Hey, they had their chance and they blew it.

Surprise, surprise, surprise . . . not really.

Here's one moderate:

Few in the Muslim world would understand why their leaders had to rush to convene a summit because of Rantissi's assassination. All Islamic governments have already registered their anger at the "targeted killing." Another condemnatory resolution is unlikely to get anyone any further.

And people might wonder: Why didn't the OIC call for a summit when 8,000 Muslim men and boys were murdered by the Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina? Why hasn't it held a single session on Chechnya - where, these past four years, 50 times as many Chechen Muslims have been killed as Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza?

Indeed, don't we in the Muslim world have other pressing problems that merit emergency summits? Hunger, poverty, illiteracy, the absence of law and order, corruption, lack of basic human rights and freedoms and the prospect of spiraling terror?

Shouldn't Muslim leaders meet to develop a common strategy to stop the terrorists who are killing innocent Muslims in Riyadh, Baghdad, Algiers and Casablanca?

From
Amir Taheri in today's NY Post

Assuming it was 100 who showed up, and assuming that the local population numbers around 50,000...

0.0002% of the local ummah showed up.

Pathetic.

First, the message of the event did not fit the thinking of most Muslims. Unfortunately, the mood in this community is a radical one, and not inclined to stand up and condemn terrorism.

I honestly feel deep sympathy for people like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, who has a task of Sisyphean proportions.

And they say that the extremists are the ones who represent only a small part of the population...

Jaffar, 0.2% :-) Your number would mean that 0.10 total people showed up...probably body parts of sharia justice victims, LOL! A thief's hand here, a druggie's head there, pretty soon you're talking real fractions of a person!

#6 evariste

Gah! Bad Jaffar! Back to math class for me!

I think I need an addendum to Iron Fist's Rule: If you think you're to drunk to post, you are also too drunk to do math...

*slinks away*

It's heartening to know that there is someone willing to make the effort and take a stand, even if it is only one man. This is disappointing though:

Most participants were not Muslim

It is up to the moderate Muslims to make themselves heard.

This provides ample evidence of the validity of LGF!

the mood in this community is a radical one

There is nothing "radical" about hate and bigotry in Islam. It is mandatory, bedrock, foundation, core.

There's a link in this story to a Daniel Pipes article that quotes a study from a Muslim organization called the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding. The study, a survey of opinion among Detroit area Muslims, turned up the following:

By a ratio of 67 to 33, Muslims in the United States think "America is immoral."
About (the graph does not allow complete precision) 90 percent of Muslims favor universal health care.
Fully 79 percent favor affirmative action for minorities.
Asked about the job being done as president by George W. Bush, 85 percent of Muslims disapprove and a mere 4 percent approve.

By a ratio of 67 to 33, Muslims in the United States think "America is immoral."

They should feel free to leave at any time.

#9 Bubbaman 4/30/2004 05:38PM PST
This provides ample evidence of the validity of LGF!

Ground Zero provides all the evidence I need.

OT
Deseters running to Canada;
ABC doing Look Stories from 1967;
Jefin'K doing Nam;
Are these people "original" or what?

#12:

They should feel free to leave at any time.

Why? Like cockroaches, there is food and water.

Must have islamic state.

Until we universally acknowledge the gnawing fear in the gut of every Muslim in America faced with the growing menace of radical Islam, we cannot judge those who choose not to show their faces at an event that by its very nature rubs dirt in the faces of the Islamists.

Hey, American Muslims know radical Islam a heck of a lot better than your average non-Muslim American does, so use your noggins to figure out what is going on.

We are talking about fear, people. This is what radical Islam is all about. The intimidation is merely the sword point of intifada.

It gets worse after that. These people were being prudent, not apathetic. Until we can provide solid guarantees of safety against the evil that exists in their midst, they will never stand in unison to denounce terror.

It is primarily only those who are not immediately threatened by terror who are willing to take a public stand against it.

Somehow I can't envision Anne Frank standing in the street to denounce Nazism...

Well, to anyone that has actually studied Islam, these pathetic results should be no surprise.

