we need to pipe up in favor of his nomination.

I liked the question Krauthammer posed in the last sentence of this paragraph:

We are all supposed to pretend that we have equal suspicions of terrorist intent and thus must give equal scrutiny to a 70-year-old Irish nun, a 50-year-old Jewish seminarian, and a 30-year-old man from Saudi Arabia. Your daughter is on that plane: To whom do you want the security guards to give their attention?

Just so, as the Brits would say. Political correctness only works (so to speak) in the abstract--that is, when other people have to deal with the consequences of it. The answer often changes when it's personal (wait, you mean we have to have a day-laborer center next door?). I'm sure even Ted Kennedy knows, although he won't say, how he would answer Krauthammer's question.

I've been saying it all along: the War On Terror must be fought right here in the US by infiltrating the mosques and university Islamic Studies programs. These are the nerve centers of organization for "stateside" terror. Just think what we could have thwarted by catching on to that blind Muslim cleric in New Jersey in 1993.

put that in your pipe and smoke it.

The problem I have encountered trying to voice my support for Pipes is the utter lack of acknowledgement from that socialist bloodsucker Chris Dodd. I have made repeated calls and sent several emails to his office asking for his position and voicing my support for Pipes. Dodd does not respond. It is impossible to take these senators to task if they hide their positions.

In fact, I was told by Dodd's office that they would not disclose his position over the phone and that I should check his website. His website is useless and does not mention Pipes.

#5, Correct me if I am wrong, but back in the 70s or 80s, wasn't Chris Dodd one of those senators writing letters of apology to Daniel Ortega for U.S. support of the contras, and stating that in resisting the inevitable embrace of global Marxism, America was "on the wrong side of history?"

Anyway, this was from The Corner

HERE'S A TEST [Rod Dreher]

For liberals who can't discern a difference between Islamic fundamentalists and fundamentalist or otherwise conservative Christians, I propose a simple test. Imagine that you are boarding an airplane. You discover that the pilots are recent graduates of Bob Jones University. Do you proceed with boarding? Now suppose that you learn that the pilots are recent graduates of a Pakistani madrassah (Islamic school). Do you get on the plane now? Why or why not?

You'll notice that Krauthammer disagrees with the path the President is apparently taking. He suggests standing firm on the nomination and force the political correctness, over US National Security, to the forefront of discussion. I agree with this assertion.

Pipes is a scholar. If CAIR and MPAC have recruited Democratic Senators to pony the PC drivel then let it be said in an public forum before the Senate Committee. Let it be exposed that Democratic Senators are composed more of the the propagation of perceived correctness while failing the preservation of United States Security.

CAIR and MPAC have opposed almost every single policy of President Bush. They opposed Jay Garner and L. Paul Bremer in Iraq. They opposed Zhalmay Khalizad as the special envoy to Afghanistan. The real litmus test applied here by CAIR and MPAC is if one has visited Israel or one has relations with Israelis, then one is unfit to serve at the request of the President of the United States.

The motivations of CAIR and MPAC are to oppose the commander and cheif no matter what policy he puts forward unless they proposed it[profiling] first.

OT but very interesting, about the hijab headscarf worn by Muslim women:

THIS IS NOT ISLAM

In the United States, several Muslim women are suing airport-security firms for having violated their First Amendment rights by asking them to take off their hijab during routine searches of passengers.

All these and other cases are based on the claim that the controversial headgear is an essential part of the Muslim faith and that attempts at banning it constitute an attack on Islam.

That claim is totally false. The headgear in question has nothing to do with Islam as a religion. It is not sanctioned anywhere in the Koran, the fundamental text of Islam, or the hadith (traditions) attributed to the Prophet.

This headgear was invented in the early 1970s by Mussa Sadr, an Iranian mullah who had won the leadership of the Lebanese Shi'ite community.

In an interview in 1975 in Beirut, Sadr told this writer that the hijab he had invented was inspired by the headgear of Lebanese Catholic nuns, itself inspired by that of Christian women in classical Western paintings. (A casual visit to the Metropolitan Museum in New York, or the Louvres in Paris, would reveal the original of the neo-Islamist hijab in numerous paintings depicting Virgin Mary and other female figures from the Old and New Testament.)

Sadr's idea was that, by wearing the headgear, Shi'ite women would be clearly marked out, and thus spared sexual harassment, and rape, by Yasser Arafat's Palestinian gunmen who at the time controlled southern Lebanon.

"radical Islam lives within the bosom of moderate Islam"

It's true. It's obvious.

But organizations like CAIR do not want anybody to notice this. And anybody who has the nerve to notice it, and point it out to others, is libeled, defamed, and called a bigot or worse. The defamatory lies that they make up are atrocious. And that is what one gets for speaking the self-evident truth.

#6 - Yes Dodd is who you think. Hence my "bloodsucking socialist" comment

More evidence that the Democratic leadership is not prepared to defend this nation. Hell, they're not even interested in defending this nation, particularly the Hero of Chappaquidick. They seem to adhere to the maxim: the enemy of my enemy (Bush) is my friend, the friend (Pipes) of my enemy (Bush) is my enemy.

#8 freedomsound - Great link. I found this line especially interesting:

(In Senegal, Muslim women wear a colorful headgear against the sun, while working in the fields, but go topless.)

I support the immediate adoption of this custom by Muslim women worldwide. ;-P

It's a very obvious truth about the mosque thing. I know a local mosque which has been distributing really vile anti-semitic and anti-Western 'educational' material in Sunday classes for years. I wasn't able to get them investigated either (but thanks for reminding me).

Curiously, the Washington Post publishes Krauthammer, but then he is not reprinted in the International Herald Tribune.

"The general Islamic community is the place radicals can best disguise themselves and hide. Mosques are institutions that they can exploit to advance the cause. These are obvious truths."

Don't see those cells of radical methodists blowing people up, now do we?

Thank you for contacting me concerning Daniel Pipes' nomination for the U.S. Institute of Peace.

