The Terror Imams and Their Mosques & Schools
Whatever we may think about Imam Rauf and his Manhattan project, sooner or later we are going to have to face a serious problem: what to do about the hundreds of radical mosques in this country. It’s a serious problem because, as Bernard Henri Levi wrote some years ago, every terrorist has a mosque. Indeed, some became terrorists because of what they were told in mosques. Many young, alienated Muslims found the meaning of life by joining jihad, and they were encouraged to become terrorists by radical imams and ayatollahs.
We in Greater Washington know a thing or two about this process, through the story of the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church. The Center employed Imam Anwar Awlaki as its prayer leader from 2000 to 2002. Awlaki met privately with two of the 9/11 hijackers in closed-door meetings, and radicalized three American terrorists: the Fort Hood killer, Major Nidal Malik Hasan; the “Christmas Day bomber,” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab; and the would-be Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad. Now designated as a key member of al-Qaeda, Imam Awlaki is hiding in Yemen.
Take another local case: An Iranian-American imam named Muhammad al-Asi was for several years the head of the Muslim Community School and the Islamic Education Center in Potomac, Maryland. He was also briefly the imam at the Islamic Center of Washington. The Islamic Education Center distributes literature direct from Tehran, including the Ayatollah Khomeini’s celebrated death sentence on the novelist Salman Rushdie, and sells anti-Semitic tapes from Switzerland that praise Khomeini as a latter-day Hitler. Al-Asi has been honored at an official dinner in Tehran, with Iran’s supreme leader, the Ayatollah Khamene’i, presiding.
We’re not talking about a handful of mosques, and the schools associated with them. As of 9/11, there were at least 1,200. Most are radical. The American Sufi leader Sheik Hisham Kabbani, who founded the Islamic Supreme Council of America to combat the influence of radical (Saudi) Wahhabis in the United States, testified at a State Department hearing that 80 percent of the nation’s mosques were under radical influence or outright control.
It’s safe to say that most of Awlaki’s words, like al-Asi’s, were religious, and that, even if law enforcement officials had known about them, they could not have acted. That’s because we avidly defend free speech, and religious speech is specially protected. All manner of self-proclaimed religious leaders are free to preach. I wouldn’t change it; I cherish it. On the other hand, I don’t want the likes of Mr. Awlaki exploiting “protected speech” to inspire and recruit terrorists. And there is no doubt that those schools and mosques are breeding grounds for future terrorists. In some cases they are actual pieces of the terror network itself.
What to do? We can’t criminalize religious speech, but it’s folly to give radical Muslim clerics an unchallenged opportunity to indoctrinate their followers. There is a great range of “Muslim doctrine,” much of it admirable. On the other hand, the terror imams didn’t invent the Koranic language they used to indoctrinate the killers. We have to expose and condemn them, and their doctrines.
We don’t want to undo our Constitutional protection of speech, but the same First Amendment that protects radical imams enables us to defend our culture and our lives against them.
Some will no doubt say that we non-Muslims have no “standing” to attack their beliefs, but Americans have historically spoken out against ideas — political, religious, artistic, literary, whatever — that we find odious. It’s self-defeating to remain silent in the face of evil and those who advocate it, whoever or whatever they are.
Lots of people in the West have, as a brilliant book explains in elegant detail, been paralyzed by guilt, and dare not criticize our enemies. This disgusting and dangerous censorship goes by the Orwellian name of “political correctness,” and underlies a great deal of the crisis we’re in. It pretends to show sympathy by forbidding criticism of most anyone (except a conservative, a Christian, or a Jew), but in fact it is the opposite: we show no respect to Muslim Americans by pretending their ideas do not matter to us.
Many scholars of Islam yearn for an Islamic “Reformation” that would modernize the faith and enable Muslims to participate more fully in the modern world. Perhaps we can help. Yes, they can say whatever they wish. And we can tell them what we think about it. It’s called free speech and vigorous debate.
Faster, please.
Michael: the concern we must have as a society in any open debate with islam — in which, one can only pray sanity will prevail — is whether or not “they” engage in taqiya. We see this all the time from the rulers of Iran and, as you know, it has always been part of islamic military strategy.
One cannot, therefore, trust the leaders, imams, etc., not to lie directly to our faces, while we engage in an honest debate. This, IMHO, is the folly in negotiating with a group like the taliban. Indeed, how many times have we read that someone like the murder mosque imam says one thing to us in public, while in Arabic, he tells the truth to his audience.
It is truly a great deception, one that I believe has deep spiritual roots to it.
Also, came across this yesterday, and if you haven’t seen it, it bespeaks about the distrust those in islam have for us at the highest levels of their education system:
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2586.htm
Of course, I do not subscribe to the professor’s line of reasoning, especially because it is so obviously anti-Semitic. But I think it is a problem that does need to be solved since their mistrust of us is a great as our mistrust of them.
yes, simeon, we must expose their lies. and our own, btw.
Yes, Michael, our lies are even worse. What is most irritating is the same “elites” are supporting this murder mosque guy (let alone our own State Department), as they continue to receive their “tax-exempt” status. The same suspects show up on ASMA’s “charitable” contributors: the Rockefellers, Carnegie, and the Henry Luce Foundation. And then people are shocked when Time magazine runs the absurd “islamophobia” story!
For anyone who wants to see the disturbing list of his supporters, here it is on ASMA’s own website:
http://www.asmasociety.org/about/p_support.html
Now we, as Americans, have to ask, why do these organizations want to fund a divisive mosque that is certainly not “building bridges”?
I think also your colleague, Dr. Chesler, would also find it ironic that the Ms. Foundation and Global Fund for Women are also on this list, among others.
Clearly the first thing to do is to find in ourselves the intestinal fortitude to defy elitist opinion makers among the so called cognoscenti and the media whose sole function is to silence those who they deem as politically incorrect. That is a tall order which seems easy on paper yet difficult to implement. Remember peer pressure in high school? I, for one, as an Iranian American who has witnessed all of this first hand and lived through the events of 1978-79 do my part wherever I may find an audience, risking ridicule. It is the twilight of my life and I don’t give a damn anymore (thanks Kris Kristofferson). Unbiased media should start a program of educating the masses about Islam and its differences with the other monotheistic religions. Counter propaganda is crucial at this point. Silence in the face of a Fabianistic encroachment of Islam can and will only lead to the implosion of Western civlization. Tolerance must, by definition, also carry a big stick. Whenever you are in a situation where the expression of your thoughts is met by ridicule by those present in your company, become even more combative and remember that you represent the vast majority of the American people. You are NOT alone.
Horseradish,
Thank you for your inspiring comment. It seems that FOX News is the only TV outlet that is willing to take Islam on. Even some of their conservative commentators struggle with the political correctness issue. Do you think it’s time we had a serious debate in this country about what Freedom of Religion means? What a religion is? Is it a religion when it is also a political movement? I, for one, believe the subjugation of women that we see in all Islamic enclaves all over the world, including here in America, disqualifies this religion on the basis of human rights violation alone. I would welcome any Islamic woman to challenge me on this.
Wayne,
I accept your challenge…and I really hate to break it to you but here it goes…everywhere in the world Women/girls of all ages,races,religions are brutalized by MEN. Our prisons in America are FILLED with MEN who rape,torture,and murder American Christian women and children every single fricken day. So let’s go blame a religion Islam (which you know nothing about obviously you have never read the Quran which affords women EQUAL rights to those of men, the media doesn’t tell you that) it’s MEN who oppress women of every fricken culture…a Muslim man doesn’t beat white women does he? A white man beats a white woman, a black man beats a black woman, a Chinese man beats a Chinese woman…get my point…do the math Wayne..look in our own backyards before we start pointing fingers at a religion…
yes, sharon, as machiavelli says “man is more inclined to do evil than to do good.” but countries like Iran, based on misogyny, where women are officially worth half a man, have no counterpart in the West. And that terrible misogyny is sanctioned by the regime’s version of Islam.