The Muslims that stayed home in Phoenix are simply behaving as Muhammed's teachings show them.........Radical Islam, the term, is redundant fully!

Islam is in itself radical and brutal......the moderates will get very very little support because they are being dishonest to Islam's vile monstrous teachings!!

It is that simple........

It would be like getting Marxists out too support a parade for property ownership..........

In otherwords, moderation is antithetical to islam as private land ownership is to Marxism....

Sad stuff indeed!!

#16:

So US law will not protect them against the intimidation?

You are right. Our laws will not protect them.

Must not bring attention to the imtidators. No one sees it, so why should I?

I do not believe a Muslim can be allegiant to a non-Muslin nation state unless he or she renounces Islam. Dr. Jasser talks about this "first generation" of Muslims still being under the influence of their parents, implying that the second generation will divest of their religion. I hope so, but I don't think so.

Intimidators. PIMF.

Blush.

Moderate Muslim = OXYMORON

#19 genard: Anecdotally, but convincingly to me, it's the second and third generation Muslims in Britain that are the most hostile. They don't see the downside of living under Islam like their forebears did. In fact, there's nothing but pluses to being Muslim in the West today. Special exemptions to the law of the land, special resources made available to you, and leftists washing away any possibility of being held responsible for your own actions and shortcomings.

Now that generational dynamic is short-circuited because hostile Muslims back in the Ummah have realized they can go straight to the West, keep their hostility, and be treated better than they would be where they are now. The camel's neck is now under the tent, and he see's the coast is clear.

Proud Albertan, long time no see! Good seeing you :-)

In Christianity and Judaism, and I presume Buddhism and Hinduism and Zoroastrianism, one can be a "radical" for one's faith, a "fundamentalist", and still be a Libertarian politically. One could argue--ok, I would--that Individual Liberty emanates from a serious consideration of Christianity, and that theocracy is blasphemous. God made man free to choose God--why should man intervene between God's plan for freedom and force other men to worship God Inquisition-style? To do so is anti-Christian, and against the "fundamentals" of Christianity. Judaism before Christianity had learned to reconcile religion w/ state, and Christianity reinforced that stance w/ Jesus' turn down of Satan's offer and the famous "render unto Ceasar" retort. Christianity was formed under "church/state" separation and thrived while persecuted.

No such Libertarianism or Apolitical interpretation exists in Islam. You can't ask someone to sincerely be a 'moderate'. People are either going to take their faith seriously, or they will be so dismissive in their faith to render it useless and superficial. Christians and Jews can take their faiths seriously and still believe in the God-given freedom of others to not have Church or Synagogue shoved down their throats.

When Jerusalem was destroyed in 583 B.C.E, Judaism adapted and thrived. And after the Temple was destroyed in 70 C.E. both Christianity and Judaism survived. If Mecca was destroyed/conquered, could Islam survive?

The very tiny minority are moderate.

The majority support terrorism.

I have not been proven otherwise anywhere, including my own personal experiences with the Muslim community.

The only time I hear that most are moderate, are from non-Muslims.

#16 Really grumpy....

The day the photos of the murdered contractors hit our local paper, a Muslim woman in full regalia was accosted in a grocery store by an angry woman cursing at her. She-the Muslim woman- wrote a letter to the editor of the paper full of rant and the same venom she'd heard directed at herself.

No cogent analysis here, just sayin....

I think you're right there's fear in that population. They're probably also pretty mad that they're going to have to either own up to what they say they believe or cave in to living with the comfy infidels and just shut up.

I kind of wish the "Robin Williams" foreign policy would actually work. Nah. Leaving a mess for my kids to clean up--like that would ever happen.

Although the number of muslims who favor suicide bombing remains high (try 270 million at least), and despite the low turnout in Arizona, I'm heartened to see that some American muslims are speaking out in favor of the WoT. Maybe there's hope for that bunch.

#16:

Somehow I can't envision Anne Frank standing in the street to denounce Nazism...

So, "moderate Muslims = Jews"? Bad (and more than a little offensive) analogy, rgbdJ.