Daniel Pipes was nominated by President Bush to be a Member of the Board of Directors for the U.S. Institute of Peace on April 2, 2003. Before his nomination can be considered by the full Senate, it must be reported to the floor by the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. A committee hearing was held on his nomination on July 23, but no vote occurred.

Please know that I am aware of the controversy that has arisen concerning Daniel Pipes' nomination and allegations that he is anti-Muslim. However, I believe this criticism does Daniel Pipes an injustice. Many of his statements have been taken out of context. Daniel Pipes is not a critic of Islam generally, but rather of militant Islam ideology. He was an early voice in drawing attention to this threat to world peace and security.

I believe Daniel Pipes would bring a valuable perspective to the Board of the U.S. Institute of Peace. As the Taliban, Iranian Mullahs, and groups such as al-Qaeda and Hamas have proven, peace will not be achieved without addressing the destructive influence of militant Islam.

Thank you once again for taking the time to contact me. I value your input. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance to you.

Norm Coleman

United States Senator

I got this response yesterday to my recent email to both Minnesota Senators. Haven't heard from Mark Dayton.

OT-- Serious Looting Takes Place In Ottawa

Hmmm... I wonder if the museum is intact.

Way to go Norm!

I wrote to my Senator, Kay Bailey "Big Hair" Hutchinson several months back. Nada. Nothing so far.

Way way way OT

I have a question. Has Tommy Hilfiger made any anti-Israel/anti-Semitic statements?

I googled it, and came up with something from ADL, but I can't access the ADL webpage, none of the links google spit up at me would work.

Want to find your local 5th columnist? Just find your local minaret, he's there, just blending in. The perfect spot for a community vuecam is your local mosque.

Montaigne's Cat #14,

The NYT bought WaPo's share of the IHT.

Ariel,

Thanks. Guess I missed that.

Anyone who has read the Koran realizes that there is no such thing as "moderate" Islam.

#19:

I wrote to my Senator, Kay Bailey "Big Hair" Hutchinson several months back. Nada. Nothing so far.

I just received a letter from NJ Senator John Corzine regarding a matter I wrote to him about more than a year ago. You may still hear back!

#24:

Anyone who has read the Koran realizes that there is no such thing as "moderate" Islam.

That is the problem. To my knowledge, none of the other major religions have at their roots the call to deceit, terrorism, and world domination that Islam does. Islam has been a predator on the scene since its inception. I believe their continued existence in the world is incompatible with anything resembling normal life for the rest of us.

Its hard to believe that the left doesn't understand that what we see in Islam is similar in ideology to the Spanish Inquisition. The dissimilarity is that the message of Jesus wasn't one of murdering non-believers. in contrast, the Koran is replete with this imagery. So the case could be more easily made that in the case of the Catholics, the Inquisittion was an abberation in relation to the message of the faith wheras in Islam it is a requirement. Jihad, Inquisition whats the difference?

Its hard to believe that the left doesn't understand that what we see in Islam is similar in ideology to the Spanish Inquisition.

The Inquisition was more an example of "absolute power corrupting absolutely." Today's equivalent is Political Correctness and the tyranny of the Left, who have achieved near total control of academia, with their own witch hunts, suppression and punishment of "heresy", etc.

Stormi.

According to this site Hilfiger is a major investor in Israel
[Link: www.bethelohim.org...]

#26 captool

The Left lumps all religions together mainly because it believes in relative morality rather than absolute morality. Truth or the concept of right or wrong depend on the context. Killing your cousin for getting pregnant may seem wrong to us, but it's perfectly acceptable in Iran or Saudi Arabia. Relative morality doesn't allow us to judge them.

For those who have trouble accepting that there can be any type of absolute morality, consider this:

Let's say I'm a cannibal. I was raised a cannibal, all my friends and family are cannibals and so were all my ancestors. So how can anyone judge me? It's not my fault I was born a cannibal. But hey, don't get me wrong, I love being a cannibal. There's nothing better than getting together with the family and barbequing some "long pork" as we like to call it. I don't expect you to be a cannibal like me, so I'll live my lifestyle and you live yours.
The only problem with my arguement is this: I wouldn't be too happy if someone tried to eat me. No cannibal would. Deep down, despite all the rationalizations, cannibals know what they are doing is wrong. Absolutely.
This is one of the reasons why when the Left and anti-semites try to apply relative morality to the situation of Israel vs. the "Palistinians", there is always a double standard in operation.

OT
Saudi diplomat expelled from UK

A Saudi Arabian diplomat has been forced to leave Britain following allegations that he bribed a police officer.

A Saudi spreading around money to a government employee? That just doesn't sound right. Very out of character. Clearly a frame-up.

OT (again, sorry)

French Hurdle in Lockerbie Deal

France has indicated it will push for a settlement with Libya to equal that awarded to victims of the Lockerbie bombing this week. A French UTA airliner was blown up over Niger in 1989 with the loss of 170 lives. The compensation demand could mean Paris using its veto at the UN Security Council to stop the expected lifting of sanctions on Libya.

US officials privately told reporters in Washington that there was little sympathy for the French case at the UN.

"This is nothing but sour grapes," another told France's own AFP agency.

"We're getting a better deal and they're upset."

They're always upset.

Let the country see that for some of the most senior Democratic leaders, speaking the truth about Islamic radicalism is a disqualification for serious office.

That would be great if the media would report it - that is, accurately report it in full, and that would be a first. I wouldn't hold my breath.

#31 SoCalJustice

While I disagree with the methods employed by the French, I'm glad they are threatening a veto. No deals with Libya or Ghadaffi!

#31 SoCalJustice

This time France is right. Lybia settled for the Lockerbie bombing? Great. When Lybia settles for all the bombings they committed, then it'll be time to think about lifting sanctions. Maybe.

Newsflash - from FoxNews: Three sniper-style shootings reported in West Virginia

33 axiom/34 Mr Pol;

Good points.

