Top Menu

Donald Trump Pledges Allegiance To Islam Ahead Of Saudi Visit

Well that was unexpected, to say the least.

In an historic announcement, President Trump asked his National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster to let the American people know that he is pledging allegiance to Islam and that he “hopes for a peaceful vision of Islam to dominate the world” ahead of a visit to Saudi Arabia.

It was so subtle you might have missed it.

It seems that Saudi King Salman, the Custodian of the Two Holy Places convinced Trump, after securing an over $300 billion dollars arms deal for the kingdom, that it was in the US’ best interests to embrace Islam.

Sources close to the White House say that Trump also thinks this will help to end violent attacks on the US by groups such as ISIS and AlQaeda, who could not be reached for comment as they are busy trying to figure out what to do with all the unemployed men they previously provided jobs for, and are once again jobless.

In celebration of the world historical event Trump will hold a male-only star-studded gala in Riyadh, the capital of Wahabbi Islam. Headlining the event will be country star Toby Keith who has forgone his trademark songs praising US bombs being dropped on innocent Muslim children and drinking cold beers for more passionate songs in praise of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him).

Scenes of jubilation spread in front of the White House. Cheers of “USA!” were followed by “Allahu Akbars!”

*This piece is satire

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • mindy1


A Victory For History Education In Florida

The Islamophobic strategy of targeting public school social studies and history textbooks that have sections on Islam by either having the books replaced with anti-Muslim histrionics or the courses removed all together was dealt a blow in Florida.

By Caroline Glenn, USA Today

MELBOURNE, Fla. — Ninth-graders in Brevard County will keep using a world history textbook, despite fierce debate over its chapter on Islam.

The Pearson textbook came under fire in 2013 and again last month, drawing the attention of the local chapters of ACT for America and the Council on American-Islamic Relations. However, the school board ultimately decided Tuesday night to keep the textbook as is.

Leading up to their decision, opponents argued that the chapter ignored the “true history” of Islam and painted Mohammed and the treatment of women in an overly favorable light.

“I think we all understand that the challenges to the specific faiths that are addressed in this book are not random challenges,” said Philip Stasik, president of the Space Coast Progressive Alliance. “This is an organized challenge against the Muslim community, and frankly it’s an insult to the Muslim community.”

Others said it scared them to see people who want to challenge “years of documented history” because of recent political discourse.

“I’m pretty offended by and really afraid of people who are going out of their way to make me feel unequal,” said Alyssa Ardhya, a freshman at Satellite High School. “They want to recreate the truth.”

It’s amazing how low Islamophobes will go in their Crusade against Islam and Muslims. Like all fanatic extremists they will cut off their nose to spite their face: i.e. purposefully remain ignorant to knowledge and truth. Indeed, they make-up their own “truth.”

Previous attacks on the Islam sections of history books have occurred in Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, and Texas. ACT! For America is behind a lot of the lobbying efforts and mobilization against the history textbooks. As RightWingWatch has documented, the basis of the strategy was detailed in a 200-page “national textbook study” called “Education or Indoctrination?”

, , , , , , , , , ,

    • HSkol

      Good points. I thank you for your thoughtful reply.

    • 786 I disagree. Previously accepted views are subject to change because history is not a collection of Things which were Faithfully Written Down for us to consult when we want to know the Truth about The Past. It is a discipline which is always evolving. Our understanding of linguistics and paleography advances, new sources come to light, new archaeological discoveries are made, and older texts are critiqued. Giants like Gibbon aren’t taken seriously by modern students of history anymore because, while they did a superb job with what they had, what they had was far less than what we have. This is not to say that the rejectionism mentioned in the article is in any way valid: they are going against not only the views of modern historical scholarship, but also against the views held by historians for the past century. But disengagement from previously accepted views is not itself a Bad Thing.

    • syed ali

      the Anti Muslim horde are no different from other evil groups their activities are based upon ignorance of historical facts.

    • Joey Sanders

      What are the Islamophobes worried about anyway. It’s not like they read.

    • mindy1

      Education always scares idiots.

    • HSkol

      History cannot change; however, our views upon it have become rather wide open – far too open. Our modern disengagement from previously accepted historical views and accounts tells a greater story about us than it does of history itself.

      In my lowly view, as “modern” folk, we should appreciate the stories told before us – even if our own skepticism raises uncomfortable questions.

      I’d think we’d have grown in humanity, and politically, more so than we have to this date. I hate to announce my personal view – we’ve devolved, degenerated.

    • sasboy

      The anti Muslim horde has shown us what scares them the most – textbooks.

The Georgia Security Force: Islamophobia in the USA

There is an all white militia in Georgia calling itself the Georgia Security Forces (GSF) which is likely another iteration of the KKK.  We might need someone like General Sherman to take care of group’s like this if their racism and hatred gets out of hand.

Aljazeera has the scoop.:

, , , , , , ,

    • Friend of Bosnia

      In 1995 the Americans did the right thing for once and saved the Bosniaks from total extermination. But I’m only middlin’ pleased with the solution they came up with. I mean, handing the aggressor the ill-gotten gains of aggression on a silver platter! And now, would they help the Bosniaks again?

    • Friend of Bosnia

      Tsk, tsk, tsk. Shame on you. Are you really that daft?