If one were to draw a parallel with nazism, it's "99% of Muslims = 99% of Germans between 1939-1945". That is, directly or indirectly complicit in the crimes of their leaders.

If the Islamic World wanted to clear up these "misconceptions" about Islam and terrorism, why not have a Global Council of Islam meet in, say, Mecca. Gather all the major clerics throughout the world, and create a unified position statement about the position of Islam on terrorism?

It would be nice to have an unambiguous standard of behavior to hold them to.

#22 Model 4,

Yes, I think the radicals jihadists have innoculated the third generation, which, in most places become assimulted citizens of the country to which their grandparents immigratedf.

With islam immigration is really a form of warfare, a way to conquer in the name of Allah.

#24 Stinky,

Yes, Christianity is mainly about personal salvation, and fortunately for the West, Jesus's declaration to "Render onto Caesar..." evolved into a fully developed predisposition to separate church and state. Islam knows no such cleavage and one cannot be loyal to a democratic nation state (man's Law) without offending Allah's Law.

30 to 100 isn't much... but it's still 30 to 100 more than I expected.

#26 Perry: Fear? Ask her if she'd fear living here more or in an Islamic country. Tell her she'll be allowed to live in the country she fears less. She'll choose the US. That isn't to say what happened to her is right, but I can think of millions of people who wish all they had to fear was the occasional tongue-lashing by an over-stressed freak, instead of how they are treated routinely by Muslims.

The Great Hope is that Islam will reform, or that Muslims will stop believing in Islam (yet still be "Muslims" somehow). They aren't going to get a better environment for that to happen in than the West. If they piss this opportunity away, I've got no sympathy. And it's not an acceptable option to just ask the jihad be put on the back burner for a decade or two while the demographics continue to shift.

This is very sad (it's been a very sad day, all in all) but let's give a little credit where it is due. Kudos to Dr. Zuhdi Jasser for his brave (quite literally) efforts. The results, however sad and disappointing they are to us, must be doubly so to him and yet, he has made what one can hope is a start. I hope that he keeps trying and that he continues to receive support.

Also, good for the Muslims that did show. It's a whole lot more than most have done.

Mr. Pol #30

Not that the 30 to 100 who did show up were necessarily against terrorism. Maybe they misunderstood what the protest was all about. From the article:

"Until then, however, there is the stark reality that very few Muslims did show up. And those who did held up “peace” and “anti-war” signs, not anti-terror or anti-Islamist signs.

From a common-sense perspective, "Moderate muslim" makes about as much sense as "Jew for Jesus".

The SAT analogy format is a useful way to convey my feeling about so-called "moderate muslims".
moderate muslims:muslims::socialists:communists

#30 genard:

Yes, I think the radicals jihadists have innoculated the third generation, which, in most places become assimulted citizens of the country to which their grandparents immigratedf.

No, you've got it backwards (or I was confusing). The anecdotal stories coming out of Britain are that it's the second and third generation that are more jihadi than their parents and grandparents. The elders saw their new lives in the West as a blessing, the youth see it as a birthright, and not one they're particularly attached to. All the benefits, none of the responsibility, and zero appreciation for or understanding of what the societies they despise have done to make their lives so much better.

Is a moderate Muslim - a Muslim?

#34 Model 4

Yes, fear. I'm sure the Muslim women in this country are particularly afraid. (Not as much as any random Muslim woman in the ME, however.) Not living here is unthinkable, but living here is increasingly tense. Tension isn't exactly life-threatening, but if one's husband suddenly "gets religion" all that could go away and suddenly you're chattel.

I have no real doubts they will screw up this opportunity, too.

You said it much better than I did, I think.

The more I think about this "protest," it seems that most of the 30 to 100 who did show up might have been counter-protestors, with their anti-war and peace signs to protest the moderates. I wonder if any showed up to actually protest terrorism.

Ya know.... when I read thing like this, it's starting to look more and more to me that we are really headed for World War 3.

We will have to fight for the EXTERMINATION (I use that word carefully here with meaning) of Islamic.