Still, it's fun to point out French whining. ;-).

I remember not too long ago when I and a few of my friends were able to make a nationwide statement. I am lucky enough to live in the district that Cynthia McKinney represented. After the statements that she made attacking the President went public, I grabbed some people, let them know what she said, and we went down and registered people that had never registered to vote.

Needless to say, she never made it to the general election.

The question I have for everyone is, "What are you doing to effect the change you want in our government?"

I appreciate what Charles is doing with this site. It gives me a great starting point to discover what is going on in the world. But the comments really do leave a lot to be desired. Here is a great opportunity to meet like minded people and push agendas that really matter. Unfortunately, it ends up being a slap fight filled with snarky rhetoric.

So, what are you doing?

#36 SoCalJustice

Still, it's fun to point out French whining. ;-).

Good point.

OT: Gnarlyface Ahenakew is making a nuisance of himself again

Canada should pass a law forbidding people who are on trial for inciting hatred from speaking to the media.

A Man, What are you doing today? Some people have learned to lift their own loads. Some loads are too heavy to lift. Some loads you need to size up pretty good and see if they need lifting or raking.

39 Deathberg:

Again with the anti-Semitic Inuit?

What a bizarre man.

The people who study history say that the spanish inquisition killed 2,000 people in 300 years. Nevertheless the yihad in lebanon have killed 1 million christian people, turkey 1 million of armenian people.
In Saudi Arabia the catholic philipinos are suffering tortures from the police of this country.
We represent the tolerance, the democracy and the freedom. We win this war but as the communism many people, too many people die. Why? Because the Islam don´t want the freedom and the mercy.
Such believers in all christian denomations orthodox, catholic and protestant are suffering and will suffer this war. In addition the atheist and agnostic people is suffering and will suffer this.
I ask for to every american because the spanish can´t make much a petition for a economical embargo to the sponsors of terrorism like Saudi Arabia, Iran and other countries until they don´t money to terrorism and respect the liberty of religion such cult like proselitism.
Because without this especially in Saudi Arabia there isn´t easy solution

Ahenekew also hates Asians, mostly the Chinese.

IAF buzzes Bashar Assad!!

Looks like Bashar is getting yeller...

Well, gymnast, I'm trying to expand my horizons today.

I also feel compelled to decypher your non sequiter homily.

Some loads are too heavy to lift - unless you get help.

Some loads you need to size up pretty good and see if they need lifting or raking. Seems rather obvious to me.

But some loads are, well, just loads.

#34 Mr Pol

How about we apply the same standards to the PLO-Arabs in their getting their own state? Compensate all the victims of their terrorist acts before they get one. IF it works for the French, it should be the same for the Israelis. You wouldn't think France would apply a double standard???

AG in Houston:

Buzz Mecca!!!

#46 BIG

You wouldn't think France would apply a double standard???

Of course not. France has no standard.

#46 BIG: Wouldn't that be nice!
/dreamworld off

OT but news of another Presidential Appointment

The President intends to appoint the following individuals to be Members of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom:

Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, of Colorado, for a one-year term expiring May 14, 2004.

Khaled Abou El Fadl, of California, for a two-year term expiring May 14, 2005.

Richard D. Land, of Tennessee, for a one-year term expiring May 14, 2004.

Googled Khaled's name and saw that he seems to be very much one of the good guys:

Khaled Abou El Fadl

"I am lucky enough to live in the district that Cynthia McKinney represented."

Well I would hardly consider myself lucky in that case. ;) Jk, but luckily for you, she's now gone.

The hilarious thing is that the Green Party is desperately trying to recruit her into their party. How pathetic of a party do you have to be to suck up to Cynthia "bin" McKinney to join you? Better yet, why would you want her to join you?

I wish we had a Daniel Pipes in the UK, shining the light in dark corners.

OT
Palestinian Authority says it has intercepted $3 million intended for Islamic Jihad

So Iran is funding Islamic Jihad - no real news there. Now Arafat has even more money.

52 JohninLondon:

Someone did a decent job with Abu Hamza and the Finsbury Mosque.

#48 Mr Pol:

Of course not. France has no standard.

Dang, if I didn't know better, I'd think you were related to Caton somehow. ;-)

#50 DavidH

Thanks for posting that, it's a great article. It's people like Abou El Fadl who give me hope that all Muslims aren't doomed by their religion and shows that it's important to distinguish between jihadi and Muslims. It's fascinating to see how the process works that sucks young Muslims into fanaticism:

"It starts out with harmless enough piety," he says. "But on top of the usual insecurities of the teenage years, you live in a society where nothing around you seems to work, your family isn't powerful, you don't know what tomorrow will bring, and there's no social mobility."

Fundamentalist Islam offered the angry teenager a way out. It gave him a sense of belonging and superiority. He ardently embraced its stark theology and rigid morality. Though his family were observant Muslims, he destroyed his sister's music cassettes and bullied his parents, thinking them infidels

"It was just a remarkable high, an intoxicant in many ways, to be drunk on the power that comes from God," he told NRO in a phone interview from Los Angeles. "You go around aggressively worshiping yourself, shoving the law down everybody's throat. It's a utopian world, with you at the center of it. Every contradiction, every challenge becomes a serious problem to the utopian vision."

I think it's important to understand this psychology. His father sounds like he was good people too.
There's been a lot of discussion about reforming Islam. It sounds like he is legitimately trying to do that. I still think Islam is irreparably flawed, but I have to admire his courage in trying

52 JohninLondon (again):

But the U.K. could stand for someone repeatedly calling out the Mona Bakers, Sue Blackwells, and (more recently) Andrew Wilkies of the world.

#55 EW1(SG)

Dang, if I didn't know better, I'd think you were related to Caton somehow. ;-)

I am. One of his sisters married my brother.

OT again: Tad Hayworth weighs in on the Gibson controversy:

[Link: www.brokennewz.com...]

