian concept of Perpetual Servitude of heathens was, as the name itself indicates, servitude.  It was a form of slavery that heathens were subjected to (including Jews and Muslims).  The term “dhimmitude” was coined by a loony old lady named Bat Ye’or, a conspiratorial pseudo-scholar and extremist Zionist Jew.  The term was popularized by Catholic apologist Obama-may-be-a-Muslim Robert Spencer.  It is quite ironic that in attempting to coin a demeaning enough term to demonize Islam, the Zionist Jew and Catholic apologist accidentally used a term that is actually found in their own religious tradition!

The historical experiences of dhimma and of Perpetual Servitude have been compared here.

Perpetual Servitude in the Bible

In his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), Robert Spencer cited a passage from Deuteronomy (20:10-17) to prove that the Bible’s commandments to wage holy war apply only to the Seven Nations and not to anyone else.  We have proven this claim to be completely false (see here).  In fact, this Biblical passage advocates genocide for those heathens living inside of Israel, and Perpetual Servitude for those outside of it.  This injunction implies “the nations”, by which is meant the entire world.

On pp.35-36 of his book, Spencer cites a hadith (saying attributed to Muhammad) that urges Muslims to offer their enemies Three Choices: (1) “Invite them to accept Islam”; (2) “If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya”; or (3) “If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them”.  The text itself (and the academically dishonest use of ellipses by Spencer) will be discussed in a future article in the Series.  For now, however, we will–simply for argument’s sake–accept Spencer’s claims that Muhammad offered unbelievers these Three Choices only (conversion, tribute, or death).

Is it not odd that the Catholic apologist Robert Spencer, along with his extremist Jewish Zionist and Christian Crusader-wannabe comrades, are so indignant of Muhammad for offering these Three Choices and yet are completely silent when it comes to Moses who restricted infidels to these choices long before Muhammad ever did?  Moses is alleged to have said (almost two millennia before the idea ever came to a man named Muhammad):

Deuteronomy 20:10 When you approach a city to fight against it, you shall offer it terms of peace.

20:11 If it agrees to make peace with you and opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you (as tributaries).

20:12 However, if it does not make peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it.

20:13 When the LORD your God gives it into your hand, you shall strike all the men in it with the edge of the sword.

20:14 Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you.

Moses and the Bible thus offered infidels only Two Choices: (1) become forced labor (Perpetual Servitude) or (2) war.  Both resulted in slavery.  And in both circumstances, conversion was necessary.  (The Gibeonites, for instance, were forced to give up their native religion and renounce idolatry for the God of Israel.)

Even if we accept Spencer’s argument about the Three Choices (again, simply for argument’s sake), this was still better than the Two Choices of Moses and the Bible.  There are at least a few reasons why:

1) If an unbeliever paid the jizya, he could retain his religious affiliation.  Meanwhile, an unbeliever under the Biblical model was forced to worship the God of Israel.

2) Dhimmis were considered free persons as opposed to slaves, and it was forbidden to enslave them.  On the other hand, perpetual serfs were “owned” by the state.  For example, the Gibeonites became the slaves of Joshua, the leader of Israel.  Similarly, Jews became perpetual serfs of the Church and/or Christian state.

3) Dhimmis were free to choose their form of livelihood, barred only from military and high governmental positions.  For example, Jews in the Islamic world were known to be physicians, lawyers, scientists, merchants, traders, bankers, and agriculturalists.  Under the Biblical model, an unbeliever became “forced labor” and could no longer choose his own profession.  This is the essence of servitude and why it’s so much worse than second-class citizenship.  The Gibeonites, for instance, were forced to become “wood cutters and water carriers for the [Jewish] community” (Joshua 9:27), “which was a very low and mean employment.” Similarly, Jews in Christian Europe were banned from virtually all fields and restricted to the “hated” profession of money-lending, considered at that time to be worse than prostitution.

4) Dhimmis retained the legal right to own property.  This contrasted sharply with the case of perpetual serfs.

5) If an unbeliever opted to convert to Islam, he was to be considered an equal. Meanwhile, perpetual serfs were forced to convert and still considered unequal serfs.

6) If the unbelievers chose to fight off the Muslims and if the Muslims won, the conquered population–including the men–weren’t massacred.  Instead, they still became a dhimmi population–with all the rights associated with that position.  If, on the other hand, the unbelievers didn’t submit to Perpetual Servitude, the Biblical model called for the slaughter of every single man.

To conclude, the concept of dhimmitude Perpetual Servitude is found in the Bible, and originated from Moses.  Most importantly, the Bible contains “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal commandments” to wage holy war against infidels, and to enslave them, to subjugate them to Perpetual Servitude–something far worse than the dhimmi system.

The obsession over the concept of dhimmis and jizya by the self-proclaimed defenders of the Judeo-Christian tradition certainly does seem to be a case of projection or simply of wholesale ignorance.  What the Islamophobes attribute to the Prophet Muhammad and the Quran is still better than what Moses or the Bible advocated.  This fact will of course be ignored, obfuscated, or downplayed by Robert Spencer et al.–which is consistent with the Islamophobic methodology of “whatever violence is found in Islam always ‘counts’ and whatever violence is found in Judaism or Christianity ‘doesn’t count’ and never counts.”

Always remember:  Jewish or Christian Violence Never Counts, and Muslim Violence Always Counts.

Editor’s Note: Due to the length of this article, it will be split into four pages, the next page to be published tomorrow.

Update I: Page 4 is now available here.

Comments (179)

Salon: Jews and Muslims united for sharia?

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Salon: Jews and Muslims united for sharia?