Put things down the road 30 years.. france, heck all of EU in constant attacks by radical islamic factions like they have in the philips these days, america having the same thing starting to happen in our country with attacks at home from radical islamic groups in-country....

The only way around this will be to the total distruction of islam... a total holy war to kill millions of people because they belive in some asshat [bigoted word] who lived 1000 years ago.

Damn, that's scary, but thats what I see in my crystal ball when I look into it.

Instead of saying only a handful of muslims are radicals, they should be telling the truth--only a handful are moderates. They are all going to vote Kerry who will support their terrorist agenda. Like I give a damn anymore what a muslim thinks of me. I can just see them, asses in the air, praying for brother Kerry to win.
[Link: www.islamonline.net...]

Anybody who expected "moderate" muslims to show up and protest what they've been taught - and still believe - is kidding themselves.

This war has been going on for, coming up on, 1500 years.

And they'll get their asses kicked again.

#41 Han Solo: I don't think that will last long here in the US, unless our national character changes quite a bit. There's a lot of people thinking "OK, you got a 'get out of jail free' card after 9/11. We suffered grievous atrocity, but we didn't blame you. But we've been watching Islam since, and have not liked what we've seen." Murdering Americans regularly on American soil will not be tolerated.

Your notion of a "holy war killing millions" isn't necessary though. It's like saying "My car won't start! I tried adding wiper fluid, and it still won't start! I'm forced to blow it up." There's a lot of effective things that we could be doing between where we are and where you fear things might be going. Until we've tried them, it seems rash to jump to extremes.

I sent this e-mail to Charles on 4-24-04.

Subject: Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser is an American patriot. He is also a Muslim.

I have been reading this gentleman's commentary for some time now. If
there is a voice to be heard from the moderate Muslim community, he is
leading the way.

Please read the article if you can. Here are the links:

[Link: www.washtimes.com...]

via azcentral.com

I believe this is his most recent comment.

[Link: www.azcentral.com...]

Thank you for all you do.

Bobbi
LGF Reader

Yay. Yay for Dr. Jasser. He has done what is desperately needed.

And if 30-100 muslims really do love America and desire peace, every shred of "American" in me wants to commend and protect them.

#12, zulubaby:

They should feel free to leave at any time.

#15, Ann:

Why? Like cockroaches, there is food and water.

Must have islamic state.

As I said the first time this survey was discussed here, the only thing that surprises me is that so few Detroit Muslims think America is immoral. Hell, I think America is immoral, and I wouldn't have any trouble finding plenty of other mainstream Christians (both Protestant and Catholic) who agree with me. If this survey had been conducted among church-going Christians, it is well within reason to expect that the statistics on this question would be similar.

My agreement with the statement, "America is immoral" doesn't mean that I don't love my country, or that I wish to install a Christian theocracy here, or any such nonsense. It is simply a value judgment in moral/religious terms: America isn't perfect.

Your suggestion (zulubaby) that people who think America is immoral should leave is patently offensive.

Your suggestion (Ann) that it necessarily implies a desire for shari'a is ridiculous.

-dg

I respect Dr. Jasser and his efforts. As noted in the Daniel Pipes article, this quote:

It was a humble beginning that can grow into something large and strong. Jasser points out to me that “The beginnings of every great movement in our great nation’s history of freedom began in a small way.”

And, lest I forget, let me echo Jehka's kudos to Dr. Jasser.

-dg

bobbi (#46),

Thanks for the links.

By a ratio of 67 to 33, Muslims in the United States think "America is immoral."

Jaffar, 0.2% :-) Your number would mean that 0.10 total people showed up...probably body parts of sharia justice victims, LOL! A thief's hand here, a druggie's head there, pretty soon you're talking real fractions of a person!

Let's consider not giving up on the moderate muslims just yet.

How would strict religious conservatives respond to the statment that "America is immoral?" Possibly in the same proportion? I don't know, but it is a question to ask.