Dang, if I didn't know better, I'd think you were related to Caton somehow. ;-)

Oh that's beautiful. LOL!

DaveH #50

Yesterday's news. See comments ##124, 130, 165, 166 on this thread.

#50 -

You're right about El Fadl. Unfortunately the appointment of Bishop Chaput is apparently a reward for this column, where he implies that, if you happen to be of the opinion that judges should treat abortion as a matter of individual choice, you are, ipso facto, an anti-Catholic bigot. He also seems to think that a judge's ruling on the question as to whether a victim of rape can have an abortion is not a matter of his interpretation of the US Constitution, but of his "constitutionally protected religious rights".

Every time the Bush administration starts to win me over with their foreign policy, they do something to offend me with their social policy.

Back to Abu Hamza. I know the U.S. had Omar Abdel Rahman (the "Blind Cleric"), but Abu Hamza is a scary sight.

An imam with a hook?

SoCal

Hamza is a real charmer, ain't he ? He is currently fighting extradition - having fomented his bile in London for many years while sponging off the taxpayer.

#58 Mr Pol: Boy, its painful when you have to explain a joke.

#60 zulubaby: Glad SOMEBODY got it!

#65 EW1(SG)

its painful when you have to explain a joke.

But taking the fun out of a joke can be very funny.

SoCalJustice (#63),

BBC - The Lying News Organization.

From your link:

He is particularly distinctive because of his hook and his single eye, believed to be the results of his fighting with the mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union.

I swear I'm going to stop believing anything the BBC says anymore. There are pictures of Hamza 4 years after the Soviets left Afghanistan showing him with both his eyes and both his hands. To make him out to be a wounded freedom fighter and not the loser Islamic nutjob who blew himself up making bombs is completely disingenuous.

Abu Hamza - The Lying Cleric

I guess the way the BBC sees it is: there are two sides to every story, Hamza's and the truth. When you only present one of those it's usually a good thing to stick with the truth. Unless...

A little OT but...

"Liberal Studies

New College of California-- only in San Francisco -- will offer degrees in "activism and social change".Tuition runs $5,500 to $6,000 a semester for one weekend of classes per month, reports the San Francisco Chronicle. Instructors include tree-sitter Julia "Butterfly" Hill and "ecofeminist witch" and author Starhawk. There are no conservatives on the faculty, college officials conceded.

Students will study everything from anarchist theory to the civil rights movement. The master's program has a course on globalization, the hot topic in progressive circles.

"We want people to learn how they can be activist and not just someone who is angry and against the system," said Peter Gabel, president emeritus of New College, who plans to teach in the activist program. He is now director of the Institute for Spirituality and Politics.

For applicants a little light on the prerequisites -- a high school degree and at least 45 units of college credit -- New College will consider their "life experience." And no, school officials said, being arrested four times for blocking an intersection isn't what they mean. Admission officials want to see a portfolio of community work, not a rap sheet."

OT: Iraqis offer tips for enduring heat, blackout.

I find this link from CNN slightly disturbing.

67 Geepers:

Ok, so here's the tally:

1) fat

2) divorced (could happen to anyone)

3) one-eyed

4) one-handed

5) one-hooked

6) poor dental hygiene (just a guess, based on locale)

7) rabid anti-Semite

8) wishes to overthrow his own government

9) lying sack of Camel waste

Doesn't sound like he's fun at parties.

SoCal

Maybe he's great in the sack ?

#66 Mr Pol:

But taking the fun out of a joke can be very funny.

LOL! Any chance you used to burn up ants with a magnifying glass when you were a kid?

#69 help!: I'm not sure what's disturbing about the link, but the article is hilarious.

#72 EW1(SG)

LOL! Any chance you used to burn up ants with a magnifying glass when you were a kid?

Too slow. I used a homemade flamethrower.

#61 Ben F - Rats...

I sent mail to Charles at 9:09am hoping to get it online.
Nothing...

Then your comment comes in at 3:02pm

DaveH (who is giving myself a virtual hat-tip)

71 JohninLondon:

In his BBC Profile, the reporter apparently didn't question his his ex-wife, so we may never know, sadly.

#62 I disagree with the Bishop on many points, Catholics in general for that matter [conservative to moderate Protestant here :)], but the bishop was the only member of the Catholic clergy to publically or inside the American Catholic church to back up the Pryor nomination and the Senate Democrats religious litmus test on judical nominees.

The guy deserves something for trying to remind his own denomination that they might actually want to follow their own principals.

Also, as I remember, that point of that council is to bring prominent religious figures from across the country to discuss the issues of inter-faith communication. I think he would be a very good voice for Catholics on that type of council.

#56 Papijoe

You say:

There's been a lot of discussion about reforming Islam. It sounds like he is legitimately trying to do that. I still think Islam is irreparably flawed, but I have to admire his courage in trying

I think that any spiritual practice has it's dark corners where it's practitioners do not look too closely. The Christian Bible has it's share of philosophies and practices, especially the Old Testament.

#73 Mr Pol:

Too slow. I used a homemade flamethrower.

Then you'd probably like this gadget. With a little luck, I'll get to play with one this month. (OR, are you jealous yet?)

#62 bc

where he implies that, if you happen to be of the opinion that judges should treat abortion as a matter of individual choice, you are, ipso facto, an anti-Catholic bigot

It helps if you know what the argument is before forming an opinion. The bishop believes that your religious views should not be "a litmus test" as to whether a person is qualified to be appointed to a government position.

' The First Amendment, considered with the religious oath provision of Article VI, makes it impossible ''for government, state or federal, to restore the historically and constitutionally discredited policy of probing religious beliefs by test oaths or limiting public offices to persons who have, or perhaps more properly, profess to have, a belief in some particular kind of religious concept.'' 258 "

[Link: caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...]

OT, with the exception that it's also about the Truth.

STEALTH MULTILATERALISM?