    • Floki

      Without mentioning the obvious (or, perhaps, mentioning the obvious), you’ve brought up an incredibly valid point in my view – this is not a One-Way Street. Blood-shed breeds blood-shed … with a big DUH toward that end. It always will. If all is timed just right and well, diplomacy might (perhaps) breed diplomacy … it just might. We’ve removed ourselves (globally) so much from that point that the terms “hope” and “understanding” may as well be removed from our vocabulary altogether.

      I honestly believe that we may all learn from one another – may we agree or disagree – yet, we’re all too bloody stupid to give a rip. Well, that’s that. I’ll see you in Valhalla, or Heaven, or Paradise, or Hell (Norway), or Boston (their candied baked beans are alright by me).

    • Floki

      In the eyes of indigenous Americans, whitey is nothing but a nothing-and-no-good invader. Please do reach within yourself and tell me how wonderful it is that whitey invaded and conquered the New World’s “savages”. With that line of logic, what’s wrong with Muslims and all their Islam “invading” the New World and the technologically advanced “savages” who might push a button to kill when weepy and offended?

      Fair is fair, right?

      Power is power, right?

      Damn understanding, sympathy and empathy!!! Might and white makes right!!!

    • CowabungaCreeper

      No, see everything muslims do that’s inconvenient to the counterjihadklan’s arguments, is taqqiyakitmansaudipetrodollars.

    • CowabungaCreeper

      You have to laugh at the cognitive dissonance on display from these morons. You’d think the people who’ve been rampaging across the globe for 241 years would know what an invasion looks like,

    • Americans are threatened by invaders??? Really? Because the REALITY is that America is invading OTHER PEOPLE’s countries. Not the other way around.

      Don’t YOU underestimate Syrians, Iraqis, Palestinians, Libyans, Afghans, etc when they are not only THREATENED by American invaders, but are relentlessly attacked!

    • No Quarter

      You are not wrong. Things have changed. islam=death

    • No Quarter

      Do not underestimate Americans when threatened by an invader. What has islam attracted? The list of murders is endless. Dylann Roof has not a thing todo with this. Get your shit straight. islam=death

    • JD

      Best Troll would be start a Muslim Only branch of

      Georgia Security Force and hand out food public in full Islamic Clothes and make sure media cover it

    • Joey Sanders

      Lol. They probably fight terror as much as George Bush fought the Vietnamese while he was stationed in Texas during the Vietnam War.

    • AJ

      Is that an onion?

    • mindy1

      That sounds about right…

    • mindy1

      Oregon?? That’s the bastion of liberalism in the U.S., surprising.

    • mindy1

      Oh this is helpful :/ can’t we buy an island someplace and let the extremists from both sides battle it out?!

    • HSkol

      LOL! I’d think that’s their base. I’d think, however, they may sow more objectionable seeds than that. I hope I’m wrong.

    • golden izanagi

      I would like to think that most of their recruits will be people who played call of duty too much and think they’re bad asses and can take on terrorists groups and bullet wounds can be healed just by waiting it out just like in the games.

    • JD

      I want to know what church they went to We they radicalized at church at home or online Is this part of hidden Christianity we don’t hear about…..How many media van out side there house covering this…

      That from Bizarro Fox News

    • HSkol

      These dudes are scary – but hilarious all the same.

      Rogue elements? Rogue elements? Doncha think these fellers are likely enough to attract persons not all that unlike Dylann Roof? Oh, that’s right, only “the other guys” have rogue elements. Rogue elements …

    • Ilisha


A Trajectory of Manumission: Examining the Issue of Slavery in Islam

By Nathaniel Mathews Originally published on Sapelo Square

A number of years ago I gave a lecture on Swahili coast history to a group of educators and students on Chicago’s South Side. During the Q&A period one older gentleman asked me why I didn’t say more about Muslim-led slavery of Africans in the Indian Ocean. I responded somewhat inadequately that slavery in the Indian Ocean wasn’t a religious issue but an economic one. The gentleman wasn’t satisfied, explaining that he was disappointed in Louis Farrakhan’s silence on the issue and testifying to the continuing presence of slavery in African Muslim countries like Mauritania to this day, explaining that slavery was justified by sharia.

The man in question was not a conservative Christian, nor part of Islamophobia Inc. but rather part of a generation of Afrocentric black nationalists in the intellectual tradition of John Henrik Clarke. He was condemning the practice of slavery globally from his commitment to Afrocentrism and part of the broader tradition of black nationalist liberation politics in in the United States. He wondered why Muslims were seemingly behind in that fight or ambivalent to the practice of enslavement. In spite of my historical understanding of slavery and the slave trade as practices that many non-Muslim African as well as Muslim African societies often willingly engaged in, his words forced me to reckon more seriously with how Islamic law treats the abolition of slavery. I am especially interested in this issue as someone trained as a historian of East Africa, where the abolitionist movement predated and then became part of the first wave of European colonization of Africa, post 1885. My position is that the Islamic tradition has already developed an abolitionist ethos and a strong commitment to liberation, out of a set of social and political struggles, including resistance to European colonialism, that took place in the historical encounters between Islam, Africa and the West in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

Afrocentrists often point to the Quran and Hadith’s sanction of slavery. It is true that Islam accepted slavery as a part of Arabian society, but there is no evidence the tradition actively encouraged the taking of slaves. If one wishes to speak of a particular ‘trajectory’ of Islamic interpretation based on the Qur’an and Sunnah, it is a trajectory of manumission, not abolition.1 The Prophet Muhammad assumed that if manumission continued to regularly occur, then slavery could continue to exist without being a trans-generational status, and would eventually die out.