Unlike Wayne who may not have read the Koran and not lived in that part of the world or Dr. Ledeen who has gathered his experise through rigorous academic research, I have read it and have lived in that part of the world. I am from “that” part of the world. So, Sharon, please don’t give me that garbage about women’s equality and the feminist paradise in which the Muslim women live in. They are subjugated, they are second class citizens and regarded by the male sex as their property. Their tradition of honor killing has followed them even to the west. Their tradition of female genital mutilation is practiced even to this day. Don’t believe me, ask Hirsi Ali. So, don’t think that having read the Koran allows you to pontificate about a fantasy that is non existant in the Muslim world. You may be able to fool the leftist ideologues, only because they are intellectually willing to be fooled, but your argument does not hold water with me or anyone who has experienced Islam first hand.
i have been saying this for many years. one mild dissent, horseradish: you do not have to visit someplace to understand it. i have never been in Fascist Italy, but i understand it very well. victor davis hansen hasn’t lived in ancient athens, but he gets it…
It’s a tough question in terms of free speech. I have done a ton of free speech activity over the years. It’s important. Your solution, to fight bad speech with counter speech, is the traditional answer to neo-Nazis etc.
Outside of speech, one method that might be helpful is to target the incoming $$ of the Wahhabist deep pockets in Saudi Arabia etc. I think a lot of these openly criminalistic outfits have a dip in their collective IQ when there is a wad of $$ in front of them, and they scream like penetrated swine when their pile of $$ is exposed to scrutiny and attack.
I am sure the “feds” already have something like this going, and since they are from the government, I trust them, because they are here to help.
yes, that’s the other logical line of attack. i think it’s easier once the other front is advancing.
I’m thinking that books like “Blood of Lambs” by Kamal Saleem, or the books authored, or co-authored by Walid Shoebat, need to be known by more than those who watch Christian television.
This is how I found out about “Blood of Lambs”. Plus, wnd.com, the labour of love by Joseph Farah, twigged me to Joel Robertson, author of “The Islamic Antichrist”.
One other thing, Michael. It was good to see your WSJ piece about Iran not being a monolith in today’s National Post.
Naipaul, terrible person apparently, but truly great writer. he really gets it.
Is that VS Naipaul of ‘The Bend in the River’, Michael? I have your book (Accomplice to Evil) and hope to finish it fairly soon.
Question – at what point does ‘free speech’ lose all meaning when, in the case of the Imams you mention, they incite directly to murder against the non-believer in Dar al-Harb? When does the West finally admit that Islam is a clear and present danger to its survival?
Good weekend, Michael.
Naipaul is especially instructive on the destruction of Persian art–one of mankind’s great treasures–by the Muslims. Read also Adjami’s The Dream Palace of the Arabs, Larry.
If it’s Fuad Ajami, I will. Thanks
Look at the disinformation being pushed by the moonbats over the Taxi Drivers attacker and it seems that even the American Thinker (AT) Blog has fallen for their BS.
Why is AT jumping on the disinformation bandwagon . Michael Enwright is NOT a right wing Tea Party anti Muslim he is in fact PRO Muslim and a member of the Park 51 SUPPORT group and the Muslim Taxi Driver does NOT support the Mosque .
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/19987
The MUSLIM taxi driver however it seems OPPOSES the Ground Zero Mosque.
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/20017
Now that puts an entirely different complexion on things doesn’t it.
“Drunken Left Wing moonbat Islamophile White guy becomes enraged because the Muslim taxi Driver does NOT agree with HIS support of the TRIUMPHALIST GZ Mosque and violently attacks him”
This is what your story headline should be.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/08/a_drunk_helps_make_a_case_for.html
Pragmatist: You make a statement that “Michael Enwright (of American Thinker) is not a right-wing Tea Party anti-Muslim, he is in fact PRO Muslim and a member of Park 51 SUPPORT group….”
Can you provide any evidence that would support this assertion? I have gone on the ASMA site and do not see his name or any organization there that he would likely belong to in the list of supporters. I might also remind you that Tea Partiers are not “natural born anti-Muslims,” so your statement was in part a slur against any one who is opposed to the secular totalitarianism being pushed by the current administration (as opposed to the ideological totalitarianism inherent in Islam). The Tea Party has a big enough job on its hands combatting the Obama agenda without having to fend off charges of racism and bigotry.
English comprehension lessons are needed by you Sparrowhawk I said MOONBATS apply that type of thinking to Tea Party members and they DO. I also gave you LINKS to where the information about the Islamophile Left wing ATTACKER is online. So please no knee jerk reactions just learn to READ properly and follow the links.
BTW Sparrowhawk where do you get “Michael Enwright (of American Thinker)’ from Michael is the moonbat attacker and is not from American Thinker at all just proves what I said you have english comprehension problems
“From Ben Smith at Politico: “But as often at the intersection of politics and violent crime, the story doesn’t appear to fit any easy stereotype: The alleged assailant, Michael Enright, is — according to his Facebook profile and the website of the left-leaning media organization Intersections International — a student at the School of Visual Arts and a volunteer for Intersections, which recently produced a statement of support for the Park51 project and is funded by the mainstream, liberal Collegiate Church of New York.”
Pragmatist: I asked a civil question, civilly. You replied with unwarranted hostility, twice. I quoted directly from your original statement. Next time, compose clearer sentences, and I won’t be confused by your meaning.
I had thought that incitement to violence was already against the law. Not so?
for the most part–”hate speech” on campus is, for example, an exception and of dubious legality not to mention wisdom–we do not criminalize speech. ever. we criminalize action.
Actually, advocating the “forceful overthrow” of the state is illegal. We have a rich history of criminalizing speech. The progressives and Wilson’s Attorney General, Palmer, is famous for the Palmer raids against socialists and communists and draft resisters during WW1. The current Federal criminal conspiracy code does not require a criminal physical act–selling illegal drugs– in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy, merely talking about and planing the endeavor is criminal conspiracy–which could certainly apply to Mosques advocating jihad. All that’s required is for congress to make advocating, planing, and encouraging jihad a federal crime. Case closed. The constitution is not a suicide pact.
Incitement IS action. Listening to it is not.
People can tune out incitement. I heartily recommend that you read the blog of Ezra Levant, a Canadian human rights activist. http://www.ezralevant.com shows that people can tune out garbage, all the while letting people to have their say, regardless of how erroneous the speaker
is.
Just because I don’t shout anyone down, does not mean I agree with them.
Dear Michael, islam since its birth came as a cancer to the world. Are our folks B. Obama and Michael mair of N.Y. city aware of this danger you are writing about? The answer seems to be not. By the way, are these chaps of the CIA + FBI informed about? So why this indiference? Or am I mistaken? They do not see how the ethnical minorities are persecuted in islamic scharia countries, and no reactions, and and and
Islam is gettng a free ride in the west. They come here and abuse the very freedoms we provide and then complain when we call them out for their anti-american behavior and terrorist plotting. I think we need a reciprocity policy with muslim countries who provide money to US muslims. If they want to finance mosques in America, they need to provide equal funding for synagogues and christian churches in their own countries. This is a way to effect real change in belief systems. Asymetric tolerance is a recipe for abuse by those who are tolerant by those who are facists. That is what is going on now and unfortunately one of the deep flaws of our democracy is taht our politicians lack statesmenship and have become nothing but prostitutes for money and power–just look at the PC nonsense going on now.
Time to wake up and get to work.
in the words of karl popper
Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.
The utterance of intolerant philosophies should not always be suppressed, “as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion.” However, we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.
Furthermore, in support of human rights legislation in the second half of the 20th century, he stated:
We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.”
This is interesting because leftists are all for silencing anybody on the right whom they (mis)characterize as “intolerant.” They coined the concept of “hate speech” as a way of criminalizing criticism of their own ideology.