Only 55% (111 million) of the eligible(202 million) voters participated in the 2000 presidential election. Of that population, about 50 million voted for GW. What percentage was out there being activists trying to get votes for Bush? Would it have reached 0.2% of those voting for Bush[50,000,000(U.S. pop estimate over 18) * 0.002(0.2%) = 100,000)? Maybe. So could it be that the Phoenix muslim demonstration was a success in terms of numbers? It could be.

Granted, there are obvious differences between the 2000 U.S. election and the war on terror, but let's be happy that something has begun in the Muslim community that says ' hey, wait a minute, this crap stinks!'

I am glad the non-muslims were out there supporting the muslims in this effort. Their community needs some support to show that they are part of the community or "social proof" to borrow a psychological term.

I suggest we be supportive of these efforts, until we are proven that it is improbable to change the muslim opinion.

source: US Census Bureau p

Re #26:

The so-called "Robin Williams" foreign policy plan was not written by Robin Williams.

[Link: www.snopes.com...]

Thirty moderate Muslims in North America is an outstanding windfall, and 29 more than I thought existed. Previously, I only recognized the stand-up Canadian lesbian Irshad Manji as a true independent Muslim. A couple dozen beyond her is a great find. I salute the brave fellow in Phoenix, Dr. Jasser, who organized the march with the disappointing turn-out. He is a great hero. I admire him enormously.

As far as I know, this is the FIRST demonstration against terrorists by Muslims who live in the United States -- two and a half years after the attacks of 911. However, there have been numerous public demonstrations for the "civil rights" of lowlifes like Sami Al Arian in Florida and Rabih Haddad in Detroit.

#51 Geepers

You are welcome.

#29, V the K,

Various muslim clerics have spoken out against "terrorism". But they define terrorism somewhat differently than, for example, LGF regulars.

Muslim denunciations of terror have often defined as "terrorism" anything done by non-muslims to defend themselves from muslim terrorism.

a link to a Saudi fiqh council 2002 statement on terrorism is : Here:

It should be read very carefully.

Portions which stand out to me:
1)
" Moreover, according to the Islamic Fiqh Council, there are various forms of terrorism, which include state terrorism, the most conspicuous illustration and the most heinous of which is practiced in Palestine today by the Israelis, and by the Serbs in Bosnia- Herzegovina and Kosovo.

According to the Islamic Fiqh Council, state terrorism is the most menacing to security and peace in the world, and, therefore, standing up against it is tantamount to self defense and striving in the cause of Allah. "

2)
" Islam also addressed the issue of evil tendencies that are apt to lead to intimidation, terrifying, horrifying and killing without any just cause. The Prophet (peace be on him) said:

'A Muslim must not terrify a fellow Muslim' "

3)
"With regard to the Dhimmis (Non-Muslims living under Muslim protection), Islam ordered that they must be treated justly. It gave them rights and imposed duties on them. It gave them security in the Muslim world, and imposed blood-money and expiation for an act of killing committed against anyone among them."

hmmmmm... :

1) reality inversion
2) but what about muslims terrifying non muslims?
3) Oh, there you have the answer to my question 2: if the non-muslims are dhimmis, then they shouldn't be terrorised.

btw, good late response to sheep herder on that other thread. I gave him too much credit for knowing anything about what he claimed he knew. You realized he was an entire ignoramus, but didn't just insult him.

God bless Jasser for trying, and God help him in his efforts.

Somewhat off topic, but not entirely:

[Link: www.assumption.edu...]

Looks like a prof's class notes on Americanization in the early part of the last century. In many ways, there were similar problems back then, with non-anglo immigrants objecting to entering the Great War on Britain's behalf, or with immigrants from eastern europe who were part of mass strikes, sparking fears of a Boshevik revolution in the US.