The Prophet Muhammad challenged the practice of slavery in Arabian society by compelling the powerful to care for and protect the less powerful.2 If masters and slaves could share some basic moral assumptions, powerful masters would feel a social obligation to protect and show kindness to their slaves. In Islam this is exemplified by a hadith enjoining the believer to treat their slaves as they would treat their own children.3 Slaves in Islam would (ideally) function more like kin and less like a separate caste of sub-humans.4 Their offspring, again ideally, would be free to assume their place alongside the freeborn. None of these reforms radically challenged the ‘natural’ reality of slavery itself.5

Why didn’t Muslims abolish slavery earlier? This is a valid question and it is worth it for Muslims to reflect very hard and critically about, especially if one is seriously committed to practicing the tradition. But when Afrocentrists ask Muslims why Islam did not abolish slavery, there is a hidden assumption that non-Muslim African societies had already abolished the practice. But in fact many powerful non-Muslim African societies depended on slavery for their wealth and resented European imposed abolition for that reason, for instance, the Asante empire of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.


Enslaved Swahili men in Stone Town, Zanzibar, c. 1890 (via BBC News)

Abolition as an ethical dilemma only occurs because we inhabit a very different time from the early Muslims, as well as most pre-colonial African societies. We often forget that for Jesus, Muhammad and other moral teachers of the past, the master-slave relationship was both a fact of life and a metaphor of our relationship with the Divine.6 The more relevant question then, is not ‘why didn’t Muslims abolish slavery?’, but ‘what makes our time different from the time of the early Muslims?’

One possible answer to that question is that we now live in a global society where we take the freedom of an individual as an irrevocable human right. Although this ideal is often traced to Western origins, it is important to note that it has other global, non-Western genealogies that are both Muslim and African. Haitian revolutionaries, among whom were African Muslims, were first among those insisting on this freedom in their struggle to end slavery in the late 1700s. At around the same time, the West African Muslim ruler Abdul Kader Kane sought to abolish the slave trade in his realm, in order to protect his subjects from the French-controlled slave trade at Saint Louis.7

Formerly enslaved Muslims also helped to reshape community perceptions of slavery.  In East Africa especially, the abolition of slavery coincided with the new popularity of Sufi brotherhoods as tools for the mass propagation of Islam. Sufism became the language by which formerly servile people appropriated the message of Islam to undermine the ijma around the social status of slaves and ex-slaves. In Lamu, Kenya, the ‘Alawi shaykh Habib Saleh angered the town’s former slaveholding elite by teaching ex-slaves. In Bagamoyo, Tanzania, an ex-slave from the Congo rose to become a Sufi shaykh and one of the most knowledgeable scholars of the region; he faced strong opposition from former slave owners.8  The first five decades of the twentieth century in Africa revealed Muslims reshaping the consensus on slavery. This process of reshaping ijma was not only an elite scholarly one; it included formerly enslaved Muslims, who contested their rights within the idioms of Islam, molding Islamic cultural repertoires to critique the exclusionary social practices of Muslim elites.

Traditions, Islam included, are not closed caskets but open conversations and debates often characterized by shifting notions of what is permissible. Slavery is one such shifting notion. There is nothing in the Islamic tradition mandating slavery. Thus, the overwhelming majority of Muslims today find slavery distasteful and have no desire to practice it. They have internalized a desire not to own people that is very modern. This is a direct result of the most oppressed and vulnerable elements of human global society forcing the world to accept a more robust and inclusive concept of individual freedom.  Concepts of abolition and freedom are the product of centuries of struggle by enslaved Africans and others to radicalize and decolonize the values of the societies they found themselves forcibly dragged into. They constitute a valuable tool that a range of activists today, from the Rabaa Square protests in Egypt to the garment worker strikes in Bangladesh to Black Lives Matter activists in the US, use to launch more radical critiques of global inequality, exploitation, and other conditions analogous to slavery.


Captured Africans in German East Africa (modern-day Tanzania), c. 1890 (via BBC News)

The Prophet Muhammad’s attempt to protect the enslaved and to grant them protections and rights, without abolishing slavery, was not a moral failing, but the advancement to the limits of what it was possible to envision within his era. If we do not acknowledge this, we will continue to reproduce two stale arguments of past Muslim apologists: that abolition is a Western concept that fetishizes consent and freedom, or that the Prophet Muhammad was an abolitionist. Neither of these are tenable positions, and there are severe moral costs to holding them, that compromise the moral compass of Muslims and leave serious and inquisitive outsiders with a suspicion that Muslims are more interested in theological apologetics than an honest reckoning with history. For instance, it is but a short step from the saying abolition is a Western concept to making the argument, like the late Islamist philosopher Abu Ala Mawdudi,  that we need to retain slavery as a mark of Muslim moral independence from the West.9 And there is simply no evidence from our tradition that the Prophet Muhammad ever contemplated abolishing slavery.