Posted on 07 May 2011 by Danios

(cross-posted from Salon.com)

Jewish groups mobilize against anti-sharia bills that would also bar arbitration under Jewish religious law

BY JUSTIN ELLIOTT

We’re a bit late to this one, but Ron Kampeas of JTA has a fascinating recent piece on fears that anti-sharia initiatives brewing around the country could also threaten observance of traditional Jewish law, or halachah.

You don’t hear much about halachah, or rabbinical courts known as beit din, even though both have been a feature of observant American Jewish communities for years.

But some Jewish groups are now lobbying against anti-sharia bills that have been drafted — possibly as a way to preempt constitutional challenges — to bar any and all foreign or religious law in U.S. courts, not just sharia:

“The laws are not identical, but as a general rule they could be interpreted broadly to prevent two Jewish litigants from going to a beit din,” a Jewish religious court, said Abba Cohen, the Washington director of Agudath Israel of America, an Orthodox umbrella group. “That would be a terrible infringement on our religious freedom.”

A number of recent beit  din arbitrations that were taken by litigants to civil courts — on whether a batch of etrogim met kosher standards; on whether a teacher at a yeshiva was rightfully dismissed; and on the ownership of Torah scrolls — would have no standing under the proposed laws.

A spokesman for the Orthodox Union explained that a prohibition on religious law would be a problem in situations when Jewish law comes up in civil courts:

Such laws “are problematic particularly from the perspective of the Orthodox community — we have a beit din system, Jews have disputes resolved according to halachah,” Diament said. “We don’t have our own police force, and the mechanism for having those decisions enforced if they need to be enforced is the way any private arbitration is enforced” — through contract law in the secular court system.

Some prominent Jewish groups seem to be putting some real lobbying muscle into this issue in state legislatures, so it will be interesting to see what happens.

Sharia, by the way, did not come up in last night’s GOP presidential debate.

Comments (30)

The Bible’s Prescriptive, Open-Ended, and Universal Commandments to Wage Holy War and Enslave Infidels (II)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Bible’s Prescriptive, Open-Ended, and Universal Commandments to Wage Holy War and Enslave Infidels (II)

Posted on 06 May 2011 by Danios

This is page II of IV.  To return to page I, go here.

In his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), Robert Spencer claims that the violent verses in the Bible are only “descriptive” whereas those in the Quran are supposedly “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal.”  However, this argument is simply not supported by the facts on the ground, as we explained on page I.  There are many violent verses in the Bible that are “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal”–at least using the same standards that Spencer so mirthfully employs against the Quran.

The Battle Psalms

The Book of Psalms is amongst the most commonly read and recited part of the Bible by both Jews and Christians.  “Throughout the world many Jews recite the Book of Psalms each week or each month.” “The Psalms are some of the most widely read portions of the Old Testament. They have a long history of popularity in the Christian tradition, so much so that often the Book of Psalms has been bound with the New Testament in pocket editions.”

The Psalms are attributed to King David, who waged violent holy war against heathens and committed atrocities that can only be described as genocide (see part 3 of this Series).  Many of the Psalms are war poems, glorifying holy war against heathens.  No wonder then that even today “when Israel is at war, Jews gather to recite Psalms” and “many Yeshivot and synagogues recite Psalms (especially Psalms 20, 83, 121, 130, 142 …) daily for the protection of Jews in Israel from terrorism.” (Certainly, ethnic cleansing–which is called for in this particular selection of Psalms–is one vengefully satisfying, albeit ineffective, way of dealing with terrorism.)  Christian soldiers in the U.S. military routinely recall and recite the Psalms as they sustain their illegal occupations in the lands of the Saracen heathens.

The Bible proclaims:

Psalms 149:5 Let godly people triumph in glory. Let them sing for joy on their beds.

149:6 Let the praises of God be in their mouths, and a two-edged sword in their hands,

149:7 to execute vengeance on the heathen and punishment on the people,

149:8 to bind their kings with chains, and their leaders with iron shackles.

Using Spencer’s own standards, this is a “prescriptive, open-ended, and universal” proclamation of holy war against “the heathen”.  Far from letting “God handle the unbelievers”, this Biblical passage empowers men to do God’s bidding–with the sharp edges of a sword no less.  After all, Psalm 18:34 says of God: “He teaches my hands to war” and 144:1 says: “Praise be to the LORD, who is my rock, who teaches my hands to war and my fingers to fight.”

Other verses more graphically depict how the Jewish and/or Christian believers will themselves “see vengeance” and exult in bloodletting:

58:10 The righteous will be glad when they see vengeance, when they bathe their feet in the blood of the wicked.

The believers pray to God: “Strike all my enemies on the jaw; break the teeth of the wicked” (3:7), “Strike them with terror” (9:20), “let death seize my enemies” (55:15), “trample our enemies” (60:120), “destroy them!” (74:11), “terrify them” (83:15), and “let them perish in disgrace” (83:17).

It cannot be claimed that these verses ask for the intervention of God without any human action.  Rather, the Psalms are calling for divine support to aid human soldiers on the battlefield.  This becomes abundantly clear from numerous passages contained therein:

18:29 With [God's] help I can advance against a troop [of soldiers]; with my God I can scale [an enemy] wall.

18:30 God’s way is perfect. All the LORD’s promises prove true. He is a shield for all who look to him for protection.

18:31 For who is God besides the LORD? And who is the Rock except our God?

18:32 It is God who arms me with strength and makes my way perfect.

18:33 He makes my feet like the feet of a deer; he enables me to stand on the heights.

18:34 He teaches my hands to war, so that a bow of steel is broken by my arms.

18:35 You have given me your shield of victory. Your right hand supports me; your help has made me great.

18:36 You broaden the path beneath me, so that my ankles do not turn.