Not all the fears played out well against immigrants, as there were groups like the KKK. But there was the more enlightened aproach by others, to make sure they became Americans, rather than just terrorize them:

"Americaniztion" also established programs teach immigrants English and American History as a way of solidifying immigrants in question into American society. At the time there was a popular idea of the "White Man's Burden". This was a social responsibility to civilized and improve upon the societies in the colonies of Great Britain and the United States; also in the United States there was a responsibility to the "Negroes" within the country. "Americanizers" brought up an even greater responsibility that they called the "Anglo-Saxon Burden". The "Anglo-Saxon Burden" was to 'nourish, uplift, and inspire all these immigrant peoples of Europe that, in due course of time, even if the Anglo-Saxon stock be physically inundated by the engulfing flood, the torch of its civilization and ideals may still continue to illuminate the way'.

Because Irish and German-American opposition to the United States entering WWI provide proof to "Americanizers" that immigrants and their children maintain loyalties that would make them likely to betray their adoptive country, "Americanizers" came up with five goals for battling these oppositions to "Americanization." First was to combat all anti-American tendencies, activities, and propaganda. Second was to work to educate immigrants in the principles of Americanism. Third was inculcate the ideals of Americanism in the citizen population that the interest of all the people is above those of any special interest or so-called class or section of the people. Forth was to spread throughout the people of the nation information as to the real nature and principles of American government. And fifth was to foster the teaching of Americanism in all schools.

If only there was the backbone to behave in this manner these days. Instead, the WASPs' decendants have gone over to the other side, having figured out they can still rule with smaller numbers, as the (smaller) ruling class in a socialist/statist system.

#34   Will 
Not that the 30 to 100 who did show up were necessarily against terrorism. Maybe they misunderstood what the protest was all about. From the article:

"Until then, however, there is the stark reality that very few Muslims did show up. And those who did held up “peace” and “anti-war” signs, not anti-terror or anti-Islamist signs.

#40   Will
The more I think about this "protest," it seems that most of the 30 to 100 who did show up might have been counter-protestors, with their anti-war and peace signs to protest the moderates. I wonder if any showed up to actually protest terrorism.

Hold on a minute, everybody: listen to Will. This entire protest is not what you're all assuming it was. It may have originally been intended to be an anti-terror rally, but the whole thing was hijacked by the Indymedia types and it turned into a standard anti-Bush/"anti-war" rally. It's par for the course for Muslims so show up at those kind of rallies. At the "anti-war" rallies I documented in San Francisco, a good 5%-10% of the attendees were Muslims. I think the message of the Arizona rally got sufficiently muddied that the few people that did show up were either curious onlookers, or "let's hijack this rally" LLL-types, or Muslims who thought they could earn some patriotism brownie points by going to a rally advertised as an anti-terror rally but who secretly were there to call for an end of the War on Terror. I.e. by carrying anti-war signs they were actually protesting for terrorism to be victorious. The Arizona Indymedia article on the event has these quotes:

"We do need to stop killing in the name of God," said Shirley Spencer of Phoenix, who attended the rally with her husband, Gene. "It hasn't gotten us anywhere so far."

Soul Khalsa, a Sikh minister, told the crowd that terrorists may still inflict damage in the future but "their day is fading."

"Those people who exploit religion for their own power and greed are a dying breed," Khalsa said. "They are the dinosaurs of this modern era."

Uhhh, that's a Christian [presumably] and a Sikh. No Muslim condemnation here. If you read the whole article, a grand total of TWO Muslims condemned terrorism. Two.

If anyone can find some photos from this event online, please post the link here so we can assess this rally accurately ourselves.

#42 Zogby poll of Muslims

30% would vote for Bush???? that's astounding. Maybe there is a passive bunch in there who aren't Bloodthirsty... let's hope.

If I knew who they were, I would write a personal note to each Muslim who showed and thank him or her from the bottom of my hard little heart.

[banging head against wall]

I want to believe that there is something redeemable here...

[bang...bang...]

I want to believe.

D. Edgren

I don't think anyone has posted this yet:

M. Zuhdi Jasser (bio page at AZCentral.com; you may have to answer three questions -- gender, ZIP code, year of birth -- for access)

Dr. Jasser sounds like someone who gets it.

-dg

That's one small step for a Muslim, one giant leap for Muslim-kind.