My argument is distinct from both of these extremes. I have argued that Western notions of abolitionist freedom have already fused with Islamic values, and that it is dangerous to try to extract one from the other. There are a number of positive benefits from embracing this position. For one thing, it provides Muslims with a powerful language not only to challenge slavery, but many other forms of similar domination and exploitation that go by different names. It seems to me that Muslims who are using this fusion of moral horizons to critique both Muslim and Western complacency with regards to forms of oppression analogous to slavery are engaged in an urgently necessary and positive reinvigoration of the Islamic tradition.


1  Trajectory hermeneutics originated with Christian theologian William Webb. For more on their use, see his 2001 book, Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis.

2 Jonathan Glassman. “The Bondsman’s New Clothes: The Contradictory Consciousness of Slave Resistance on the Swahili Coast” Journal of African History 32(2): 1991, 277-312.

3 Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī º30; Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim º1661

4 The walāʾ system then, whatever its faults, was a social compact between master and slave, and thus often a tool of integration of the latter. See Ulrike Mitter. “Unconditional Manumission of Slaves in Early Islamic Law: A Hadith Analysis.” In The Formation of Islamic Law (ed. Wael Hallaq). New York: Routledge, 2008.

5 Unlike the status of ex-slaves even many postbellum Western societies, the formerly enslaved in the Islamic world could raise their status considerably. But that did not erase an existing hierarchy placing the enslaved at or near the bottom of society.

6 Luke 12:43-48; Qur’ān (Sūra az-Zumar) 39:36. The Apostle Paul’s advice to the runaway slave Onesimus in the Book of Philemon is filled with admonishments about a new community of belief between slaves and masters that does not upend the social hierarchy but nevertheless creates a sense of moral obligation between the two.

7 For the Haitian revolutionaries and their creation (not merely co-optation of) Enlightenment values, see Laurent Dubois, “Enslaved Enlightenment: Rethinking the Intellectual History of the French Atlantic” Social History 31(1): Feb 2006, 1-14. For the abolitionists, see Adam Hochschild. Bury The Chains: Prophets and Rebels in the Fight to Free An Empire’s Slaves. London: Mariner Books, 2006. For Abdul Kader Kane and the abolition of slavery in Futa Toro, see Rudolph Ware, The Walking Quran, Chapter 3.

8 For Habib Saleh, see Patricia Romero. “‘Where Have All the Slaves Gone?’ Emancipation and Post – Emancipation in Lamu, Kenya.” The Journal of African History 27 (3): 1986, 497-512. For Shaykh Ramiya, see August Nimtz Jr. Islam and Politics in East Africa. The Sufi Order in Tanzania. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1980, 45.

9 Abu Ala Mawdudi was unabashed about this stance. See W.G. Clarence-Smith, Islam and the Abolition of Slavery, 188.

Also read: Responding to “Hoteps”: Three Points On “Islamic” Slavery

, , , , , , , , ,

    • Viredae

      Add to that the fact that it was a great virtue to free a slave, so much so that early Muslims sought out slaves, bought them and freed them on the spot.

      So if you had a slave, and you were obliged to feed, clothe and shelter them adequately, you would have an incentive to free them because it would actually be cheaper (and more virtuous) to do so.

    • Islam abolished ALL FORMS of slavery except with regard to prisoners of war, and that was because at the time, there was no alternative.

      What should have been done with prisons after a war? Should have they have been killed, left to die? Women forced into prostitution or starvation? Do you think there was a local United Nations compound in the Arabian desert 1400 years ago where they could take refuge? Taking them as slaves was the “least harm” option available at the time.

      Even before when Islam acknowledged the existence of slavery, the doctrine required that slaves be treated the same as their master, eating the same food, wearing the same quality of clothing, and not being overworked. For the time, that was unheard of.

      Muslim failure to live up to Islamic doctrine doesn’t change Islamic doctrine. They didn’t need the West to end slavery, but rather to properly implement their own doctrine.

    • Khizer


      “Wealthy blacks … commit more crime than poor whites, that’s a fact.” -Jon ‘Aryan Iranian’ Jafari/Tron Certified Woke Race Realist Truther

    • Joey Sanders

      The only reason slavery under Islam is being debated today is because of the white victimization culture spewed on Fox News. “White people were enslaved too by the Barbary Pirates.” There are certain white people trying to minimize their history of black oppression in America.

      Nothing will change the fact that white people enslaved black people in America for hundreds of years. After they freed them, they oppressed them through the Jim Crow laws. Today, they continue to oppress black people through racial profiling and the drug war.

    • GaribaldiOfLoonwatch

      The Walking Qur’an by Ware is a great work as well, that I would recommend especially if one is interested in how abolition of slavery preceded the encounter with the West.

Shaikh M. Tawhidi: The “Imam” The Haters Love

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

The Australian “Imam” Shaikh M. Tawhidi is being groomed into an international celebrity. Some weeks ago he claimed that he was persecuted by “the Australian Muslims” and went into hiding. That made him famous outside Australia. The self proclaimed “Muslim reformist” Ayaan Hirsi Ali has voiced her support of the “Imam“.  He is the latest darling of Jihadwatch and Pamela Geller. One Nation, the political party that wants to kick out all “disobedient Muslims” from Australia, loves him. He is a strange Imam. Just look at this:

A strange Imam indeed. He publicly states that Islam is a dangerous religion. He wants to close all Islamic schools and believes that no more mosques should be built in Australia. He complains that Muslims in Australia are not protesting against ISIS. He believes that all of Palestine belongs to Israel, and he claims that his father would not have moved to Australia if he had known that so many Muslims would live there in the future.