18:37 I will pursue my enemies and overtake them; I will not turn back till they are destroyed.

18:38 I will smite them through, so that they shall not be able to rise: They shall fall under my feet.

18:39 You have armed me with strength for the battle; you have subdued my enemies under my feet.

18:40 You have also given me the necks of my enemies; that I might destroy them that hate me.

God’s aid is certainly sought, but it is the human who will become God’s agent of vengeance.  It can almost be considered that God was thought of as another fighter on the battlefield:

108:11 Have you rejected us, O God? Will you no longer march with our armies?

108:12 Oh grant us help against the foe, for vain is the salvation of man!

108:13 With God we will gain the victory, and he will trample down our enemies.

Psalm 83 is one of the most commonly recited parts of the Bible and is in fact read “daily” by many pro-Israeli Jewish congregations.  This psalm calls for God to do to the enemies of Israel what was done to the people of Midian.  As we read earlier, the Israelites killed every Midianite man, and enslaved their women and children.  The passage also lists other peoples who were defeated and destroyed by the Israelites.  This prayer in the Book of Psalms reads:

83:9 Do to them as you did to Midian, as you did to Sisera and Jabin at the river Kishon,

83:10 who perished at Endor and became like dung for the ground.

83:11 Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna,

83;12 who said, “Let us take possession of the pasturelands of God.

83:13 Make them like tumbleweed, O my God, like chaff before the wind.

83:14 As fire consumes the forest or a flame sets the mountains ablaze,

83:15 so pursue them with your tempest and terrify them with your storm.

83:16 Cover their faces with shame so that men will seek your name, O LORD.

83:17 May they ever be ashamed and dismayed; may they perish in disgrace.

Far from rejecting the wars and genocides of Moses, this prayer in the Bible–recited by Jews (and Christians) worldwide–hopes for similar treatment of other infidels, especially those who have the unfortunate fate of being deemed enemies to Israel.

Editor’s Note: Due to the length of this article, it will be split into four parts, the next part to be published tomorrow.

Update I: Page 3 is now available here.

Update II: Page 4 is now available here.

Comments (18)

The Bible’s Prescriptive, Open-Ended, and Universal Commandments to Wage Holy War and Enslave Infidels (I)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Bible’s Prescriptive, Open-Ended, and Universal Commandments to Wage Holy War and Enslave Infidels (I)

Posted on 05 May 2011 by Danios

This article is part 6 of LoonWatch’s Understanding Jihad Series. Please read my “disclaimer”, which explains my intentions behind writing this article: The Understanding Jihad Series: Is Islam More Likely Than Other Religions to Encourage Violence?

In his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), anti-Muslim Catholic apologist Robert Spencer calls the Quran a “book of war” that is “violent and intransigent.”  In contrast, he argues, “there is nothing in the Bible that rivals the Qur’an’s exhortations to violence.”  This view is held by the general public as well; in the words of Prof. Philip Jenkins:

In the minds of ordinary Christians – and Jews – the Koran teaches savagery and warfare, while the Bible offers a message of love, forgiveness, and charity.

This viewpoint is used to promote bigotry against Muslims and Islam, and to fan the flames of Islamophobia.  Fortunately, we’ve “utterly destroyed” this viewpoint (see parts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this Series), and have categorically shown that the Bible is far more violent than the Quran.  As Prof. Jenkins puts it:

In fact, the Bible overflows with “texts of terror,” to borrow a phrase coined by the American theologian Phyllis Trible. The Bible contains far more verses praising or urging bloodshed than does the Koran, and biblical violence is often far more extreme, and marked by more indiscriminate savagery.

The Bible sanctions genocide, something that one simply cannot find any equivalent of in the Quran.  In the Bible are verses calling for the slaughter of civilians, with explicit calls for the butchering of women, children, and even babies.  Even the most violent-sounding passages in the Quran do not come close to saying this.

The “Descriptive vs. Prescriptive” Defense

Keenly aware of the fact that the horribly violent verses in the Bible sound far worse than anything in the Quran, Robert Spencer and other anti-Muslim ideologues have to explain why these Biblical passages “don’t count” (whereas the violent sounding Quranic verses always “count”).  This follows an important rule of thumb employed by Islamophobes, as we explained in a previous article:

All violence in the Quran “counts” whereas whatever is peaceful in the Quran “doesn’t count”, and whatever is violent in the Bible “doesn’t count” and whatever is peaceful in the Bible “counts”.  Heads I win, tails you lose.

Islamophobes argue that the violent passages in the Bible “don’t count” because “the Biblical verses are merely descriptive, not prescriptive like in the Quran.”  In other words, the Bible only records and describes the violence committed by Judeo-Christian prophets, without prescribing believers of today to carry these acts out.

According to this view, the God of the Bible only commands war against the people of the Seven Nations, who simply do not exist any more.  Since they don’t exist any more, those Biblical verses are effectively dead letters. This is how the pro-Christian argument goes anyways.

The ultra-conservative Catholic organization The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property summarizes Spencer’s argument in a sympathetic review of his book:

Biblical references record God’s commands to specific people to wage war against certain groups for a particular purpose and a limited time period. These passages are a historic account of God’s dealings with His people. Conversely, the Koran’s more numerous violent passages call upon Muslims of all times to fight unbelievers with impunity and spread Islam with the sword.

And in Robert Spencer’s own words (found on pp.28-31 of his book):

Islamic apologists more often tend to focus on several Old Testament passages:

* “When the LORD your God brings you into the land where you are entering to possess it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you.  And when the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them.  You shall make no covenant with them and show no favor to them” (Deuteronomy 7:1-2)

* “When you approach a city to fight against it, you shall offer it terms of peace.  If it agrees to make peace with you and opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you.  However, if it does not make peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it.  When the LORD your God gives it into your hand, you shall strike all the men in it with the edge of the sword.  Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you.  Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes” (Deuteronomy 20:10-17).