...virtually no one in America knows that Italy has nearly 3,000 troops in Iraq including soldiers, marines and some 500 Carabinieri paramilitary police. Indeed, on July 15 the Italian army's mechanized Garibaldi Brigade assumed control of the entire Dhi Qar province (one of Iraq's 18).

Nor was it widely reported that Royal Dutch Marines this month replaced U.S. Marines at As Samawa. The Netherlanders, whose numbers will soon reach 1,100, will now administer the entire Al Mathanna province.

These forces may have gone largely unnoticed because they come under command of the British 3rd Division HQ at Basra in the south of Iraq. They are part of a 15,500-strong multinational division (the Multinational Division South East or MND-SE) that also includes an overstrength Danish infantry battalion (450 men) and a Romanian mechanized infantry battalion (attached to the Italian brigade at Dhi Qar) and military police company (520), plus forces of at least company strength from the Czech Republic (300), Norway (140) and Portugal (130).

Another multinational division, led by Poland (whose Special Forces played an important role in the capture of Um Kasr in March), is taking control of the whole South Central sector of Iraq, relieving the U.S. 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. The 31,000-square- mile sector includes the cities of Karbala and Nasiriyah.

Commanded by Gen. Andrzej Tyszkiewicz, who arrived with a 250-man advance guard in July, this division will be made up of three brigades, including detachments from Ukraine (1,640), Spain (1,300), Bulgaria (500), Romania, Latvia, Slovakia, and Lithuania (around 100 each). Poland's force will total 2,300. The Spanish will command one of the three Brigades, a predominantly Latin force supported by units from Honduras, the Dominion Republic and El Salvador.

How have all these allied commitments slipped beneath the media radar? It's hard not to suspect the widespread desire in many newsrooms to believe that an isolated Bush administration is losing a guerilla war in Iraq...

[Link: www.nypost.com...]

#76 Rev Jay

We're getting way OT here (my fault :-)), but my understanding is that the Democrats opposed Pryor because they thought his position on abortion goes against settled US law. The "religious litmus test" thing was an outrageous canard and a case of clever White House spinmeistership. Joshua Marshall had a pretty good post on this.

Of course, I wasn't trying to say Chaput shouldn't try to guide his congregants on religious matters, or that he's not qualified for that council. Just that the appt looks to me like a political payoff.

#79 rizzo -

Right. But they weren't basing their opposition on his religious views.

Pipes the Propagandist

Bush's nominee doesn't belong at the U.S. Institute for Peace.

By Christopher Hitchens
Slate
Monday, August 11, 2003

===

The timing of this blast at Pipes is interesting.

Hitch's most recent Vanity Fair column (Sep 03) takes aim at Edward "Orientalism" Said, Hitch's old comrade, describing the Columbia U prof as a tragically wasted talent who was blessed with rarest of talents and a unique opportunity to serve as an invaluable interpreter between Araby and the West, but who instead, and most regrettably, chose to run intercultural interference for the Arab/Islamic terror masters.

Notwithstanding Mr. Hitchen's scathing critique of Prof. Said's ideological orientation, Hitch still seems to retain a great fondness for the gentleman on a personal level.

It may be unfair to speculate, but on the principle of the "enemy of my enemy," Mr. Hitchens' taking the hatchet to Dr. Pipes also works, among other ways, as a thoughftul and public demonstration of his continuing warm regards for, and solidarity with, the professor, despite their now obvious and open disagreements.

I heard recently, Pipes has maintained that professor Edward Said of Columbia University is not really a Palestinian and never lost his family home in Jerusalem in the fighting of 1947-48. I have my own disagreements with Said, but this is a much-discredited libel that undermines the credibility of anybody circulating it.

[snip]

The objection to Pipes is not, in any case, strictly a political one. It is an objection to a person who confuses scholarship with propaganda and who pursues petty vendettas with scant regard for objectivity.

This may be an undiluted expression of Hitch's political views, without any intermixture of private "signaling" within the public message.

I would prefer to believe, however, that the tone of the Slate article was enhanced to send a personal message of sorts. It would be disappointing if indeed the column categorically reflects Hitch's deeply held views.

Actually, this piece by Marshall is a much better refutation of the "religious litmus test" charge than my link in #81.

O/T

Quotes from Iraq

[Link: www.whitehouse.gov...]

Start at the bottom.

ot
#84 bc

Actually, this piece by Marshall is a much better refutation of the "religious litmus test" charge than my link in #81.

This isn't a difficult controversy to understand. The Dems believe that a person who is nominated to be a judge cannot hold certain religious beliefs and still be impartial when it comes to enforcing laws. The Dems problem is that they're trying to use a "religious oath"( the religion of abortion on demand) as a belief that needs to be acknowledge before a person can become a government official. Marshall is just a Dem political hack so his opinion on the matter is up there with Paul Krugman and Maureen Dowd.

#86 rizzo -

So you're saying that if it's my religious belief that heroin is the path to enlightenment, and my record and statements in the public sphere indicate that, if I'm confirmed as a a federal judge, I'll act on those beliefs by reversing the convictions of drug traffickers, then you as a senator would have to confirm me because otherwise you'd be setting a religious test?

#87 bc

So you're saying that if it's my religious belief that heroin is the path to enlightenment, and my record and statements in the public sphere indicate that, if I'm confirmed as a a federal judge, I'll act on those beliefs by reversing the convictions of drug traffickers, then you as a senator would have to confirm me because otherwise you'd be setting a religious test?

The straw man fallacy is when you misrepresent someone else's position so that it can be attacked more easily, knock down that misrepresented position, then conclude that the original position has been demolished. It's a fallacy because it fails to deal with the actual arguments that have been made.

[Link: www.infidels.org...]

#24 smudge and #25 lmg: Since Daniel Pipes believes (according to Krauthammer) that "the solution to radical Islam lies in moderate Islam," and since you do not believe that such a thing exists, do you then oppose Dr. Pipes' nomination to the Institute for Peace because he is an Islamic appeaser?