‘My father wouldn’t have moved from Iran to Australia if he’d known there’d be so many Muslims here’.

He makes an interesting slip of the tongue while speaking on the video above. He says that he does not understand “why Muslims believe” that they go to heaven by blowing themselves up but corrects himself and says “well radical Muslims”. Interesting slip of the tongue. By “accident” he claims that all Muslims are terrorists.

The slip of the tongue is understandable if you know that Shaikh M. Tawhidi supports a racist political party that hates Muslims.  Below is one picture he posted on social media recently, when he made offerings of roses to One Nation posters. One Nation is a radical rightwing party in Australia that hates Muslims.

He supports One Nation and apparently they like him, or what should we say about the frequent posts by the party representative in South Australia praising the imam?

Besides this, he apparently is a supporter of a Korean cult:

With his gold-trimmed white robes and pointed turban, the man who calls himself both an Imam and Sheikh cuts an elegant figure as a minder guides him out of the car, past more jubilant Koreans and television cameras, and into the surreal surrounds of an Olympic stadium filled to capacity, where tens of thousands of seated spectators holding coloured cards form a gargantuan human LCD screen.

Here he is ushered to pose for photographs with other similarly well turned-out men of faith, all of whom have been flown in from religious communities across the globe to take part in the World Alliance of Religions Peace (WARP) summit.

But the cheer squads are not really here for Tawhidi, and this is not really a peace conference. These ecstatic young Koreans are members of an allegedly dangerous religious cult taking part in a highly regimented North Korean-style stadium extravaganza to pay tribute to their controversial leader, Lee Man Hee.

Well I can agree with one thing the “Imam” says: we certainly need to scrutinize some of the Imams in Australia. Lets begin with the imam Shaikh M. Tawhidi! Who funds him? And why? 

Edited 4/20

, , , , , , , , , , ,

    • Khizer

      judging from your comment history, I suppose it is drivel to your standards, it didn’t even mention the EVIL LIBERALS!!! /s

    • I think common sense should suffice. Let’s parse some simple logic together.

      People say negative things about Islam. Not every negative thing people say about Islam is true. Therefore not every negative thing said about Islam is an “uncomfortable truth.”

      Did you follow along?

    • I deleted that comment, but since you’re already replied, let’s dig into the matter. There are two rleated points I think are worth parsing.

      First is he “authentic” as a shaykh? Can we call him a “fraud” in terms of formal credentials? Well anyone can claim to be a shaykh, and it’s valid to the extent Muslims accept that and take their guidance and rulings. There is no process of being “ordained” as in a church.

      What “authenticity” is in question? I can’t know what you had in mind, but the point there was that he isn’t some sort of Islamic official with a set of established credentials we can verify against. There is no Muslim pope.

      However, there is another angle to consider in terms of his claims. He is NOT authentic and IS a fraud in the more general sense that he pretends to be something he clearly is NOT. He is not a sincere Muslim who is criticizing Islam in earnest.

      He’s an outrage peddler catering to the worst enemies of Islam and Muslims, fueling their campaign to spread fear and hatred.

      It you want to pat him on the head and fawn over him as a pet, that’s fine. It matters not in the least to me.

      Muslims will decide for themselves who is a credible shaykh from whom to seek guidance. Muslims will decide how Islam will be interpreted and practiced. What YOU think is irrelevant—and so is this pathetic excuse for a “shaykh.”

    • Not every negative thing stated about Islam and Muslims is an “uncomfortable truth” by default.

    • Authenticity??? Is that even the question?

      Non-Muslims can fawn all over him if they like but if he has no credibility among Muslims, then he’s irrelevant. He’s a joke.

      If you want to think of him as “authentic” and useful in some way, no one is stopping you.

    • He’s a fraud. If you can’t see that, I can’t help you.

    • AirForce101HD

      “Anointed as a religious leader by the tabloid media, this Shia extremist is using its newspapers and television programs to wage a sectarian war against Australia’s majority Sunni community. And their audiences can’t get enough.”

    • mindy1


    • mindy1

      An Imam who denounces Islam is like a Rabbi who says Hitler was a good guy. :/

    • Lelouch Vi Britannia

      Go see for yourself mate.

    • Bobby Ingersoll

      Exposed in what way?

    • HSkol

      I am thoroughly confused. Looks like I’ve got a new project – trying to figure out who this dude is. Again, I am thoroughly confused.

      Speaking of Australia … I’m on the Highway to Hell …

    • Lelouch Vi Britannia

      Definitely not a muslim. He got exposed on facebook by the muslim community though.

    • CowabungaCreeper

    • Awesome

      Lol this guy is claiming to be a Muslim, a man who demonises his own religion. This man is not a Muslim.

      Given the ignorance in his comments about Islam and Muslims, it seems unlikely that Tawhidi ever was a Muslim (or at least not much of one). There is no ambiguity about his Zionism though – a very common theme among the detractors of Islam and Muslims. His claim of being a “Muslim” seems to be based on nothing besides his cultural identity, which he likely claims because of his “Muslim background”. By adding “cultural identity” to the definition of a “Muslim”, coming from a “Muslim background” is enough for someone to make the claim of being one, regardless of what they actually do, say and believe. At best, they are only trying to avert being alienated by other Muslims. At worst, it is another tactic used against Islam. In the case of Tawhidi, it is more likely the latter.