* “Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately.  But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves” (Numbers 31:17-18).

Strong stuff, right?  Just as bad as “slay the unbelievers wherever you find them” (Qur’an 9:5) and “Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly on them” (Quran 47:4) and all the rest, right?

Wrong.  Unless you happen to be a Hittite, Girgashite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, or Jebusite, [the Seven Nations] these Biblical passages simply do not apply to you.  The Qur’an exhorts believers to fight unbelievers without specifying anywhere in the text that only certain unbelievers are to be fought, or only for a certain period of time, or some other distinction.  Taking the texts at face value, the command to make war against unbelievers is open-ended and universal.  The Old Testament, in contrast, records God’s commands to the Israelites to make war against particular people only.  This is jarring to modern sensibilities, to be sure, but it does not amount to the same thing.

Robert Spencer reproduces Biblical verses to prove his claim when in actuality these verses are all the proof needed to refute his claim.  One does not need to go further than his own page in his own book to see how fallacious his basic argument is!

The first passage is Deuteronomy 7:1-2, which orders the believers to “utterly destroy” the people of the Seven Nations:

When the LORD your God brings you into the land where you are entering to possess it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you.  And when the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them.  You shall make no covenant with them and show no favor to them” (Deuteronomy 7:1-2)

The believers are forbidden to sign a peace treaty with the people of the Seven Nations (“you shall make no covenant with them”), and they must be ethnically cleansed (“you shall utterly destroy them”).

The next passage Spencer cites explains what to do with all nations other than the Seven Nations:

When you approach a city to fight against it, you shall offer it terms of peace.  If it agrees to make peace with you and opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you.  However, if it does not make peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it.  When the LORD your God gives it into your hand, you shall strike all the men in it with the edge of the sword.  Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you.  Thus you shall do to all the cities that are very far from you, which are not of the cities of these nations nearby. Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes. (Deuteronomy 20:10-17).

In his book, Robert Spencer completely omitted the verse in red above. Notice how the words in red (Deuteronomy 20:15) simply do not appear in Spencer’s rendition of the passage.  Take a look for yourself (click on the image to view):

This time, Spencer didn’t even bother using those ever so strategic ellipses to manipulate the meaning of a passage.  One wonders at the convenient omission of Deuteronomy 20:15 and whether or not this is a mistake or deception.  It is certainly a very helpful “mistake”.

Furthermore, Spencer didn’t reproduce 20:17 either:

20:17 But you shall utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD your God has commanded you.

Whatever the case, the Biblical passage (the one that Robert Spencer uses as a proof) is actually saying that the general rule is that heathens are to be offered terms of “peace”, which entails being reduced to “forced labor” (perpetual servitude).  (This is the Bible’s version of “peace”, and the same type of world “peace” that Jesus, the “Prince of Peace”, will bring during his Second Coming.)  If the heathens reject these terms of “peace”, then in that case they are to be attacked and every single man (including non-combatants) is to be killed.  Meanwhile, the women and the children are to be enslaved, and the animals and all property are to be taken as booty.

After stating this general rule, the God of the Bible clarifies that this does not apply to the people of the Seven Nations, who must be “utterly destroy[ed]“.  The women and children cannot be taken as slaves because the believers “shall not leave alive anything that breathes.”  In other words, Spencer’s rationalization could be applied to Deuteronomy 20:16-17 (the genocidal verses advocating “utter destruction”) but not to Deuteronomy 20:10-15 (the verses advocating perpetual servitude of heathens).

The Bible thus advocates genocide against heathen residing inside the Promised Land, and perpetual servitude of heathen outside of it.  Genocide is the rule for the Seven Nations (Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites), whereas perpetual servitude is the rule for all heathens other than this.  The enforcement of this Biblical rule (genocide inside the Promised Land and slavery outside of it) can be seen in the story of Gibeon.  As infidels, the Gibeonites were forced to choose between genocide and slavery (both options requiring forced conversion); we explain this story here [pdf document].

The Battle Psalms

Above have we refuted the argument that the Bible calls for holy war against the Seven Nations exclusively.  But the juiciest Biblical verses are actually found in the Book of Psalms, including this doozie:

Psalms 149:5 Let godly people triumph in glory. Let them sing for joy on their beds.

149:6 Let the praises of God be in their mouths, and a two-edged sword in their hands,

149:7 to execute vengeance on the heathen and punishment on the people,

149:8 to bind their kings with chains, and their leaders with iron shackles.

There’s much more in the Book of Psalms, and that’s up next…

Editor’s Note: Due to the length of this article, it will be split into four pages, the next page to be published tomorrow.

Update I: Page 2 is now available here.

Update II: Page 3 is now available here.

Update III: Page 4 is now available here.

Comments (118)

Barth’s Notes: “Pam Geller and the Ulsterman”

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Barth’s Notes: “Pam Geller and the Ulsterman”

Posted on 05 May 2011 by Emperor

The more Geller gets attention, the more her looniness is exposed

What direction are the uber-anti Obamaist going to take now that he “scored” Bin Laden? What are the creative methods by which they will cast him as evil incarnate? (hat tip: Azwark)

Pam Geller and the Ulsterman

by Richard Bartholomew

Charles Johnson draws attention to a new post by Pamela Geller, in which she cites a website that claims that Osama bin Laden only met his end because the military overrode the wishes of the President: “it appears Obama had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the OBL operation”, she tells her readers. Johnson notes:

Her source for this ridiculous rant? A site called “NewsFlavor” (it has the flavor of news without all those fattening facts), featuring unprofessional “articles” written by anonymous Internet non-entities. This article is credited only to “Ulsterman.”