Perhaps you can contact President Bush to suggest a more appropriate candidate with a "total" solution to the Islamic "problem." I would suggest fellow poster Ploome as a candidate...

#50 DaveH: Thank you for bringing forth information about Mr. El Fadl. He is living refutation of the Islamohatred and Islamophobia exhibited by many on this site.

#88 Rizzo

Great link! Thanks

I never realized how funny congress.org was: AMJ letter to Jonh Warner and George Allen.

Dear Sirs,
I recieved a very concerning email that says Pres. Bush will bypass Congress and appoint Daniel Pipes without using YOU! It seems to me that this president has put himself in position as; quite close to, a dictator with some of the policies and procedures he has enacted during his firt four years. I find it hard to believe that Congress will allow him to continue in this way. What has or will become of the checks and balances set up by our forefathers?

-- Email from American Muslims for Jerusalem

In the Name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful ...

90 Gordon:

He is living refutation of the Islamohatred and Islamophobia exhibited by many on this site.

Were he to write or speak in [insert Islamic country here] in the same manner he has in the U.S., he might not be such a "living" refutation.

Americans may not realize, says the law professor, that throughout the despotic Arab world, governments strictly control education, keeping students from ideas considered dangerous. And in those countries, undergraduates who choose science, engineering, or technical majors will never have even the slimmest opportunity to have their worldview challenged by the humanities.

"It's really naïve to think that all of this doesn't push people toward fundamentalism," he says.

And Gordon, you can't be happy about this next part:

Arab Muslim immigrants, even if they aren't fundamentalists, bring the habits of their authoritarian societies with them to America, he explains. This helps account for the failure of Muslims in America to speak out forcefully against the September 11 terrorist attacks.

link

Fadl and Pipes are basically on the same page.

#90 gordon

living refutation of the Islamohatred and Islamophobia exhibited by many on this site.

Um 9/11/01, USS Cole, the embassies in Africa, '93 WTC, Bali, JW Marriot, suicide bombers, the Great Satan, the Little Satan, the "charity" organizations, the bloke in London with two hooks, the housing projects in French suburbs, the Egytian in LA at the airport, the Taliban, Khobar Towers, The Bekka Valley, Kashmir, Mindano, the tourists in Algeria or Mali, Leon Klinghoffer, Lockerbie, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Pearl,
and other characters...

John #71,

Thanks alot. Yuck! The thought just about makes me ill. With those wonky eyes it would be next to impossible to know if he was staring deep and longingly onto ones eyes. The whole hook thing really throws me for a loop too. Then there is the beard that looks as if it could be wrung out and have the contents of it fill a tea cup. Shudder

On that note, time for a cocktail.

Gordon:

Thank you for bringing forth information about Mr. El Fadl. He is living refutation of the Islamohatred and Islamophobia exhibited by many on this site.

I'm glad to hear that you support President Bush's wise choice of Professor Abou El Fadl to the Religious Freedom Committee.

I'm sure your support will not waver when CAIR (and the idiot left me-too Chorus of Islamic Fascist Sympathizers) denounce Professor Abou El Fadl's nomination.

Rayra,

What is wrong with objecting authoritarinism?

#97: Glen, I support both Dr. Pipes and Mr. El Fadl in their nominations. They are excellent choices. The CAIR denunciations are evidence that they are uniquely qualified to serve in their appointed positions.

By the way, do you agree with Pipes that "the solution to the problem of radical Islam lies within moderate Islam," and that Mr. El Fadl represents moderate Islam?

#99 Gordo

By the way, do you agree with Pipes that "the solution to the problem of radical Islam lies within moderate Islam,"

It helps if the Arab world isn't a one party state contolled by the Saudis.

#17 Jack Murray

Interesting that the AP is now reporting that Chretien is making nice again about the blackout. (Fears of looting in Quebec, maybe?) The link is here:[Link: www.phillyburbs.com...]

I'm back!

The long dark cable-less night is over in NYC.

#90 Gordo,

Don't you just love it when an exception like El Fadl leaps to the fore so you can take his position out of the mainstream context and wave a bloody shirt at rationalists who give you regular come-to-Jesus ass-whuppings?

By the way, here's his whiny take on being profiled - not very proud of his watchful and moderate fellow Americans here, is he?

We belong on this plane and on our seat, you don’t. You’re here because we allow you to be here. It’s as if it’s a privilege. You’re different, it’s a privilege that you are allowed on this plane. And when I started wearing suits and ties consistently, regardless of how long or short the flight is, I’ve noticed that the treatment has gotten better. But it’s always anxiety producing, not just for the normal security concerns, but because it’s an unknown sum. You just don’t know whether you’re going to run into someone who’s going to say something rude, something hurtful, whether you’re going to sit next to someone who asks to change seats, which has happened to me, because they don’t feel comfortable sitting next to you. Every time you pick up something from your travel bag, or you take out a magazine, or take out a book, they look like they’re going to have a heart attack. Or constantly staring at you. It’s just, it’s an extremely anxiety producing experience and the irony of it is that if, God forbid, there is a terrorist attack, and I am on a plane, I’m just like everyone else, I die just like everyone else.

It's a reasonable screed, but it sort of belies his previous comments here (regarding 9/11):

My reaction very soon after it happened was anguished hope that Muslims were not involved in this. And actually I remember very distinctly sort of a degree of feeling ashamed about having that hope, because you would like to respond to something like this at a human and universal level.

#88 rizzo -

Well! Wouldn't want to commit the straw man fallacy!

So you're saying that if it's my religious belief that affirmative action is the path to a better society, and my record and statements in the public sphere indicate that, if I'm confirmed as a a federal judge, I'll act on those beliefs by supporting affirmative action plans of all kinds, then you as a senator would have to confirm me because otherwise you'd be setting a religious test?

By the way, do you agree with Pipes that "the solution to the problem of radical Islam lies within moderate Islam," and that Mr. El Fadl represents moderate Islam?