But if anyone points out the hatefulness and incitement to violence within Islam, then the person who points it out becomes the “hater”! Look at all the grief that Geert Wilders has gotten for quoting the Qur’an and playing tapes of imams preaching. I’ve read about cases in Europe where criminal prosecutions were brought against people for hate speech, and the judges said it was no defense to point to authoritative Islamic texts as proof that they were just telling the truth. (I.e., the truth is no defense.)
leciat,
“The utterance of intolerant philosophies should not always be suppressed, as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion. However, we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force;”
The utterance of intolerant philosophies should NEVER be suppressed! They should always be vigorously challenged…. as is occurring here. The wickedly intolerant ones, the Islamists in question, will marginalize themselves. So will those on the rabid left. Outraged as I am by the arrogance, and impudence, of the organizers of the GZM, I am grateful they’ve chosen this as their hill to die on…so to speak. For that is what they most surely will accomplish for themselves if they proceed with their plans.
we need to support and promote people like irshad manji who is fighting to reform islam
an excerpt from the new book she is writing
“By introducing the God of love to Muslims, I want non-Muslims to see that they, too, can transcend their fears of asking questions about Islam. I’ll explain why good-hearted non-Muslims should risk offending. Their willingness to bust deadly silences can encourage reformist Muslims to speak up, too.
Bottom line: Liberal Muslims need the support of liberal non-Muslims. And the future of liberal democracy needs us all.”
If Islam is to be “reformed” so that it can “survive” in a secular, individual rights-based society and culture, what are called the “brutal” elements of it must be surgically removed, so that it is muzzled and pacified. Could it still be called “Islam”? I doubt it.
Another important component in Islam is the character of Mohammad, the barbarian, whose depredations make Conan look like a meek census taker. Any reformation of Islam must dispense with him or reinterpret him beyond recognition and certainly beyond credibility. As a “prophet” he is the source of Islam’s alleged wisdom. Muslim theologians may tinker with what he said was the Islamic “moral” life to make Islam’s imperatives palatable not only to Muslims but to non-believers. But to discard Mohammad is to discard the whole system, so it‘s a no-win conundrum for the reformers. And to discard Mohammad, or subject him to a more civil make-over, is also to subject Allah to the same grooming. It would be tantamount to transforming Alaric into a fashion plate for Gentleman’s Quarterly, and Jehovah into Clarence the angel from “It’s a Wonderful Life.”
I must also dwell on Islam’s altruist nature. Individuals subscribe to it for a number of itinerant reasons, none of them rational, and risk surrendering their identities and volition to a system that demands unquestioning acceptance of all that emanates from the Koran and Hadith. Islam, like Christianity, demands that men give up their minds and their thinking faculties and substitute the fiat authority of a supernatural being as a moral guide. Islam has never undergone any conflict with a secular state, as Christianity has. Nor has it ever really experienced the kinds of internal strife that Christianity has.
There are the major Sunni and Shi’ite factions within Islam, but the differences between them, at least to an “outsider,” are inconsequential in light of the overall fearsome character of Islam. They are both anti-individual, anti-freedom, misogynic variations on the same theme and willing to use force to compel conformity and submission. Christianity, once dispossessed from the political sphere, allowed and still allows Christians (and Jews) mental “breathing space” to live outside the altruism (what I call compartmentalization). Islam does not allow such breathing space. It is all or nothing, even for those who manage to enter professions such as medicine or journalism or engineering. I do not see such internal strife within Islam. The best minds have abandoned it altogether (Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and others), leaving behind Muslims who are prisoners of their own dogma and not likely to instigate a “reformation” even if they could figure a way out of the rut of their doctrinaire illogic. But beaten, passive minds are not noted for original, revolutionary thought. The bath water is soiled and toxic; the responsible baby’s got to be thrown out with it.
Michael – I don’t view Islam as a religion. It is an authoritarian political ideology pretending to be a religion. It is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Having said that, how does America handle the mosque question you pose without destroying the 1st Amendment (because Muslims will play victim and whine they are a religion)? I think the answer is simple. Send in agents who can blend with the crowd and who know Arabic. If the imam, or whoever, starts launching into a diatribe about the West and/or encourages jihad against America or any other country, close the mosque down (with the appropriate court order to do so). As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said, your right to free speech does not mean you have the right to yell fire in a crowded movie theater. A “religious” leader who encourage violence is a provocateur and should be treated as such along with the entire mosque. In this regard, just look at North Africa, the Near-East and Asia Minor. Once they were all Christian. Look at what they are today. They did not get that way through voluntary conversions.
Most people are utilitarian when it comes to religion and Muslims are no different. But, the key is that they are attached to markers, and all the while they change A to B, they will hold that B is still A. Just look for example at the more liberal hijab here in the US amongst those Muslim women who even wear it. They are changing the definition of hijab while at the same time claiming that it is proper
By the very fact that American Muslims are a small minority, fractured along ethnicity, and of above average socioeconomic status, they will continue to reshape Islam to be more congenial to their lives and the realities they have to be face here in the West. Additionally, to maintain cognitive coherence they will claim that their interpretation of Islam is the “true Islam.” Myself, I don’t think there is a “true Islam,” but a gelded and bourgeoisified religion is fine by me and this is what we should be rooting for.
Again, who would have imagined a Muslim, Miss USA? Or Muslim rock bands? There are several actors in Hollywood that are Muslim. Muslim WOMEN are marrying non-Muslim men. We see Ali Velshi (who is muslim) on CNN and think nothing of it. They are assimilating into our culture.
It is my hope that in the future, this gelded American Islam and it adherents can push their co-religionists in the Muslim world to modernize along with them. And because America leads the world, I have confidence it will happen
Gotta Love it .. Americans just cant handle the truth. Too much TV?
Too many Brady Bunch happy endings? Too many commercials? Or wait, was it the
Celebrate Diversity brainwashing jammed pumped into you since Kindergarten? You know
the posters with all the little children brown, white, black standing on the globe holding
hands. Perhaps the pot in high school? John Lennons “Imagine” played 1000x while you stared
at the sunset? Bwaahaaahaa.. guess what? ISLAM DOESNT CARE…it really doesnt care about
your sensititivity and tolerance. Islam claims that it directly listens to the voice of God
whose message is eternal. If thinks your day glo peace posters, your moron rock stars, your ignoramus Hollywood actors, your flakey high school teachers, your Marxist Progressive Professors, your lesbian Senators and homosexual Congressman are GARBAGE
There is no moderate Islam..just those muslims that, for the time being havent yet taken the message seriously.
there are hundreds of millions of moderate Muslims.
Very true Michael hundreds of million of moderate Muslims and it is THEY are the real misunderstanders of Islam. What does not exist though is MODERATE ISLAM.
You are right..the radicals are the true believers. As for the rest.. our relationship at best
can be to live on pins and needles. Waiting, and praying that something doesnt upset them.
a lost job, a wife that leaves, a percieved bit of unfairness..something, anything that
will cause the to turn to their religion and really start listening to what it says.
And that is what our existence must be…pins and needles, prayers and evasion, forever.
Just SAY NO.
Keep Islam out…
And it begins by stopping the State Departments mass refugee importation plans.
100,000 Somalis, 60,000 Iraqis, 50,000 Sudanese. And NO Americans were allowed a say in it.
There are 22 wars going on around the world involving Islam. This is about the average number
for the past 1500 years.In order to perpetuate this “feel good” lie you will bring into the USA
the religion that breeds radicals incessantly. You will bring the misery of Chechnya, India, Pakistan
Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran..into our country. Will you show up at the bombing sites
to mop up the blood and collect the body parts? Or will you stay home clucking your tongue and shaking
your head wondering “how could it have happened? how?”. The question isnt NOT “how does Islam
get hijacked by radicals”. The question is “why is Islam so hijackable?” If there are “moderate” muslims
its because they arent paying attention or trying to avoid what the Koran commands. Given the slightest
provocation.. a slight, a bit of anger and resentment ..and they will all “turn on”, like the walking time bombs they are.