Stay tuned, because the killing of Osama bin Laden has motivated Geller to plumb new depths of bad craziness. I have a feeling she’s just getting warmed up.

“Ulsterman” has been posting online for several months; he purports to be receiving information from a “White House Insider” (or “Deep Thoat 2″), and his “scoops” have included “Obama Battling Severe Depression” and the like, written in breathlessly polemical style (he’s also a birther, naturally). However, “Ulsterman” has been debunked as a hoax for months; this blog documents fake sources and names that have appeared in “Ulsterman’s” articles on a range of other subjects.

In November, Sam Gefland of the Twin Cities Daily Planet published circumstantial evidence that “Ulsterman” is a certain Anthony G. Martin; Martin has a Twitter feed andYoutube channel under the name “Welshman”, and he writes regular pieces praising and echoing “Ulsterman” on Conservative Examiner:

It would appear that the explanation is simple: Anthony G. Martin is the blogger known as Ulsterman.  He writes unfounded articles and publishes them on Newsflavor, a website that will print anything without any sources.  Then, he references the Ulsterman articles to back up his opinions.  Because his opinions have no facts to back them up, he creates the facts.  And, at the end of the day, it may not just be a political argument that he’s trying to win.

Triond pays its writers for how many clicks their articles get.  The more people who read the Ulsterman articles, the more money he receives.  Even though this amounts to a few pennies or maybe dollars per month, it is still clearly a motivating factor for Triond writers, who often make up outrageous and false stories in hopes of earning easy cash.

Martin denies being “Ulsterman”, but it’s a pattern I’ve seen before on the internet: sites of ambiguous or obscure authorship that appear to know each other intimately, and which use citations to compensate for and distract from the fact that purported information being peddled cannot be traced back to any authoritative source. The hope is that the false impression of independent endorsements and of a wider conversation taking place will eventually lead to the information trickling up into the wider blogosphere or media. For that to happen, you need someone higher up the food-chain you can hoodwink or who doesn’t care a damn about what’s true or what’s false, just so long as it serves their interests. Step forward Pamela Geller.

Martin also has a website called “Martin Christian Ministries” (again posting as “Welshman”), where he advertises himself as a “Pastor, chaplain, evangelist, revival preacher”, who is available for “concerts, preaching, Bible conferences, all on a free-will, love-offering basis”.

I wonder if John Bolton ever feels embarrassed that his endorsement continues to appear on Geller’s website, or for providing a foreword for her anti-Obama book?

Comments (15)

clear-brook-highschool-cropped-proto-custom_2

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

A Texas Teacher told a Muslim Student, ‘I Bet You’re Grieving’

Posted on 05 May 2011 by Emperor

Doh! What was this teacher thinking? Probably that all Muslims are alike.

TX Teacher Suspended After Telling Muslim Student ‘I Bet You’re Grieving’

(TPMuckracker)

A Texas high school teacher has been placed on administrative leave following an incident where he allegedly told a 9th grade Muslim girl in his algebra class “I bet that you’re grieving” on Monday following the death of Osama bin Laden.

According to one parent at Clear Brook High School in Houston who spoke about the incident to a local ABC affiliate, the teacher also said, “I heard about your uncle’s death.”

The parent said the student “understood that he was referring about Osama bin Laden being killed and was racially profiling her.”

The name of the alleged victim of the comment has not been released. She is being described as an “American-born girl of Muslim faith.”

The teacher allegedly showed no remorse after Muslim girl reacted to his comments, according to the parent (who requested anonymity from the ABC station because “she doesn’t want any retaliation against her daughter or the girl who experienced the inappropriate comment.”)

“The student ended up crying over what was said to her by the teacher and the teacher asked her why she was crying and another student said it was because of what you said earlier,” the parent told the station. “And his response was, oh, OK, and just kind of smirked and giggled and walked away.”

The Houston Chronicle reports the unidentified teacher “has been placed on administrative leave” following the alleged remark. The Chronicle published this official statement from the school district:

In the Clear Creek Independent School District, we believe diversity strengthens our community and seek opportunities to celebrate the different cultures within our schools and neighborhoods. The sentiments allegedly shared by this teacher are not reflective of the staff at Clear Brook High School or anyone within the Clear Creek Independent School District.In accordance with CCISD policy, the teacher has been placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of a personnel investigation. The student did the right thing and immediately notified an adult regarding the teachers’ comments. The principal at Clear Brook High School notified the child’s parents and has been in communication with the family.

The alleged incident in Texas is just the latest in a short string of small incidents targeting American Muslims following the death of bin Laden. A mosque in Portland, ME was vandalized in what police there are calling a hate crime and a Muslim unity rally was canceled in Portland, OR after organizers feared reprisals from both non-Muslims upset over terrorism and Muslims who organizers said might be angry by an event that supported the killing of bin Laden.

Comments (25)

450×364-alg_court_hopkins

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Brooklyn man imprisoned woman, chained and whipped her under ”Sex slave rules’: prosecutors

Posted on 04 May 2011 by Amago

John Hopkins pleads not guilty to keeping a woman as a sex slave in his Brooklyn… (Ward for News)

It wasn’t Islam that made him do this. It wasn’t the Arab culture that made him do this, but just imagine if he were Muslim?   (Hat tip: Saladin)

Brooklyn man imprisoned woman, chained and whipped her under ”Sex slave rules’: prosecutors

BY OREN YANIV

DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITE

A Brooklyn man accused of raping a woman he kept as a sex slave had a chilling list of penalties for her – including flogging and chaining her to a radiator – if she disobeyed his rules, prosecutors said Friday.