There is an organization, the American Islamic Congress, that has been speaking out on behalf of moderation and tolerance in Islam. Its founder, Zainab al-Suwaij, is a refugee from Iraq who has written articles in support of the American effort there. I have no idea how large they are - my guess is that unfortunately it is probably like the demonstration in Phoenix. But at least they are out there trying. Their web site is www.aicongress.org

Im reading Irshad Manji's book...wow
the honesty is amazing, eye popping

highly recommend

[Link: muslim-refusenik.com...]

#8 zulubaby

It is up to the moderate Muslims to make themselves heard.

What do you mean, the moderate Muslims should make themselves heard? She is heard - I mean how many rallies can one woman go to?

Sigh.

I have a feeling that we'll do much better promoting moderate Islam in the middle east than we will here.

Iranian kids are already much more friendly toward Israel and America than American Muslims are!

And that new American Satelite channel is trusted much more by Saudi Arabians than our media is trusted by American Muslims!

It's a problem. They come here, but they don't think of Americans as fully human because we're "infidels". They must be the first group of immigrants who refuse to become Americans, really.

When I write that I hear the standard Muslim spokesman in my head saying "you are completely unfair" - Muslims always say that about infidels. By definition, infidels have to be wrong and unfair and Muslims have to be right, 100% of the time. It's exhausting to listen to the constant rightiously indignant hot air.

Imigrants should be greatful to be here and want to fit in, otherwise they shouldn't come. If they don't trust us, don't like us, don't agree with our values or don't want to fully be one of us then they should stay away. Americans get to set the terms of what it means to be an American. Saudi Imams don't! Iranian Mullas don't. Palestinian terrorists don't! Muslims are unbelievably presumptuous if they think they can come here and tell US how to live and how to think.

#42

Zogby poll of Muslims 30% would vote for Bush???? that's astounding. Maybe there is a passive bunch in there who aren't Bloodthirsty... let's hope.

You sure that's muslims, and not Christian Arabs (aka "Arab-Americans," "Arabs"). I think sometimes people misunderstand the difference when they read those polling results.

Instead of saying only a handful of muslims are radicals, they should be telling the truth--only a handful are moderates. They are all going to vote Kerry who will support their terrorist agenda. Like I give a damn anymore what a muslim thinks of me. I can just see them, asses in the air, praying for brother Kerry to win.

I actually wonder about that. If you're a die hard Jihaadi, and you want to fight your victorious war against the Great Satan, would you need the Americans to continue on their current path? ie. more Bush?

If their plan was to split the EU and the US, good riddance. The can have Eurostan. Maybe then the US can go back to the way it used to be, before Europe's commies came over the pond.

The moderate Muslim is like Big Foot. Much fuss about it, many proofs of its existence, but impossible to sight.

[Link: www.islam-online.net...]
{Call For Incorporating Sharia Into International Law
CAIRO, April 30 (IslamOnline.net) – World Muslim scholars meeting in Cairo urged incorporation of Sharia into the International Law to avoid eruption of more crises or other forms of injustice. }
Now what am I missing here--a bloody and barbaric ideology believes itself to be the answer to world peace. Now would that mean we'd be closer to an islamic caliphate? Or does it mean that atrocities committed by muslims in Sudan, Nigeria, Israel, etc. would be condoned under sharia and if they became good dhimmi, there'd be peace? Have these guys ever read the koran?
Tolerance in Islamic Civilization--now that is reaching.

I wish all Muslims could be more like this guy. But most still are simply 7th century barbarians who think nothing of battening themselves down at the table of their infidel hosts before turning on him in the name of Allah!

#17 Proud Albertan, #19 General:

You both couldn't be more correct. The only solution, in my view, is to eliminate the Moslem presence from the civilized world. Else, they will continue to attempt to destroy us, by terror, by population, by any means. The "moderate" ones, like our good Zuhdi Jasser are on the losing side. Their best bet is to leave their filthy "religion" as soon as possible.

I fear that violent Muslims have passed the critical point where they control the forum.

Irshad Manji (see #65) says that extremists exist in all religions, but only in Islam are they the majority.