Yes, just look at all the moderate Muslims who are turning Europe into Eurabia. Are they assimilating into the British, French, Norwegian, etc., cultures in which they live? NO! They are creating no-go enclaves where they pretend they are still living in their home countries. They are demanding special treatment in the schools, community centers, hospitals, and in the political arena as well. Several times, they have turned areas in France into fiery hell-holes, burning cars and causing untold destruction. They are a cancer in Europe, obliterating their host nations’ cultures. Do you think that can’t happen in America and Canada? It is happening. Remember that Europe has been taking in Muslims for four or five decades. It will take a while longer here, but it will have the same result as in Europe. Wake up! We have a perfect example in Europe of what happens when countries have lax immigration laws and don’t insist on assimilation, but instead give in and kowtow to their demands. Why don’t we pay attention to what is going on in Europe? We are so beat down by political correctness in North America that this will happen here too. And don’t forget the profound effects of low birth rates in Europe, America, and Canada. Muslim women are having babies at an alarming rate. You can’t argue with demographics. They will surpass us in numbers in time.
A Partner in Fox news is one of the major financiers of the mosque, as well as others worldwide. If we are serious about what we discuss then do something about the source of funding. Kingdom Holdings is a major funding source of various enterprises that supports terror worldwide.
http://www.google.com.hk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=+Kingdom+holding+company+terror&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
So after 10,000 car bombs, millions of bodies, body parts and flaming wreckage from the skies
after 1500 years of Islam, dozens of invasions of the West, thousands of fanatics, Imans
Mahdis, Ayatollahs..countless plots, assasinations, conspiracies..Michael Ledeens idea is???
Wait for it..
Dialoque.
Tea and Cookies, and Chit Chat. Bridge building and hand holding and photo ops.
Thanks but the real answer is to preserve the gift that God..gave the Unites
States of America…two vast oceans to protect it from the insanity of the Old World. Its has
saved us (barely) in the past..
GET ISLAM OUT OF THE USA….thats right..take a big gulp brace for the racist hysteria..and
get them out..or watch America turn into the Balkans or Israel, or Kashmir..or Chechnya, or anyplace
where Islam is in contact with Infidel populations.
How does a CULT which is constantly and repetitively bragging about its 1.5 BILLION membership get the chutzpah and disgusting HYPOCRISY to cry “persecuted MINORITY’ whenever it suits THEM and how do PC,MC Left wing, Islamophile moonbats and some very very misguided so called ‘conservatives’ have the intellectual STUPIDITY not only to not challenge them but to AGREE with them.
Now I know HYPOCRISY and LIES are as Islamic as barbaric Shariah Law but what are the moonbats and Obama’s excuses ?
The Ledeens of the world assert that we must not reject the entirety of Islam because of our free speech laws and our tolerance of religion. He states that, regarding free speech and religious tolerance “All manner of self-proclaimed religious leaders are free to preach. I wouldn’t change it; I cherish it”. This is followed with another assertion that is supposed to provide comfort: “there are hundreds of millions of moderate Muslims.”
Let’s pretend that’s factual for a moment. This means that there must be hundreds of millions more Muslims who are anything but moderate. How to tell the difference? We obviously haven’t done a good job of doing it. But neither have the so-called “moderate Muslims” among us, who have largely stood by silently, if the Ledeens are to be believed, while their Mosques have been infiltrated and their communities eaten by myriad extremist cancers.
What if all the vaunted “experts” on Islam have been wrong for all these years?
What if there is no possibility to winnow out the “extremists” from among the “moderates”?
What if Islamic terror comes with the territory of Islam, and that there is no chance that, given sufficient time and circumstance and opportunity, Islam will always produce a crop of jackboot Jihadis to terrorize and subdue?
That’s exactly what I think. I think that for decades, the “experts” on Islam have led us merrily down the garden path, assuring us in the West that they understand Islam and Muslims. All this while millions of unassimilated and potential murderous enemies have flowed like a tsunami onto our unexpecting shores to establish Islam under the protections of out hard won rights and privileges as Westerners.
Yes – under their decades-long assuring tutelage, pied pipers such as Marc Gerecht, Daniel Pipes, the Michaels Ledeen and Scheuer, along with the Islamophiles like Juan Cole, Carl Ernst, the poisonous John Esposito and Edward Said, we in the West have been persuaded that some Muslims are great, or to support this faction of “good Muslims” with the goal of subverting those “bad Muslims” as they see them. How has that been working out? These are the same “experts” who’ve given us the greatest hits of insane multicultural swill like “perverters of a great world religion.” & “Religion of Peace ™”, etc.
Isn’t it high time to call BS on these “experts”?
Dr. Ledeen assures us that Islam possesses “a great range of “Muslim doctrine,” much of it admirable.”. Right.
If the insurrection and subversion and perfidy we see rife among American Muslims is any indication of what we can expect far more of I the future, then why continue listening to the scoundrels who encouraged us to welcome Muslims over the decades into our dominions? Why continue to listen while they coo about “moderate Muslims” and the elusive Islamic reformation.
Something tells me we’re seeing the Great Islamic Reformation, and it looks a lot more like bin Laden and Jumaat Islamiya and Hamas and Hezbollah than Martin Luther.
Enough!
Exactly right. Not only can you not winnow out the radicals, from the non-radicals, you cannot
tell which non-radicals will become very radical indeed..tomorrow at the drop of a pin.
For example Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square Bomber, America gave him everything, more than
most Americans ever get. Wall Street job, new car, low mortgage house, cell phone, citizenship, American passport.
And it was STILL not enough. Not enough for him to hearken to Islams call after having a bad day.
And so he went from “loving America” as all moderate muslims do…to hating it all in moments
turn of mind. All it took was a bad day, a divorce, a lost job, a bit of perceived bigotry. And this is what we risk with every Muslim we bring into this country. Because unlike say Irishmen, or Frenchmen
every Muslim comes carrying carrying a 1500 year old doctrine of defiance, and rejection of the West
and Christianity in his pocket, all written in the most exquisite poetry. And we are reduced living in fear and apprehension hoping he doesnt read it.
I think you are sadly right. People can’t face the world for what it is. Islam’s record today, in all the attacks and wars around the world it is involved in, is clear enough. People will say, ‘That does not matter even if true. Because you can’t go after 1.4 billion.’
It’s not necessary to go after 1.4 billion people in a physical way. It is necessary to drain the swamp, and that involved far more than targeting ‘radicals’ and ‘extremists.’ It means a plan by Western countries to quarantine the worst sources of Islamic indoctrination, and this must necessarily include Saudi Arabia. Combine this with responsible energy and consumption policy.
Obviously most people are ready for none of this. One of my biggest fears is that if/when the Iranian regime is neutralized, Saudi Wahhabism – the biggest indoctrinational threat – will be emboldened.
Why isnt Wahabbism..the truest expression of Islam? Why do you assume its an
abberation. As for facing the world as it is..the first thing to face is that
the very act of trying to reason with Islam..is the very thing that makes
you contemptible. You are asking them..to quibble with the commandments of
God throught his Prophet. That alone is a unbearable insult worth of death.
When you start really sizing up what Islam is..and its power over the mind the
one and only thing you can do is back peddle as fast as you can. Do you argue
with a madman waving a gun? No..you get out of range. America has been given two
vast oceans and we need to use them to quarantine ourselves from the coming wave
of destruction that is going to overwhelm Europe. What we dont need to do is import
our sworn enemies into America via the State Department refugee programs and mass imigration. Just say NO.
i am banking on us. to paraphrase Marx, the point is not to understand the world but to change it. i do not believe there is any such thing as unchangeable ideas; all religions have changed. there are many versions of Islam that Mohammed never imagined, and we need to engage in that debate. my question is, what’s the best way? As for blocking incoming fanatics, i’m certainly all for that.
Honest dialogue is not what we can realistically expect once we gather the courage to speak up. We just need to realize that honest criticism does not offend those who have nothing to hide. Would dogs bark if they were not afraid? Would Danish flags have been burnt in large numbers in the streets of Damascus if Islam was open to humor? Are Danish flags commonly for sale in the bazaars, whether for burning or for any other purpose?
Think about what would happen if you managed to smuggle a copy of the Bible in Saudi Arabia, and you got caught? Why are the monarchs of Saud so afraid of this book? Would they forbid it if they did not feel threatened by it? If we are good Christians, why don’t we get on with our duty to love the Muslims? That is not the same as indulging their dissembling and their bullying. Good teachers provoke, not for the sake of provoking, but because they offer new insight. We have to bear witness, honestly and courageously, and be ready to deal with the reaction, which will be vociferous, particularly if we do in fact hit the target. Exposing fraud is not easy, but failing to expose it is only cowardice, and we should know what comes with it. Would the Islamists have senses an opportunity if we did not look like lambs?