    • GaribaldiOfLoonwatch

      I guess if one were to put on a pope costume they could then claim to be Pope.

    • Sam Seed

      Lol this guy is claiming to be a Muslim, a man who demonises his own religion. This man is not a Muslim.

US Culture of Death: Orgasmic Over “Mother Of All Bombs” Dropped on Afghanistan

This is the largest bomb ever dropped in the world after the two nuclear bombs that were dropped on Japan. In the US there have been celebrations and joy over the attack, with many describing it as “what freedom looks like” and praising the “red, white and blue.”

, , , , , , , ,

    • HSkol

      HSkol, you’re cute. No one else will ever say that to you, so I found myself impelled to do so.

      *multiple self appreciative personality disorder … or something*

  • HSkol

    Two very different people with perhaps very different understandings of the world, you and I – yet, we align as siblings (uh, siblings who actually get along, that is *snicker*). Innocently, I heart you.

    Monitoring human rights is the trickiest of the tricky – yet, I think about it often, seeing multiple sides, feeling for all, not understanding all, but wishing to promote self-determination. Your first paragraph is a stamp of reality – I see it; however, the “pious” often enough reject such words at every level. Please permit me to quote Nietzsche, the philosopher I agree with 47% of the time. Further, please do not accept his “grouping” of persons literally, however.

    From The Will to Power:

    342. . . .

    b. The inconsistent type. War is waged against evil—there is a belief that war waged for Goodness sake does not involve the same moral results or affect character in the same way as war generally does (and owing to which tendencies it is detested as evil). As a matter of fact, a war of this sort carried on against evil is much more profoundly pernicious than any sort of personal hostility; and generally, it is “the person” which reassumes, at least in fancy, the position of opponent (the devil, evil spirits, etc.). The attitude of hostile observation and spying in regard to everything which may be bad in us, or hail from a bad source, culminates in a most tormented and most anxious state of mind: thus “miracles,” rewards, ecstasy, and transcendental solutions of the earth-riddle now became desirable…. The Christian type: or the perfect bigot.

    Well, that made sense before being called to duty – helping my daughter with her homework.

Bill Maher’s Use of Opinion Polls of Muslims is Ahistorical and May Justify Violations of Their Human Rights

Bill Maher and George Bush: Closer in thought then we ever knew?

By Ayman Fadel

A friend forwarded me a September 2014 video telling me “you’re swimming upstream in your defense of Islam.” Not knowing I was defending Islam (I see my political stances as defenses of human rights of people, including Muslims.), I replied, “only out of respect for you did I waste 3 minutes listening to Bill Maher.” He then wrote, “Who better than you, to point out where he’s right and where he’s wrong? Please share your thoughts.” Of course, there are many better qualified than me (see after the blog post.) But, after some delay, here they are.

I’m not going to fact check everything Maher said in the interview clip, which begins at 9:45. But as an example of an incorrect fact, Maher said that over 80% of Muslims in Egypt support execution of former Muslims who renounce the religion of Islam. If you look at the actual poll, it is actually 86% of the Muslims who favored making “Sharia the Law of the Land.” In Egypt, the percentage of Muslims who favored making Islamic law the official law in Egypt was 74%. So the number Maher should have cited was 86% x 74% = 64%.

But in this blog entry I accept Maher’s contention that vast numbers of Muslims reject the liberal views that he believes are essential for good society, and I’ll ignore the vast numbers of Muslims who do hold liberal views. I’ll also ignore the polls which show non-Muslims, including populations in the United States, who hold illiberal views.

I’ll ignore the arguments my brother makes on why it is possible for liberal polities to function with people with illiberal views.

My criticism is that Maher’s message is ahistorical and its policy implications are at best unclear and at worst genocidal.

In a few sentences, I want to say what Edward Said said in Orientalism & summarized in Covering Islam. A poll reveals a snippet of a person’s opinion at a given moment. Is the reason the person answered that way, i.e. held that illiberal view, that he or she is a Muslim? Or is the reason that the person’s analysis of his or her country’s history leads him or her to think that only Divine Intervention can improve it? What would a series of polls have revealed about Muslims? Have their ideas changed over time? If so, wouldn’t it mean that their opinions on things at any one time is more a product of their secular, historical circumstances than their religion? And the corollary would then be that a change of their secular, historical circumstances would change their religious opinions.

Are Afghanis who grew up with war and exile since 1979 likely to have liberal opinions? When the “civilized” and “liberal” world established the Zionist entity on Palestinians’ land in 1947 and then ignored Palestinians’ appeals to liberal ideals for 50 years, is it surprising that many Palestinians have come to see those liberal ideals as false? Why did ISIS start in Iraq & Syria? Does the United States’s destruction of Iraq have anything to do with it?

Focusing on the religion of Islam allows United States “liberals” like Maher to completely ignore policies which have contributed to the circumstances which gave rise to illiberal beliefs among Muslims.

Secondly, I ask Maher what does he think good liberals should do with this information. Should they discriminate against Muslims in housing and employment? Should they support policies which kill large numbers of Muslims, like invasions of Muslim-majority countries and unconditional support for dictatorships which promise to suppress Islamists and for Israel, the majority of whose victims are Muslim? Should they regularly accost their Muslim friends, co-workers, neighbors and strangers with criticisms of the religion of Islam? Should liberals oppose zoning of new masjids and private Muslim religious schools and cemeteries? Should they encourage popular culture portrayals of Muslims as bad people? Should liberals approve of any criticism of Muslims or of historical Muslim figures, regardless of their accuracy? Should liberals support ideological tests for immigration?