Yes.

But I am also aware that today's mainstream Islam ain't it.

OT (or is it?) but with lots of joke potential:
Al-Reuters battles employee drunkenness
When you're in the propaganda business and your clients are violent jihadis, this could obviously become a problem.

Excellent article in Front page. Muslims don't hate Americans and Jews because of policy---they hate Jews and Americans because it is a pre-requisite of their religion--cult, I should say. It started with the pedophile, Mohammed, the delusional dirt bag.
[Link: www.frontpagemagazine.com...]

Boy, would I like to be a fly on a drape in a Mosque. My guess is the collective jaw of Americans would drop if they only knew the kind of evil that spews forth in Mosques around the country. I've got a question. Would the members of a Mosque have a problem being situated between a Temple and a Church?

By appointing Pipes in an under the table way you go along with the notion that Pipes is an undesirable person., a bigot, lying about Islam..It DOES send that message. He should have stood by Pipes.

Another thing Im noticing lately. Are Jews going to be hired or appointed ONLY when there is a Moslem to be given a smiliar post? Is that where we are headed? If so..wave goodby ultimately to Jews in the US.

We dont want social "games" to LIMIT our Opportunities and our ability to contribute. Thought we got rid of that long time ago... We get and keep our positions on MERIT..We study HARD and prepare from the earliest times of our lives to enter all the fields. Now..we are to obtain our jobs to balance out some kind of new silent Politically Correct Quota? So What is it going to be..cant hire a Jew to be your Surgical Resident.. cause we already have one? New kind of "counting of Jews?"...Geeze..here we go again.

#102 Gryphon--

The passage you quote does not strike me as in any way whiny or objectionable. One can support profiling on an intellectual level and still find it very upsetting emotionally to be viewed with suspicion by others just because of one's looks or dress.

Imagine yourself as a black teenaged male, who can't help noticing that when white folks see you walking on the sidewalk they tense up, or start walking faster, or look around, or show other evidence of fear. Imagine being judged by your appearance, judged with suspicion, constantly, even if nobody ever accosts you or confronts you with a harsh word.

These are very human experiences, and a legitimate topic for discussion, IMO.

I'm back from vacation and came home to a power blackout!

The thing that bothers me is that the oposition in the Senate is bering done by liberals such as Ted Kennedy, yet Jews in America are automatic Democrats.

#106 Kat--

There seems to be something wrong with that article; part of it is a petition or report to a U.N. body and there are no transitions. I find it a little off-putting that Littman cites the work of "historian Bat Ye'or" without mentioning that she is his wife, but again maybe that is because this article has been adapted from some other document.

In any event, your comment twists Littman's argument; he is criticizing Islamists and like-minded ulemas and mullahs, not Muslims generally.

#110 Ben F.

Imagine yourself as a black teenaged male, who can't help noticing that when white folks see you walking on the sidewalk they tense up, or start walking faster, or look around, or show other evidence of fear. Imagine being judged by your appearance, judged with suspicion, constantly, even if nobody ever accosts you or confronts you with a harsh word.

Imagine yourself as a women who is "white", asian,arabic, african. The menancing thud of rap music all around you. The lyrics proclaiming that you are a "white", asian, arabic, african and nothing more than a bitch or a whore. You just might give the black teenagers a wide berth in navigating them. If you are going to act like an a**hat expect to be treated like an a**hat.

Rayra,

Besides a rather cavalier approach to the use of capitals, your 107 made no sense at all.

As for referring to me as an Anarchist, how assinine. Unless, of course, by your usage of the personal pronoun you, you actually mean the indefinite pronoun one.

Ben, tell me the difference between a muslim who kills Jews and a mullah or ulema, who tells the stupid muslim to kill Jews. Do you know of any muslims who like Jews or Christians--or anyone non-muslim? I don't. They jate Jews, Atheists, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus--you name it, they kill it. Pipes is just finally pointing out how sick this religion is. Thank God for Pipes. May he live long.

#99 Gordon
Glad you support the nominations of Dr. Pipes and Prof. El Fadl. I agree with those nominations.

Pipes has presented a plan for having the US allied with moderate pro-US Muslims, to turn the tables within the ummah on militant Muslims -- or at least to do what is possible in containing their rise.

"When it comes to Islam, the US role is less to offer its own views than to help those Muslims with compatible views, especially on such issues as relations with non-Muslims, modernization, and the rights of women and minorities. This means helping moderates get their ideas out on US-funded radio stations such as the newly created Radio Free Afghanistan and, as Paula Dobriansky, the undersecretary of state for global affairs, has suggested, making sure that tolerant Islamic figures -- scholars, imams, and others -- are included in US-funded academic and cultural exchange programs." -- Pipes in last chapter of Militant Islam Reaches America.

Prof. El Fadl, I suspect, is one of those who does have compatible views on those issues: relations with non-Muslims, modernization, and the rights of women and minorities. Certainly he has been outspoken in saying that he is opposed to the fundamentalist version of Islam. That is what got him in trouble with the Wahhabi-funded militant Islamists. And he has proposed that there be subsidizing of books written by moderate Muslims to make them affordable to Muslims throughout the world. Perhaps the USIP, with Pipes on board, would be supportive of that.

There is a war for the soul of the ummah. And the president is right in not abandoning the field to the militant Islamists (like CAIR, and its sister organizations that are also Wahhabi-funded). The president should appoint Pipes to the USIP, and El Fadl to the USCIRF.

#115 Kat--

I have a co-worker, Andrew, who is a Muslim. A devout, practicing, prays five times a day and fasts during Ramadan Muslim. He has made the Hajj. My office is majority Christian with a good number of Jews. He is on good terms with all of us. He does not behave in any way like the people described on Wahabbi websites that spout garbage like "never greet a kufr or acknowledge Christian or national holidays."