How will we know we have succeeded in liberating the Muslims among us from the burdens of the intellectual servitude imposed by Islam? When can see Imams and Ayatollahs laughing spontaneously on TV! Evidently, that is not going to happen anytime soon, but that is not an excuse for not getting started. By the way, if we liberate ourselves from the intellectual burden of political correctness in the first place, we will also put the pontificating TV anchors out of commission, and good riddance!
What is freedom good for if we are afraid of exercising it?
You nice Nationalist do not understand. Everywhere Islam goes, it is a violent minority, and when a majority, they rule by force. Islam is allowed into America by the CFR controlled State Department to help divide America.
It is the same logic behind allowing the illegal alien invasion. The culture gets destroyed, and people divide along religious, and racial lines. A country is easier to control that way.
Globalism is not just bleeding American jobs overseas for cheap labor, it is a full court press to destroy nation states. Islam plays it’s role nicely.
Check all Mosques for hate speech, weapons, and C-4. Then place a military tribunal for Treason on the government of the United States for selling out to special interests, and global Marxism.
Semper fi ,Leatherneck. Are you ever correct, especially the military tribunal part. Every practictioner of communism and supporter of wahabbi Islam needs to tried for treason, and the proper punishment carried out.
Do, or Die Stormclouds!
Me thinks a Storm is coming.
I gotta start getting here earlier.
One of the things that has struck me as a particular weakness of Islam is that it has not been through anything like the internal criticism and commentary that Judaism and Christianity have. Of course Martin Luther may be the most known, but for centuries there have been discussion and effort covering other faiths from inside and outside and they have survived the criticism, in some cases better than before (indulgance, anyone?). When outsiders, even apostates who are intimatly familiar with Islam write on the subject they are dismissed as infidels or Orientalists, which serves to negate valid and logical discussion just as screaming racist or Nazi does. For Islam the stuggle seems to have ended sometime in the Umaid caliphate, though I’d have to check my resources again I remeber there being at one point as many as 6 used version of the Quaran. Since the pairing down to one the Hadiths and Sharia have been largley conplicit in blocking re-investigation which may arise from linguistic changes (Arabic, like Hebrew, lacked vowels when written) or apophrical additions. It needs this, and it needs to be internal before the discussion will mean anything.
Robert perhaps you could tell us how a book ‘the Koran’ which unlike every other religions Holy books claims ITSELF to be the ‘ACTUAL and UNALTERABLE word of God’ can be reformed. You see Islam claims that Mohammad was simply a messenger through whom God via the Angel Gabriel passed down the words of an actual book in heaven and that Mohammad dictated to various scribes (wow so much HEARSAY). Its all written in ancient ambiguous Arabic of course as it seems that this all powerful God does not understand any other language and it is full of contradictions, violence, mistakes, antisemitism, misogyny and nonsense.
What separates Islam from other religions is their legal system. Like communism, Islam brings with it the Sharia legal system. Muslims have a population-based Sharia implementation plan. The muslims we see as “moderates” are simply waiting for the Sharia population parameters to shift so that the moderates can activate their inner Sharia programs. As the numbers of muslims increase, their Sharia demands increase. That is why muslims are intensely focused on census numbers.
The puzzle is how we continue to see the Islamic package, with its Sharia law, as a well-meaning, altruistic “religion”? All muslims are aware of their duties as their numbers increase. If some look like moderates, it’s only because they’re waiting for the call to Sharia, and their turn hasn’t come up. Eventually, as in all countries where Islam grows, the old constitution is voted out, and it’s replaced with a Sharia constitution. America then becomes an Islamic republic. It’s just a matter of time.
Larsen_I agree with you that is Islams plan, thats what they have always done. However,I dont see Islam getting far in the US. Too many women here wouldnt have much use for being treated worse than dirt. Too many of us like our freedoms. And one example I point out is Israel. The Moslems have been trying to destroy Israel for 6 decades and cant succeed. The reason is Israel wont go along with there own suicide, unlike the mayor Bloombergs and Maobamas here. First thing we need to do with Islam is simple-get rid of the moslems. Quit cateringto them. Islam can only win if we help them win. Other than that, the smartest people in the world are in the West. Islam doesnt encourage creative thinking. I just dont think Islam, a rigid ideology, can think on there feet enough to defeat a more creative West.
” …..Supreme Court in 1878 in the case of Reynolds vs the United States. Reynolds had been charged with bigamy and claimed that his faith required him to engage in polygamy.
The Court found that while Reynolds had the right to believe that polygamy was his duty, he did not have the right to practice it—thus upholding Jefferson’s distinction between action and belief.
As the court put it;
In our opinion, the statute immediately under consideration is within the legislative power of Congress. It is constitutional and valid as prescribing a rule of action for all those residing in the Territories, and in places over which the United States have exclusive control. This being so, the only question which remains is, whether those who make polygamy a part of their religion are excepted from the operation of the statute. If they are, then those who do not make polygamy a part of their religious belief may be found guilty and punished, while those who do, must be acquitted and go free. This would be introducing a new element into criminal law
Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices. Suppose one believed that human sacrifices were a necessary part of religious worship, would it be seriously contended that the civil government under which he lived could not interfere to prevent a sacrifice? Or if a wife religiously believed it was her duty to burn herself upon the funeral pile of her dead husband, would it be beyond the power of the civil government to prevent her carrying her belief into practice?
So here, as a law of the organization of society under the exclusive dominion of the United States, it is provided that plural marriages shall not be allowed. Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? [98 U.S. 145, 167] To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances.
The outcome then was that we could not have a situation in which crimes could be committed in the name of religion and protected by the First Amendment. Belief could not be criminalized, but practice could be. ”
Best article ever published on this issue-
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/10830
Michael, another good thought piece. The most effective — and maybe the only — response to radical Islam is to exercise our inherent rights as citizens to have such a discussion. In an open, honest discourse, the relative merits of each philosophy can be considered and seen for what they are.
Unfortunately, Islam in virtually all of it permutations seems unprepared to have that conversation: The West is corrupt/evil. Sharia Law will prevail. Case closed.
itsgetting to the point where we are going to be left with only one option-kick all practitioners of Islam out of the US. Yes, I know, not all moslems are terrorists, yada, yada, but unfortunately many are ENABLERS of moslem terrorists. Look at the Ground zero mosque-80plus yo Holocaust survivor cursed out by a Mosque supporter. Moslem “cab driver” stabbed by an man whos an extreme leftist, but the moslems use this as an example of Islamophobia. Islam is the only ones who lack tolerance and preach hatred. There have been no Nidal Hassans attacking mosques. There have been no christians trying to leave massive bombs in Times Square. There are no Jews trying to set airplanes on fire with bombs in there underwear. There are no “flying imams” trying to incite fear on planes in Hinduism. I hate to say this, but Islam has no desire to intergrate with Western values. Therefore, they do not belong here and should be forced out. I certainly dont hope we have to have another several thousand dead before we come to that realization.
The article says we defend free speech-since when is inciting hatred and murder “free speech”? the constitution is not a suicide pact. Its is a guideline for rights to defend us against enemeies “forgeign AND domestic”. Those enemies include politicians who follow Marx and Alinsky and Moslems who preach hatred and want to implement a worldwide caliphate. The constitution should not be applied to those who are not willing to uphold it.
I know it for a FACT-and I can’t mention at this forum how I know this-that if NOT for the jihad plotted at the Al Farooq Mosque on Atlantic Ave in Brooklyn, NY, 9/11/01, or for that matter, the 1993 Twin Tower bombing would not have occurred.
Moreover, the NYPD and the FBI knew about terror plots being hatched at the Mosque, but did NOTHING. The fact of the matter is, the opening of jihad on US soil started with the assassination of Rabbi Meir Kahane at the Marriott Hotel in NYC in 1990, and despite all the evidence that this was an Al Qaeda hit, the Feds, NYPD and even the CIA kept it under wraps, sticking to their lone gun man story.Google, The Opening of Jihad on US Soil, and the above will become clearer.