OT:
The movie about Osama is now available on the P2P networks. A review page giving the edonkey link is at:

shareconnector review

For those who have not explored P2P downloading, here is a page with good free software which has no popups or spyware embedded in it. Yes, there is also a Mac and Unix client available too.
[Link: www.overnet.com...]

This foreign movie is english dubbed. If you are into creating CDs from video, it seems to be at the PAL frame rate, so only the europeans might be interested in going that route. Otherwise, you only need a divx player to just show it on your computer monitor.

Big dog guy (#16) sez: "We are talking about fear, people. This is what radical Islam is all about. The intimidation is merely the sword point of intifada.
It gets worse after that. These people were being prudent, not apathetic. Until we can provide solid guarantees of safety against the evil that exists in their midst, they will never stand in unison to denounce terror.
It is primarily only those who are not immediately threatened by terror who are willing to take a public stand against it.
Somehow I can't envision Anne Frank standing in the street to denounce Nazism... "

But in the 1950s and 1960s, ordinary black Americans shook off the very real fear of the KKK and other terrorist organizations to protest, non-violently, so that they and their children could vote and participate in a non-segregated society. And some of them were murdered for this.

Surely you're not excusing fear as a valid reason not to do the right thing.

#64

Sorry about the screwed up URL, it is American Islamic Congress

#37 Model 4,

I was being unclear. I agree with you, second and third generation Muslims do seem to be more vulnerable to the jihad mongers. They seem to be innoculated against assimulation.

Yes, many first generation immigrants came to the West to escape the oppression of the umma.

We in the west--by that I mean we of a Judeo-Christian ethic--are guilty of projection in a big way. Even, of all places, here @ LGF.

We presume that Muslims--good ones, anyways, the ones we call "moderate"--have a live-and-let-live attitude because we do. We believe that faith is a personal thing between us and our god and that government should be a secular guarantor of religious freedom for all--and we expect Muslims, the good ones, to do the same. We see many Christians and Jews seeminlgly able to transcend the fundmentalism of their faith so that their ethic is more in line with secular society and we are suprised that Muslims aren't interested in doing the same.

The problem is that Muslims do not share the same ethos. What we would describe as a "moderate" Muslim, they would describe as an apostate. They believe that government should be informed, if not guided, by Islam. We value free agency and political freedom above all. They value virtue above all and are suspicious of political freedom as an avenue to decadence and licentiousness.

And who could blame them? I'm with dexter greeen (#48) when he says that much of American culture is immoral, at least that part that we project to the world through the arts, TV, movies and literature. I recently got fed up with the crap on cable TV and got rid it. Watching network TV again for the first time I was agahst at what is permitted to be broadcast. I got rid of the rabbit ears, too. I can well understand Muslim aversion to western culture and their desire to shield their childrens' exposure to it.

As a fundamentalist Christian, I am directed by scripture to live in the world but not be of the world. That means I can not isolate myself from my fellow man--I would then be unable to be of service to him or to share the gospel with him--but that I shall not take part in those aspects of our culture that are anithetical to my faith.

Even I, a flag waving Air Force brat, former consumer of copious amounts of mind altering substances and a one-time eager participant in the wanton nature of our society, don't participate in much of today's culture. I wouldn't expect a Muslim, who has no such directive to engage with infidels, to assimilate into American society. We should change our understanding of a "moderate" Muslim to mean one who will not make waves while others do "Allahs work".

Don't expect them to show up to any rally against terrorism because terrorism in the service of Islam's prime directive--world wide dar al Islam--is acceptable to them, even virtuous.

And I caution those who are dismissive of the Muslim threat or the ability of Islam to triumph over the west. Until I converted I had no idea either of the power of faith. We would do well not to underestimate the danger. There is a growing vacuum of faith in the west. Nature hates a vacuum; it will be filled with something.

Whew. Long post. Sometimes I just get on a roll.

I might add that we in the west are in just as much danger of being consumed by secularism and the attendant debasing of society than we are of Islam.

A government should be secular. A people should not. Our government has changed from one which refrained from endorsing a religion to one that discourages faith. That's a bad thing.