I’ll listen to atheists’ thoughtful criticism of Muslims, Islam, the Messenger Muhammad ﷺ and religion in general, but I won’t listen to them if they also support violations of Muslims’ human rights, like Sam Harris and Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

In the course of writing this blog entry, I looked up other articles criticizing Bill Maher’s statements about Muslims. I did not use them, but I thought I’d include them below for reference.

Sonia Soraiya’s article ends with a passage worth contemplating:

I think Maher confuses compassion with idiocy. Compassion is a quality that has nothing to do with how smart or how right you are. It’s a quality that is at the root of not wanting to make generalizations, and at the root of wanting to say things that do not horrifically offend other systematically oppressed people. I fully believe that Maher doesn’t understand those well-meaning liberals, those politically correct assholes. I would just rather be one of them, I think, than to merely be right; I would like to be able to understand another point of view, from time to time. And especially on a day like yesterday, I would like to be able to feel compassion.

Bill Maher did in fact criticize the idea of a national registry for Muslims, although he did not explain why. I wonder if he would have done so had President Obama or candidate Hillary Clinton had proposed it instead of candidate Donald Trump.

Originally published on AymPlaying

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

    • Joey Sanders

      Lol. If you are going to have people on that make dishonest arguments, then why not have a bunch of people on who deny the Holocaust? Have them on all the time spewing their false rhetoric. It’s a debate. Right?

    • silus

      A debate panel without a debate wouldn’t work.

    • Daniel S.

      Maher trotted out the same tired trope that Milo and some other professional haters have re: “few books translated into arabic.”

      They want to talk about translations instead of bilingual/trilingual speakers since they know (or maybe don’t) that muslims definitely speak more languages than americans. Translations become superfluous if you actually, um, learn the original language.

      Also, Maher falls prey to the cottage industry of islamophobes and fake muslims that prop up “the empty kameez” aka Asra Nomani. She thoroughly showcased herself as an airhead on Maher’s show even though she was never on the defensive… she just can’t even hold a conversation.

    • HSkol

      There are victims within any particular group of people. Far louder and more boisterous, however, than any genuine victim – be that of violence, discrimination, or whatnot – are those who victimize themselves with their persecution complexes … only to dig their generalized and non-nuanced belief systems’ heels into the rug and promote victimization of those not like them – at times, perhaps without even realizing as much. Maher is far too full of himself and his own fears to embrace a compassion that just may help to heal this ridiculous little rock we find ourselves on.

    • GaribaldiOfLoonwatch

      Thanks for the links

    • Thank you. I’m a big fan of Haqiqatjou’s work.

    • Joey Sanders

      Bill Maher claims to be a liberal, but he uses his show to give a forum to some of the biggest right-wing nuts of all time. He is the one who made Ann Coulter famous through her many appearances on Politically Incorrect. Recently, he gave Milo his own time to rant on his show. Then, not too long ago, he had Roger Stone on. This is somebody who is a known liar, but still, Bill Maher gives him a forum on his show.

      More than any “liberal”, he continues to use his show as a platform of spewing Islamophoic rhetoric that is false. Also, he has had on some of the biggest Islamophobes of all time. This list includes Geller, Gabriel, Nomani, Harris and more.

      This loon continually talks about hating all religions, but he chooses to support Israel which calls itself a Jewish state. He has yet to criticize Jews who think God handed them a deed to a property. I always found it funny that one of the crazy Jews he had in his movie Religulous was a rabbi who did not believe in the existence of Israel.

      Hopefully, one day, his show will get cancelled. Unfortunately that will not be for years to come.

    • 1DrM

      Who died and decided “liberalism” or any other backward “ism” out of the bowels of Europe was the benchmark for humanity? Muslims hold to a higher standard rather then becoming carbon copies of euroPeons.

      Zionism is Maher’s religion so why bother thinking this untalented jester has anything to offer but recycled hasbaRat talking points?

    • Joey Sanders

      You are 100% percent correct.

    • GaribaldiOfLoonwatch

      I want to do a comprehensive take down of this trope Maher has been pushing by using the Pew Poll data in the manner that he does. It really is to dehumanize Muslims and justify wars and an assault on Muslims’ human rights.

Theresa May Didn’t “Refuse” Saudi Leaders On Hijab Headscarf

Theresa May, the conservative Prime Minister of the United Kingdom did not make some “bold feminist” stand against the Saudi leadership by not donning the hijab or headscarf when she visited the kingdom. May, was simply dressing as many other female leaders have while visiting Saudi Arabia. (h/t: MEND community)

Theresa May has worn the hijab when visiting mosques in the UK:

All of this stupidity obscures the real problems in the UK-Saudi relationship: the carte blanche support the UK gives to Saudi Arabia in terms of military sales and diplomatic cover as it pummels Yemen and aides transnational “Salafi-jihadi” organizations.

, , , , , , , ,

    • Daniel S.