I also have information that would make the readers even more livid at their leadership, but suffice it to say, the authorities that are supposed to be protecting the citizens are playing politics with the lives they are tasked with protecting.
The readers don’t know the half of it.
The readers know some things, Adina, as in ‘the FBI protected the Blind Sheikh’ who was some sort of intelligence asset. Mubarak wanted him extradited. This was not the first time that an Islamist was wanted by a Muslim gov’t while the West protected him. Britain has also done this.
I live across the street from a mosque located at Riverside Drive and Seventy-second Street in Mikey Bloomberg’s New York. Before nine-eleven it was a sleepy place with little activity. After nine-eleven it suddenly got very busy. Every Friday at about one o’clock in the afternoon the Muslim hoards descend. Taxi and limousine drivers by the hundreds swarm the neighborhood.
None of the Muslims live anywhere near the area but this is where they find it convenient to pray. And with their arrival, local laws and ordinances go out the window. Sharia traffic and parking rules obtain. Cabs, limousines and pedicabs triple park in no standing zones, in front of hydrants and in bus stops. They block the entrance to the West Side Highway three and four abreast.
Loudspeakers blast their sermons into the street. Prayer rugs are laid out on the sidewalk and kneeling worshipers by the dozen pray outside, blocking pedestrian traffic. In a city glutted with cops, the police do a vanishing act. Cruisers from the Twentieth precinct roll by on West End Avenue but none make the turn onto Seventy-second street. Riverside Drive is abandoned by the local constabulary altogether. Hear no evil, see no evil is the rule.
Meanwhile, two blocks away, errant motorists are being ticketed and towed as usual. What’s good for the Muslim goose ain’t good for the Christian or Jewish gander. Equal protection under the law no longer applies.
Call in a complaint to the Twentieth Precinct and you will be told that “they got permission.” Point out that a dangerous condition exists and if there is a fire or accident or someone living in one of the blocked buildings needs an ambulance, emergency vehicles can’t get through and you will be met with excuses. “There’s nothing we can do,” say the cops, “You gotta call the Mayor’s office.”
What happened on nine-eleven that suddenly made all these Muslims so religious that they have to turn out to pray every Friday? Was the murder of three thousand New Yorkers a revelatory spiritual experience for Muslims? Do they not realize that their noisy, in-your-face religiosity is offensive to local residents?
Mosques are indeed a breeding ground for terrorism. And no remedy can be expected from officialdom. Not from mealy-mouthed politicians like Mikey Bloomberg nor from lazy, unionized, time serving policemen operating from cushy precincts like the Twentieth in Manhattan.
The left continually makes the false charge that Muslims are being subjected to hostile discrimination and assault for their beliefs. The sad fact is that no change will be possible until that charge is made true.
In an utterly corrupt leftist-liberal political environment legal recourse is not an option. In the end, terrorism will have to be met with terrorism. Ordinary citizens will have to take up arms against these homegrown enemies of democracy and fully expect the police to be on the opposing side.
Moderate Muslims give us little to work with other than their various subjective wish-lists of how they think Islam should be, not of how it actually is. There is no religion called “Moderate Islam”. There is only Islam, that has theologically never in 1400 years renounced its aggressive barbaric components. So-called moderate Muslims want to have their cake and eat it too. They provide the rest of us with no theologically distinct lines of demarcation between themselves and the radicals. Then progressives, with their not-so-hidden agenda of Cultural Marxism, have squelched any useful national dialogue to analyze such distinctions, including most especially how we as a society can codify related laws so that we will not be surreptitiously attacked from within.
It is now up to the moderates and progressives. They are currently in the wrong. They must realize that they have a responsibility to allow all of us to sort out this mess. The first result must be a theologically approved and codified rejection of those portions of their religion to which the radicals adhere. If they cannot understand this, if they cannot bring themselves to do this, then it means that we as a people are disallowed from defending ourselves. The only logical position remaining is to shun all Muslims and let God sort it out afterward.
Charles Stevens,
Do guilty moderate Muslims have to have a fatwa against their head and a body guard to be accepted by Americans? As Salman Rushdie said in one of his talks, Americans want Muslims to criticize Islam but in a politically correct way.
As always, it is the loud mouth Muslims that are left alone. They bully everyone including other Muslims who are not as goody goody as they are. Goody goody Muslims pray five times no matter where they are, in conference rooms, airports ….name it. When they fast during Ramadan, if they see another Muslim is eating or drinking, they insult them. There is no doubt, bullying works for this type of Muslims. Islam has ruined my country, now they are trying to force themselves on America. I live in a state full of orthodox Muslims Somalies. I don’t know where to escape from them…
Michael:
I love the USA so very much that this breaks my heart. WHY, that is the question that MUST be asked of these muslims!
“Why, would New York want/or need ANOTHER mosque?”
Bloomburg and all these muslims are “FORCING” me to be tolerant…NO.
I want that question answered.
With ALL these massive mosques throughout the U.S, and, at least 100 “IN NEW YORK ALONE”, WHY??????
I am not a bigot, I an American that wants an answer.
The solution to radical mosques is to give them the same rights that churches have in Saudi Arabia.
Well, that is a good thought, but I think they need Charles the Hammer Martel.
I’ve copied a movie phrase to accommodate this Manhattan mosque:
If You Build it, We Will Come. (as in come and burn to ground, so I hear). They won’t get any construction workers anyway.
For the remaining 11,999 mosques here in the states, we need a knowledgeable Citizen’s Special Forces. The radical ones go down!
Personally, if they feel Islam is so great, return to your Islamic country. We have a multitude of Peaceful Religions here in the states, we certainly don’t need those from some radical element with intent of changing our nation.
We are a Representative Republic! We only change to an Islamic State over my dead body!
In Islam it is wrong to kill “innocents” sounds great hey and a very Christian ideal and its one verse that Taqqiya spouting Muslims and their gullible naive Islamophile left wing PC,MC moonbat apologists are so very keen for you to see . But dig deeper and think and look at the definition of “innocence’ in Islam and you will see that Muslims and ONLY Muslims can be considered innocent which puts that oh so nice verse clearly in to context . Christians, Jews and other religions followers are descendants of ‘Apes and Pigs’ and either have to convert (Muslims call it ‘REVERT’ as they consider everyone is BORN a Muslim) be killed or become a Dhimmie and pay the Jizya the tax they pay to Muslims for “defending???” them from Muslim attacks I presume so a Protection Racket I think its called.They thus become a second class citizen submissive cash cow for Islam with no rights under Shariah Law. The Jews of course get no choice they all have to be killed.
Islam the INTOLERANT demanding your TOLERANCE Islam the DISRESPECTFUL demanding your RESPECT Islam the HYPOCRITICAL.
Michael, this great outcry from the leftist movement in America, and indeed, in most European countries about religious freedom and their unflinching support and defense of Islam is truly puzzling. The left stands up unashamed and vigorously support an ideology that actually goes against the grain of eveything they are supposed to represent and stand for, i.e. equality, human rights, the right of women to equal respect, the right of all to live as equals under the law, and so on and so forth.
Why? Surely it is exactly those in the left who should be standing up and decrying the infamous tragedies that are being perpetuated to this day under the name of Shariah in the Middle east and Africa. Why have religious fanatics become the pet project of leftwing socialists? It is bizarre, incomprehensible – feminist groups supporting Muslim organisations? This actually goes beyond the bizarre and morphs into insanity. I would enjoy hearing your views on the subject, thank you for an interesting and informative article.
It has been said that while there may be “moderate Muslims” there is no “moderate Islam,” and this is so.