John Hopkins, 45, pleaded not guilty in Brooklyn court to a litany of charges after prosecutors detailed the graphic “master” and “slave” relationship he had with a 27-year-old Midwestern woman who came to live with him last month.

Hopkins “set up slave rules,” prosecutor Christopher Laline said. “He punished her if she disobeyed.”

Aside from flogging and chaining her, the penalties included forcing her to drink water and barring her from the bathroom and sexual molesting her, the prosecutor said. “This is a henious crime,” Laline said of the 62-count indictment.

After a week, the victim, who was working at an elite sushi restaurant, told her mother she was being held captive, prompting a call to police.

Comments (7)

r-SIKH-SWORD-FIGHT-large570

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Fight Erupts At NYC Sikh Temple; Seven Charged

Posted on 04 May 2011 by Amago

Sikh on Sikh violence. 7 people were charged with disrupting a prayer service and yet where is the media on this? If this were Muslim on Muslim violence imagine what would have happened.

The HuffPo title actually seems to have gotten it wrong, those weren’t swords but musical instruments that they were using.

Sword Fight Erupts At NYC Sikh Temple; Seven Charged

(HuffPo)

NEW YORK — A brawl involving cricket bats and small swords at a Sikh temple in New York City has led to riot and assault charges against seven people.

Police say the defendants interrupted prayer services at the Baba Makhan Shah Lubana Sikh Center in Queens on Sunday. They were arraigned Monday.

Temple president Jamail Singh told the Daily Newsthat the fight was instigated by a dissident group of followers who are opposed to opening up membership.

The dispute is at the center of a lawsuit in state Supreme Court.

Some of those arrested Sunday also were charged with disrupting a religious service.

Gothamist posted a video of the brawl.

WATCH:

Comments (14)

Say_No_2_Islam

Tags: , , , , , ,

Temecula: Anti-Islam Group Descends on High School

Posted on 04 May 2011 by Emperor

I found this line heartening,

Many students crumpled up the fliers and threw them on the ground, according to a parent who was present.

Temecula Anti-Islam Group Descends on High School

(TemeculaPatch)

A Temecula-based anti-Islam group handed out fliers to students at a Murrieta high school.

About a dozen members of Concerned Citizens for the First Amendment perched themselves on the sidewalk outside Murrieta Valley High School Tuesday, handing out fliers to students walking by.

A person unaffiliated with the group stood across the street from the high school, holding yellow signs that read, “Islam = Hate,” and, “Say No 2 Islam.”

The letter handed out was the same one the group gave to students outside Chaparral High School in January. To read about that, click here.

Seventh grade students in the Murrieta Valley Unified School District learn about the history of Islam as part of Social Studies. The letter accuses teachers of lying about Islam.

“Did you know you were subjected to some really serious brainwashing when you were in the seventh grade, and that it is continuing even today?” the flier stated. “That means you have been fed a bunch of lies. Lies can mess up your life forever. Do you like being lied to?”

The group could not be reached for comment by publication time. The event did attract media such as ABC 7.

The group also informed school district officials the day before that they planned to hand out the fliers, said Karen Parris, spokeswoman for the Murrieta Valley Unified School District.

The district sent a phone message home to parents, telling them about the outreach.

“Under the first amendment, the group has the right to express their views on Islam and the building of mosques in the United States. Our students have the right to refuse the fliers or to accept the fliers, to engage in conversation, or to continue walking,” the message stated. “School staff and Murrieta police will be on hand to ensure that this is a peaceable exercise, as promised by the Concerned Citizens for the First Amendment.”

School officials also advised the students and gave them the choice of taking an alternative route to leave the school, the message stated.

Many students crumpled up the fliers and threw them on the ground, according to a parent who was present.

“It really was a non-event,” Parris said.

Comments (8)

Debbie Schlussel Calls for Mass Slaughter of 1.8 Billion Muslims

Tags: , , , , , ,

Debbie Schlussel Calls for Mass Slaughter of 1.8 Billion Muslims

Posted on 03 May 2011 by Emperor

Debbie Schlussel

Debbie Schlussel is on the crazy train again. And to think that Robert Spencer referred to her as a “freedom fighter” once upon a time.

Osama bin Laden Dead: Debbie Schlussel Calls for Killing 1.8 Billion Muslims; Let the Crackpot Raving Begin!

Stephen Lemons (Phoenix New Times)

In the wake of President Barack Obama’s announcement that terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden has been killed by American forces during a firefight in Pakistan, I have a few predictions.

The first is a given: traitorous right-wing nutjobs will not grant the Obama administration any credit for the kill.

They also will argue that bin Laden is irrelevant, that former President George W. Bush should get all the credit, and they will question the credibility of the report itself, helping to spawn insane conspiracy theories on both the left and the right.

After all, if the Tea Party types can’t be convinced — even with the release of Obama’s long form birth certificate — that he is an American citizen by birth, do you really believe they can be convinced that bin Laden is kaput? Hell, like a crazed mass of doubting Thomases, they’ll want to put their fingers in the bloody bullet holes themselves.

Even then they wouldn’t buy it.

For instance, “Chuck” over at SeeingRedAZ is already barking at the moon with this comment,

“Now Obama is confirming bin Laden’s death. That makes me have some doubts about the veracity of the report.”

Yeah, if I were Chucky, I wouldn’t stick my last name up there, either, lest it become a byword for IDIOT.

What about GOP self-loathing immigrant-hater Michelle Malkin? How does she react to Obama’s historic announcement? By quoting the President and mocking him:

“We must remain vigilant at home and abroad.”

Make it more than lip service.