      Wow, I am new to this site and didn’t expect such ignorant remarks, emperor. Viredae made a great response. Quite frankly, some fashion gossip is a welcome reprieve from the Bashar Assad/Russia Today/Press TV/AlManar narrative that you shoehorned at the end. Saudi Arabia should be faulted for not doing enough in the past 40 years to protect muslim communities from Iranian terror. If the US did not invade two sovereign nations and hand them to Iran perhaps things would be different ie better?

    • Viredae

      And the… the carte blanche support the UK gives to Saudi Arabia in terms of military sales and diplomatic cover as it “pummels Yemen” Is not an issue because that’s literally the position of every single country outside of Iran and Russia (and, of course, the Houthis who are funded by Iran), and if your opinion matches Iran and Russia, you may need some self-reflection on your opinions.

      Also, which “Salafi-Jihadis” groups? Considering Saudi Arabia has the Muslim Brotherhood on their terrorist list, and even the resistance groups in Syria they support are only part of the least responsible for civillian casualties )that honor goes to Assad’s regime at 90% and ISIS with the remaining 9.5%), this sounds like more lies fed to scared Muslims in order to pit them against each other.

      So literally, this outrage is stupidity masking nothing but bigotry.

    • Nomez

      Damn. That was deep.

    • sasboy

      You cannot refuse to do something someone has not asked you to do.

    • mindy1

      Typical “news”, pushes an agenda without knowing the full story. :/

German Soldiers Plotted False Flag Attack To Blame On Refugees

At least two German soldiers have been arrested for plotting to commit a false flag attack and blame it on Syrian refugees. The intense focus on so-called “Islamic terrorism” obscures the threats of white nationalists and neo-Nazis that pose a greater threat to Europe than fanatical Muslim political groups.

The Independent

A second soldier has been arrested for allegedly planning a “false flag” terror attack to be blamed on refugees in Germany amid fears of a wider neo-Nazi network within the army.

The plot was exposed with the arrest of a German lieutenant, Franco A, who was found to be posing as a Syrian refugee in order to carry out a shooting attack targeting left-wing politicians.

One of his friends at Illkirch-Graffenstaden barracks in France has now been detained for allegedly covering for the soldier’s absences as he periodically returned to Bavaria to continue the ruse.

Maximilian T, a 27-year-old German national, was also a member of Jägerbataillon 291 and was arrested on Tuesday after being questioned by military intelligence officers.

He had joined his friend on a trip to Vienna in January – supposedly for an officers’ ball – where Franco A stashed an unregistered gun to be used in the attack at the city’s main airport.

Maximilian T was also part of an online messaging group where he, Franco A and other members exchanged far-right posts, photos and audio files, Der Spiegel reported.

Continue Reading…

, , , , , , , ,

    • George Carty

      In the 1980s it was Zionists who were framed by French far-right radicals who attacked hostels used by Maghrebi immigrants:

    • Vigilant Skeptic

      I find it sad that when a small section of immigrants commit crimes (normally due to diminished opportunity in life in their final destination) or are indeed emmigrating in the first place, people can’t take a step back and asky WHY people are doing these things in the first place and what can be done to resolve the root cause.

      Likewise, when a small section of the local community commits crimes against those immigrating to their community (mainly because of a sense of betrayal on their part for accepting immigrants in the first place), the immigrants themselves (and those on their side) are also seemingly incapapble of asking WHY the local people are feeling threatened and considering what can be done to alleviate the fears and feelings behind them.

      People prefer to ‘pick a side and get behind it’ as it is far easy to demonise the other side then scrutinise the whole situation or indeed yourself.

    • Vigilant Skeptic

      You will find most media outlets do not describe terrorists by their religious identity anymore, just by name.

      And the description of the planned attack as a ‘false flag’ attack is accurate as the intent was to pose as another faction while causing damage to life and/or property. If an immigrant civilian was to dress in an army outfit and do the same in reverse, it would be called the same thing.

    • Awesome

      Far right radicals plotting terror attacks to make refugees look bad. This is what it has come to……

      False flag attacks are nothing new or uncommon. They just don’t make the news as such unless they fail, where the plot is exposed and the actual perpetrators are caught. The real question in this regard is how new or uncommon this particular incident is of far right radicals framing refugees for attacks in a PR war against them. I doubt this is the first time it has happened, but probably only the first time that it has failed and been exposed.

    • cmyfe .

      Standard answer to this would be something like this;

      Don’t you know they have a right to do so? They are “surrounded by enemies” who want to “wipe them off the map”.

    • Friend of Bosnia

      Like I said I’m not surprised at all. How can there ever be peace with such, ah, people? the hypocrisy! Whenever they show photos of Palestinian children with toy guns they whine “oooh, why do they hate us?”, and here … ? And NO, I’m Not anti-semitic!

    • Friend of Bosnia

      Of course not. Only Islam is terror, and all terrorists are Muslims, and all Muslims are terrorists. Everybody else is exonerated, no matter what they do and especially if they are genocidals >:-(

    • mindy1

      Great, just what the world needs, more haters :/

    • Raad

      Israeli children:

    • Joey Sanders

      I guarantee that no mainstream media outlet is referring to them as Christian or German terrorists.

    • sasboy

      Far right radicals plotting terror attacks to make refugees look bad. This is what it has come to……

    • HSkol

      Wowzer. The Independent’s site is extremely slow, but the article deserves a full read. Individual Germans making Germany look as Germany herself “collectively” and intentionally wishes to not look. Sounds as though there’s a near-crisis within their military membership.

Powered by Loon Watchers