These are Muslim’s doctrines, not ours, but given the existence and application of the religiously sanctioned deceptive tactics of Takiyya (dissimulation i.e. lying) and Kitman (withholding or partial truth) that Muslim practice recommends, allows, and sometimes commands be used by Muslims in all their dealings with us “unbelievers,” and especially by Muslims when they are in the minority (and are taught by the Saudi printed and supplied texts that are given free to U.S. mosques, to consider themselves to be “on a mission behind enemy lines”) in any majority “unbeliever” society, if by using these deceptive tactics Muslims can protect or advance the cause of an individual Muslim or of Islam, by their own declarations—if we have the wit to find and heed them–we cannot trust the word of any Muslim, or take what they say at face value, or rest assured of their words being “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” or of them of honoring, particularly in perpetuity, any commitment they might make to us unbelievers.
This presents what I believe to be an insuperable problem, for any statements they might make, any oath or other legal document or agreements they sign or swear to, all the outward aspects of their lives and who they apparently are, can be a lie, or their lives can be peaceful and moderate one day, and the life and conduct of a Jihadi the next. Just how do you then deal with such an ideology, such deeply deceptive tactics, and such a group? You tell me.
Then, of course, there are the supposed billion or so “moderate Muslims,” that many in the West, like Michael Ledeen, are pinning their hopes on, but in what sense are they moderate?
Does “moderate” mean that they are not, just right now, actively seeking to kill us, and to impose Shari’a law on the entire world? Is that “moderation?” When we think of these “moderate Muslims” in our minds, do we just plug in the values that we here in the West regard as “moderate” and attribute them to these Muslims? For, if we do, I think we will be sadly and fatally mistaken if we somehow expect these “moderate Muslims” to hold the same general views we do on “freedom” and “democracy”, on “equality”, “freedom of religion,” the “rule of law” and the “separation of church and state” and I recommend that we look very carefully at what is occurring today in Muslim states that are touted as being “moderate” (see http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ and http://www.jihadwatch.org/). Do we really believe that they, being “moderate,” will somehow come in on our side in our fight against their more activist and violent coreligionists? I believe it is imperative that we very carefully and thoroughly investigate if these Muslim’s “moderation” extends to their views about us “unbelievers,” and how we should be treated, what our fate should be, and what the ultimate goal of Islam is, and how it should be arrived at.
As I see it, these more than one billion Muslims who we desperately hope are “moderates” are figuratively standing silently and observing, on the sidelines of the battlefield on which the forces and peoples of the West are fighting off the onslaught of Islam’s Jihad and, to me, their silence is their acquiescence to the Jihad; they are the reserve battalions of Islam, and will joint the fight when they are needed–and not on our side–for they have been told by the Qur’an, the conduct of Muhammad, and their leaders that any “booty” wrested from us unbelievers in battle is legitimately theirs.
The “evidence on the ground” shows millions of Muslims—all over the world—joining in what seem like weekly demonstrations to scream “Death to America” and “Death to Israel,” to parade their arsenals, and their bloodthirsty, threatening signs, and to march and give their often Nazi-like salutes, but we have seen no counter demonstrations by even a few hundred Muslims against Islam and its Jihad, Muslim terrorist groups, or Muslim terror anywhere in the world, inside the Umma or without. Thus, reliance on “moderate Muslims” to—you should pardon the expression—“save our bacon,” is deadly denial, and a fatally flawed proposition, unless, of course, we think western civilization is not worth defending, want to lose it all and become “dhimmis,” second class citizens and slaves under the domination of Muslims and Islam, for that is their ultimate goal.
seth, i am pinning my hopes on us. not “moderate Muslims.” on us. we have to fight. as i’ve said always.
Dudes and Dudettes,
Listen up. The Muslim religion is not anymore or less violent then other religions. You’re pretending doesn’t make it so. Wishing Musims would just “go away” is not going to make them leave. Why should they leave? They have every bit as much rights to live here and worship here as anybody. It happens to be what makes our country great. It is why respect and tolerance is needed on both sides of this debate. Peace out!
Only Cowards Stone People to Death: An Islamic Religious Ritual
August 19, 2010 – by Phyllis Chesler
Yesterday, I appeared on Fox News’ The Strategy Room to discuss a recent stoning in Afghanistan and the issue of stoning in general. Kimberly Guilfoyle interviewed me both skillfully and graciously. The subject is a very distressing and somewhat mysterious one for most westerners.
What does it mean when a mob of men, numbering anywhere from 50 to 200, stone a female child to death — as happened in October of 2008 in Somalia? That poor soul was not only a 13-year-old child, she had also just been raped. Indeed, that was her sole “crime” and the reason for her torture-execution. She was forced into a hole and buried nearly up to her neck. She took a long time to die and kept crying out for her life. In addition to the 50 active stoners, 1000 more men cheered them on.
What does this tell us?
First, that barbarians are mainly cowards who do not view themselves as responsible for their actions. Everyone is the murderer and therefore, no one is the murderer. The group both absorbs and atones for any possible guilt or hesitation that even one individual might have felt. However, as we shall see, there is also another way of looking at this.
For a culture presumably so concerned with “honor,” so consumed with concepts of responsibility towards the family, clan, or “ummah” (Muslim people), those who stone a living being to death utterly shrink from any individual responsibility for carrying out their bloody deeds. Entire families become conspirators in an honor killing; village and religious councils collaborate to issue a death sentence; Muslim men sexually harass women in the streets (of Egypt) — and in large mosque-inflamed mobs (in Algeria).
In terms of stoning, which is primarily a contemporary Muslim-only custom, not only do cowardly men hide behind each other, clearly they lack the ability to act as individuals. That power is reserved for one man, one leader, one ruling cabal only. In Afghanistan, the Taliban hooligans threw the first stones.
This tells us something else that is important. The need for a mob is, in a sense, proof that the individuals who compose it are all being held hostage to the will of the psychopathic criminals who rule them. Oppose them, and you yourself might be stoned to death. Hostage-mobs also share the “guilt,” or rather, their leaders’ point of view. The leaders cannot be held accountable for their actions either — everyone did it.
In addition, sharing a so-called Muslim sinner’s blood, especially female blood, is yet another way to forge a blood-brotherhood that is based on male supremacism.
Stoning is practiced in contemporary Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, and Nigeria. In 2006, a poll conducted in “moderate” Indonesia found that 50% of Muslims there supported stoning in cases of adultery, however it is defined. Adultery might include: a married woman who is raped by a stranger, or a woman promised in marriage to one man but who chooses another. This is precisely what happened in the recent case in Afghanistan.
The Grand Torturer Khomeini brought stoning back to Iran. Uneducated mullahs in the provinces rather liked it. They also liked drugs, drug trafficking, forcing girls into prostitution and then jailing or hanging them for it; temporary “marriages”; forced veiling, etc. Although stoning is now under legal review in Iran, to date, eight men and three women await stoning execution.
In Iran, one woman, accused of adultery, was sentenced to be lashed 99 times — and then sentenced to be stoned to death. Due to an international campaign and due to the hard work of Iranian dissidents, Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani’s sentence was delayed. But she was lashed 99 times and her teenage son was forced to witness her helplessness, humiliation, and torture — and, in a sense, forced to both share these emotions, second-hand with his mother. Her son’s presence before her nakedness was meant to shame them both and challenged him to become a very hard man as a way of avoiding an eventual nervous breakdown.
I am not sure whether there is any connection, but think about this. When Muslims go on pilgrimage to Mecca, part of their three day ritual includes stoning “The Devil.” Large groups literally throw stones at giant concrete pillars. This suggests that stoning is a Muslim religious ritual, not a tribal custom. Therefore, stoning a living human being is not only an act of human sacrifice — it is a classic religious ritual meant to glorify the stoners’ God.
A little like jihad if you ask me.