But it’s wingnut loon Debbie Schlussel who garners the prize for full on “woo,” as my friend Pat Curley over at the Screw Loose Change blog, would say. Never to be outdone, Schlussel first argues that it’s no big deal, then calls for the mass murder of 1.8 billion Muslims.

picresized_th_1304311775_debbie (1).jpg
debbieschlussel.com

Um, like, wow. It’s not often that someone of the Jewish faith calls for pogroms or a different sort of Holocaust altogether. Sounds like Schlussel is ready to fire up the ovens herself.

Indeed, Schlussel’s bio states that she’s the grandkid of Shoah survivors. Bet they’re proud, or rolling over somewhere.

I know that not all Republicans think this way. However, even the mainstream GOP has been catering to a hatred of Obama on the right that seems to know no bounds. These conservative wackjobs regard Obama as illegitimate, a traitor, a Marxist, a fascist, similar to Hitler, similar to Stalin, a liar, and so forth.

Hell, if they could blame the guy for the 9/11 attacks, the tsunami in Japan, or the tornado rampage in the South, they would.

Watch-out for the lefty loonies as well. Though the so-called 9/11 “truthers” have been ground into complete obscurity with their “9/11 was an inside job” bull, I wouldn’t be surprised to see them revivified by the report of bin Laden’s death, while asserting that it’s all a hoax.

Comments (61)

2_wa (1)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Arab victim ‘stabbed 10 times by haredim’

Posted on 03 May 2011 by Amago

 

If an Arab Muslim or Christian perpetrated such an act Islam or so called “Islamic culture,” whatever that means, would be the center of attention. Here we have Haredim, Orthodox Jews stabbing Arabs in a racist assault, what if they were Muslim?

Arab victim ‘stabbed 10 times by haredim’

by Hassan Shaalan from Israel News

Christian Arab assaulted near Safed says ‘Jews’ racism against us has reached point of real violence’

Alber Halul, who was stabbed Saturday night by a group of masked men he claims are haredim, recounted the attack Sunday. “They threatened to shoot us if we resisted and stabbed me 10 times – in my head, my leg, and my neck,” he told Ynet.

Halul, a 22-year old Christian Arab from the Galilee town of Gush Halav, was assaulted while with a group of friends at Ein Zeitim forest, near Safed.
He says that at around 12:30 am two vehicles arrived at their gathering place and eight masked men alighted, and attacked them. Halul is currently being treated for wounds in his back, head, and legs at Ziv Hospital in Safed.

“At around 12:30 five masked drove up in a Nissan jeep and began driving in circles near us. Then they left and came back with another vehicle, and came closer,” he recalled from his hospital bed.

“They threw stun grenades and fired in the air. Then eight masked men got out of the car and began to attack us. The guys I was with ran away but I stayed to protect a girl who was with us. They stabbed me 10 times in my head, my leg, and my neck until they hit me hard and I fell to the ground.”

Halul says he knows the men were ultra-Orthodox Jews although they wore masks. “While they were attacking us one of the said that if we dared to resist they’ll shoot us and we knew from their accent and their clothes that they were ultra-Orthodox,” he said.

It wasn’t the first time the 22-year old was attacked due to his race. “I won’t return to the forest again. The Jews’ hatred and racism against us has reached a point of real violence that threatens our lives,” he said.

I don’t want to blame anyone and hope that the police will reach the people behind this attack because such people shouldn’t be walking the streets – they are a menace to the Jewish and Arab public.”

But police have not yet made any arrests in the case, and say they have no suspects. “The case is still being investigated,” police said in a statement.

Comments (10)

mosque.graffiti

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Graffiti on Portland mosque under investigation

Posted on 02 May 2011 by Amago

Officer Gavin Hillard writes down contact information at a mosque on Anderson Street in Portland today where someone spray painted graffiti on the wall in the wake of Osama bin Laden's death. The writing says "Osama today Islam tomorow (sic)," and "Long live the West." Gregory Rec/Staff Photographer

Jirde Mohamed walks past the front of a mosque on Anderson Street in Portland today where someone spraypainted graffiti on the wall in the wake of Osama Bin Laden's death. Bin Laden and Islam are not the same thing, said Mohammed, a member of the mosque who has lived in Portland 10 years. Gregory Rec/Staff Photographer

Fall out from the Bin Laden murder coupled with the anti-Islamic sentiment.

Graffiti on Portland mosque under investigation

PORTLAND — Portland police are investigating anti-Islam graffiti painted onto the Maine Muslims Community Center on Anderson Street.

The graffiti included: “Osama today, Islam tomorow (sic),” “Long live the West” and “Free Cyprus.”

The letters were written in maroon paint on the mosque’s gray cement block wall. The graffiti was written sometime between late Sunday night and about 7:15 a.m. today, when it was discovered by Portland Housing Authority workers on Anderson Street.

A crew from Graffiti Busters was called in this morning to remove the graffiti, and it had finished the task by 10:45 a.m.

Officials with the community center said they recently completed purchase of the building, where they’ve been since 2007, for close to $1 million.

They said they’re disappointed by the graffiti and concerned about the impact it will have on children.

The mosque, or masjid, caters to a predominantly Somali Muslim community in greater Portland and is the largest Muslim community in the city. Members say it is the first time, the center has been defaced with graffiti.

“It makes me feel like I’m not welcome,” said the group’s treasurer, Abdiaziz Mohamed, who said his wife and four children were born here.

Original post: Graffiti on Portland mosque under investigation

Comments (19)

Osama Bin Laden Killed

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Osama Bin Laden Killed

Posted on 02 May 2011 by Garibaldi

The USA got Osama!

Today people are celebrating but there will be a tomorrow to think about. Are we going to scale back our wars, drone attacks and support for occupations; issues which breed hundreds of Osama’s or will we continue to ignore them?