There is a basic problem concerning the reformation of Islam – the Koran. The Christian (Protestant) Reformation was largely based upon the Bible becoming more available to lay persons and it was soon realized that the Church had gone astray from some of its basic teachings. However, when one closely reads the Koran any reformation away from violence would be contrary to its text. Here’s just a sample:
“Slay them wherever you find them…Idolatry is worse than carnage…Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme.” (Surah 2:190-)
“Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it.” (Surah 2:216)
“If you should die or be slain in the cause of God, His forgiveness and His mercy would surely be better than all the riches…” (Surah 3:156-)
“Seek out your enemies relentlessly.” (Surah 4:103-)
“Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends.” (Surah 5:51)
“Believers, when you encounter the infidels on the march, do not turn your backs to them in flight. If anyone on that day turns his back to them, except it be for tactical reasons…he shall incur the wrath of God and Hell shall be his home…” (Surah 8:12-)
“Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme.” (Surah 8:36-)
“…make war on the leaders of unbelief…Make war on them: God will chastise them at your hands and humble them. He will grant you victory over them…” (Surah 9:12-)
“Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]…until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued.” (Surah 9:27-)
“what to do about the hundreds of radical mosques in this country.”
Make it illegal for foreign nations to fund religous schools or temples in the United States for starters.
Tell the Saudis they can fund schools and temples in the United States on the same day Americans can do it in Saudi Arabia…and not before then.
I didn’t read all of the above, but it would seem that refusing visas, green cards, and citizenship to all Saudi and other Wahhabi clergy would be a good starting place.
Requiring disclosure of all foreign contributions for religious activities in the country, and perhaps barring certain sources known to support violent activities (i.e. jihad) or to be involved with violent partners (Iran)
There may well be moderate Muslims, but there is not and cannot be a moderate Islam.
What do you make of this (from today’s Jerusalem Post?) Do Imams=Islam?
August 30, 110 Monday 28 Elul 3870 11:31 IST print
American Imams visit Auschwitz
By JTA
18/08/2010
Muslim leaders learn about the Holocaust.
Eight Muslim American leaders who visited concentration camps and met with Holocaust survivors signed a statement condemning Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism.
The trip earlier this month, intended to teach the participants about the Holocaust, featured visits to Dachau and Auschwitz.
“We stand united as Muslim American faith and community leaders and recognize that we have a shared responsibility to continue to work together with leaders of all faiths and their communities to fight the dehumanization of all peoples based on their religion, race or ethnicity,” the statement read. “With the disturbing rise of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and other forms of hatred, rhetoric and bigotry, now more than ever, people of faith must stand together for truth.”
Marshall Breger, an Orthodox Jew who served in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, launched the trip to educate those who may not have had the opportunity to learn the history of the Holocaust. Breger said this would help combat Holocaust denial among Muslims.
The leaders on the trip were Imams Muzammil Siddiqi of Orange County, Calif.; Muhamad Maged of Virginia; Suhaib Webb of Santa Clara, Calif.; Abdullah Antepli of Duke University in North Carolina; and Syed Naqvi of Washington, D.C., along with Dr. Sayyid Syeed of Washington; Sheik Yasir Qadhi of New Haven, Conn.; and Laila Muhammad of Chicago. U.S. government officials, the State Department’s special envoy to monitor and combat anti-Semitism, and an official from the Organization of the Islamic Conference also participated.
According to the Jewish Daily Forward, several of the leaders, all with large spheres of influence, had a history of anti-Semitic comments. Laila Muhammad is the daughter of American Muslim leader W.D. Muhammad and granddaughter of Elijah Muhammad, leader of the Nation of Islam.
The Aug. 7-11 trip was co-sponsored by a German think tank and a New Jersey-based interfaith group called Interreligious Understanding.
ml “seth, i am pinning my hopes on us. not “moderate Muslims.” on us. we have to fight. as I’ve said always.”
There are several problems with this approach. First define who is “us”. If you haven’t noticed America is now deeply divided. There is us and there is them.
Those not of us are actively assisting illegals from all nations, legals from majority Islamic or even Islamic governed nations and locations. They pay their way from start to finish including every welfare benefit that American citizens get plus they give them preference in jobs, schooling and treatment.
And those “them” are so ingrained in the American bureaucracy as to not be gotten rid of in any manner known to actually work. It is them that control, write and enforce the rules, bend them, break them and only use them against those that they deem a threat.
And that threat to them is us.
I could write pages on this, but VDH and others that write better than I have had their say on this and other related subjects and have said it much better than I ever could.
Is the invasion from the world non-stoppable. In my opinion it is unless our enemies within are dealt with first. Harshly.
“We can’t criminalize religious speech”….but we can criminalize….sedition. And we can criminalize…treason. And we can criminalize speech that calls for the destruction, murder of the west and it’s citizens. And finally we have RICO…Islam is an organized crime producing outfit. Not a religion…but a poisonous,radical political ideology.
Time to pull the tax exempt status of these new “Murder for Islam / hire” gangsters. Why pick on Italians when the islamists do the same thing against innocent civilians…Times Square, Fort Hood, WTC 1 and WTC 2, the Cole…the shoe butthead…..and on and on.
If Hitler was a bit smarter…he should have declared Nazism a “religion”…he and Armadinnerjacket would be allies today. And so would Nazism.
My favorite comment here ( I already forget your name) is to define Muslim. They are. Not just a religion. It is political…political, & worse than Marxism. They are dictators and. Brutal ones to their people. They are deceptive and think they are speaking forGod and have blessings to kill anyone if not joiners to their bloody cult.
R
‘“We can’t criminalize religious speech”….but we can criminalize….sedition.’
You got a point there. If Congress can blow off the 1A and pass the Smith Act, there’s no reason why they can’t do the same in this case. It wouldn’t be any more illegal than what they’ve already done.
In NYC, the Broken Window Theory helped to cut violent crime by more than half.
It said – fix the broken windows and shut down the window-washing, driver-harassing panhandlers, and you will eventually drive out more serious crime.
This is similar to Al Capone, who could not be arrested on the real charges, but was arraigned and convicted for tsx evasion.
We need to nickel and dime the radicals.
Get them for tax issues. Get them for zoning issues. Get them for parking and obstructing traffic and noise violations (in their mosques, as the poster pointed out regarding the mosque at 72nd and Riverside in Manhattan). Take away tax benefits for schools that have hate speech in their texts (like the Islamic school in Northern Virginia).
This is not substitute for aggressively going after clearly violent groups, but an approach for the more stealthy ones.
Don’t forget – the name of the game is encroachment. They encroach on the democratic system in all manner of small ways, we need to put them back in place in all manner of small ways.
This takes a broad vision and alot of will. Like the police commissioners and mayor who cleaned up NYC (Kelly, Guiliani, etc) – they saw the big picture and carried it out in all manner of small, coordinated ways and did not give up.
.
It is refreshing to see the sympathy Michael Ledeen feels for Muslims as humans who deserve their rights. But there is a long list of things we can do – ethical, legal, inexpensive things. (1) We can criminalize things in Islam which are already crimes or illegal, eg slavery, dhimitude, honour killings, murder for apostasy, unequal treatment of women, taqiya etc, simply by defining them carefully and making it criminal to either do those things or encourage another person to do those things, or to do them with religious motivation or encourage others to do these crimes with religious motivation. The law already makes it illegal to encourage murder by speech. Free speech has never meant free criminal speech. Don and Carla (at 6) are right.
(2) Everyone should be allowed their beliefs but anyone who tries by word or deed to bring about a caliphate, or any aspect of Sharia law,must be imprisoned. David Greenfield and Menachem Ben Yakov 23 are both right. Michael Ledden is also right to say there are hundreds of millions of innocent Muslims. Their rights to practice their religion will not be reduced by what I propose.
(3) We can sign treaties with all Islamic nations regulating the transfer of money for religious purposes. Mosques who do not disclose their funding can be fined.
(4) There is a lot we can do with immigration. We can test new arrivals.Taqiya can be defined and punished. Anyone who leaves here to go to Somalia, Yemen, Afghanistan or Pakistan should not be readmitted unless they received permission before departing here.
(5) We can re-educate imprisoned criminals by forcing them to read the Hadiths etc until they repent or they are radicalised further and incriminate themselves and bring down new jail sentences on themselves. We can insist that public servants read something about Islamic doctrine (and Hindu, Budhist, Christian etc) so that they understand multiculturism.
There are other simple easy things we can do, if we want to keep our civilisation. Most politicians seem focused on the next election, not the survival of our civilisation. It will be much easier to keep our freedoms if we start now.
right on. we need to do things, not whine.