Osama bin Laden killed in Pakistan

(AlJazeera)

US president Barack Obama said bin Laden, the most-wanted fugitive on the US list, has been killed on Sunday in a US operation in the Pakistani city of Abbottabad, about 150km north of Islamabad.

“Tonight, I can report to the people of the United States and the world, the United States had carried an operation that has killed Osama Bin Laden, a terrorist responsible for killing thousands of innocent people,” Obama said in a statement.

“Today, at my direction, the United States carried out that operation… they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.

“The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date against al-Qaeda.

“We must also reaffirm that United states is not and will never be at war against Islam. Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, in fact, he slaughtered many Muslims,” Obama said.

US celebrations

Barack Obama called bin Laden’s death the ‘most significant achievement’ against al-Qaeda [EPA]

As the news of bin Laden’s death spread, crowds gathered outside the White House in Washington DC to celebrate.

Former US president George Bush called his death a “momentous achievement”.

“The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done,” Bush said in a statement.

According to Al Jazeeera’s Rosalind Jordan in Washington, the operation had been in the making for the last nine or 10 months.

“The fact that it happened inside Pakistan, there have been suggestions that Pakistani intelligence may have been protecting them,” she said.

Patty Culhane, another Al Jazeera correspondent, said the US authorities got intelligence last September and were able to track bin Laden down through his couriers. They followed them to his compound which is reported to be worth over a million dollars.

Reporting from Pakistan, Al Jazeera’s Kamal Hyder said the development had caught a lot of people by surprise .

“He was considered by many as a hero, but not to the extent that people would come out on the streets. The reaction so far not likely to be strong on the streets, perhaps a protest here or there by the religious parties,” he said.

‘Symbolic victory’

Qais Azimy, Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Kabul, said Afghan officials described bin Laden’s killing as a “symbolic victory”, since he was no longer directly connected to the group’s field operations.

“This organisation (Al Qaeda) is more than Bin Laden, it may be symbolised by Bin Laden, but it definitely is more than Bin Laden”

Mark Kimmit, US military analyst

Mark Kimmit, a US military analyst, said bin Laden’s death “was not the end of terrorism, but an end of a chapter.”

“Capturing or killing bin Laden has more iconic value. It will have symbolic value, because it has been a number of years since bin Laden has exercised day to day control over operations. We still have an al-Qaeda threat out there and that will be there for a number of years.

“This organisation (al-Qaeda) is more than bin Laden, it may be symbolised by bin Laden, but it definitely is more than bin Laden,” he said.

It is, however, a major accomplishment for Obama and his national security team. Obama’s predecessor, George Bush, had repeatedly vowed to bring to justice the mastermind of the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington, but never did before leaving office in early 2009.

He had been the subject of a search since he eluded US soldiers and Afghan militia forces in a large-scale assault on the Tora Bora mountains in 2001. The trail quickly went cold after he disappeared and many intelligence officials believed he had been hiding in Pakistan.

While in hiding, bin Laden had taunted the West and advocated his views in videotapes spirited from his hideaway.

Besides September 11, Washington has also linked bin Laden to a string of attacks – including the 1998 bombings of American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the 2000 bombing of the warship USS Cole in Yemen.

Having the body may help convince any doubters that bin Laden is really dead.

Comments (148)

Bryan Fischer: Muslims Can Either Convert…or Die

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Bryan Fischer: Muslims Can Either Convert…or Die

Posted on 01 May 2011 by Emperor

Looks like the Crusades are on again. Imagine if Fischer were some Mullah instead of a Christian?

From RightwingMediaWatch:

The only thing that will give us a shot at building a democracy in an Islamic land is a mass conversion of its people to biblical Christianity. So that means if we want to see freedom come to those darkened, benighted lands, we should be sending missionaries in right after we send in the Marines to neutralize whatever threat has been raised against the United States. So we say to them, look, if you don’t want our missionaries, fine, that’s your choice, we’ll take our missionaries and our Marines, we’ll take them home, but we’re gonna let you know we have no hesitation about returning with lethal force if the forces in your country threaten us again. This time it’s Marines and missionaries, next time it’ll be Marines and missiles.

Comments (20)

2976797342

Tags: , , , , , ,

GANTS HILL: Racist attack on mosque

Posted on 01 May 2011 by Amago

An attack on any holy place is horrendous. But just imagine if these attackers were Muslims and they were attacking a church instead, how much time would  the media invest in this story?

GANTS HILL: Racist attack on mosque

By James Ranger

RACIST abuse was shouted at worshipers at a busy mosque.

Police were called to Eastern Avenue in Gants Hill after reports of a group of men causing damage to parked vehicles in the road.

Six men were seen heading in the direction Redbridge roundabout towards Redbridge Islamic Centre, also in Eastern Avenue.

As they reached the mosque they shouted racial abuse and threw bricks at the building, which broke glass in the front doors.

The incident occurred at around 7.45pm on Thursday (March 24), near the start of evening prayers.

A number of worshippers had already entered the mosque but there were still some people outside the building when the attack occurred.

One man suffered a minor head injury but did not need any medical treatment.

Six men were arrested by police and remain in custody at Ilford Police Station.

Chief Inspector Stan Greatrick, of Redbridge police, said: “We would appeal for anyone who was in the Eastern Avenue area and saw the group of males to contact us.

“We have spoken to a number of people in the area and continue to liaise closely with members of the Redbridge Mosque.

“We have already secured additional patrols for Eastern Avenue and we would like to reassure the local community, and those who worship at the Redbridge Mosque, that we are treating this case extremely seriously.”

Anyone with information should contact Redbridge CID on 020 8345 2632.

Comments (35)

Advertise Here
Advertise Here