Andrew was very much involved in assisting one of my partners, recently deceased, a Jew, during his struggle with Parkinsons. The person with whom Andrew works most closely is a lesbian.

Andrew is as fine a person as any that I know, and I am proud to have him as a colleague.

BTW, Dr. Pipes has many Muslim colleagues and supporters. So please do not associate him with bigotry.

Hate the haters if you will. But do not lump all Muslims into that category.

OT

It doesn't seem a good idea to take vacations in France these days. Times headline "French left tourist to die alone"

[Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...]

#117 Ben F.

have a co-worker, Andrew, who is a Muslim.

That is a problem when your identity is related to your group. Your friend Andrew is good person because he is a good person not because he is a Muslim.

#118 JohninLondon
Shit! My sister and her family are in Brittany right now!

Then you tell your friend I want to hear him to speak against the worldwide atrocities muslims are committing as we speak. I want to hear him as loudly as I hear those so called moderate fucks in CAIR, AMC, and all these damned muslim organizations who paid with Saudi money, for the anti-war rallies--the ones which condoned Jew killing. The ones who prayed for a 1000 Mogidishus. The ones who scream blue murder when a terrorist is arrested but sit quietly whjen muslims kill thousands. How many people die monthly at the hands of muslims. In my opinion islamism should be outlawed--the UN should outlaw it. So should muslims--but secretly muslims desire a world under allah and want me dead because I'd choose death believing in Jesus over islam--to me it is a fate worse than death. Allah is not my god--it is a serious misrepresentation of any moral or legal ideal to hold that one who commits murder, rape or robbery is a good person, and therefore entitled to a great reward. Muslims reward murderers--they name camps after suiciders.
No Muslim likes to be subjected to such atrocities himself, he feels a tremendous sense of pride, piety and probity when he practises these brutalities on non-Muslims as jehad in the name of Allah, who promises the highest prize i.e. paradise, for such heinous acts against humanity. Can crime be justified in the name of God? And how can a crime-loving God be respected or worshipped? The God who feels tickled when humans are tortured to glorify Him, is not Divine. I can't respect people who cheer the deaths of innocents and I have less respect for those who pretend to be moderate--and DO NOTHING.

#121 kat

Then you tell your friend I want to hear him to speak

Take a deep breath. Now take another and see #119.

rizzo,
I saved those links! They were great!

#90 Gordon
"He is living refutation of the Islamohatred and Islamophobia exhibited by many on this site."

Okay, so there is one prominent Muslim voice in the United States not spewing Islamist hatred and murder. I have been asking to see evidence of the alleged majority of peaceful Muslims and it is indeed encouraging that at least one such exists. The question is, why aren't there more. Why is the Muslim community so silent about their murderous coreligionists, and so prickly about the attention said coreligionists have visited upon them. If they're as true red white and blue as CAIR says they are, they should have been fucking rallying in the streets against al Qaeda, as soon as they were done turning in all the sleeper terrorists among them.

A truly peaceful religion would not brook a murderous fascist movement in its breast for even one moment. I know nobody thinks this example is that funny, but I insist it is a useful countermodel and contains a serious point: If the spiritual head of Anglicanism, the Archbishop of Canterbury were to call for the slaughter of all Muslims, the worldwide Anglican community would arise in a immediate and deafening uproar of public denunciations, and an instant schism would occur.

Every Friday, murder emits from the state run mosques at Islam's two holiest places, and we get a few isolated and beleaguered voices raised in protest.

This is wrong.

Grrr.

#124 rebmiami--

You're right, it is wrong.

#119 rizzo--

Unless you know Andrew, I do not see how you could possibly say this.

Despite the best efforts of the Saudis and of the Iranian mullahs, not every Islamic school and mosque in the world teaches hate. And not every Muslim draws hatred from Islam.

Condemning the entire religion only builds the strength of the extremists by alienating more and more of the Muslim community.

Think Magneto.

I think the concern about "condemning the entire religion" might generate some more response when and if it continued in the face of a public presence that actually existed in response to this question -124-fromrebmiami

"Why is the Muslim community so silent about their murderous coreligionists, and so prickly about the attention said coreligionists have visited upon them?"

or this -#121 from Kat

Then you tell your friend I want to hear him to speak against the worldwide atrocities muslims are committing as we speak. I want to hear him as loudly as I hear those so called moderate fucks in CAIR, AMC, and all these damned muslim organizations who paid with Saudi money, for the anti-war rallies--the ones which condoned Jew killing. The ones who prayed for a 1000 Mogidishus. The ones who scream blue murder when a terrorist is arrested but sit quietly whjen muslims kill thousands.

It would also generate more concern if people like Kat and rebmiami were actually forming organizations to indoctrinate hatred against all Muslims, cranking out forged doctrines of the elders of Arabia, running nursery schools where 3 and four year olds were taught to hate and grow up to kill a Muslim for God, and advocating that all Muslims ( and anybody else who happened to be nearbye) be blown up at any possible occasion.

Can I safely assume you two aren't thus engaged?

If not, lets save the moral equivalencies for things that are actually morally equivalent and actually occur in real life.

If I wanted to hear the moral equivalency mush I would go back to anyone of the mainline denomination's websites and I could read moral mush all day long. All the fine national leaders of mainline churchland "oppose all violence", all prejudice, and are staunch supporters of "peace".

#125 ben f**khead

Unless you know Andrew, I do not see how you could possibly say this.

Your friend Andrew is good person because he is a good person not because he is a Muslim.

For too many years we have bought this moderate muslim crap. I have news for you, the only moderate muslim is an ex-muslim or a non-practising muslims. I will always view every muslim as a possible terrorist--it is their job to prove me wrong. Muslims seek to destroy North America and convert it to a muslim sewer. They make no bones about it--that fat glob of glue Ibrahim Hooper has said it and they preach it in their mosques. They tell American muslims it is their duty to kill us. "Upon hearing an immigrant Islamist speaker instruct an audience of Muslims that they were "obligated to desire, and when possible to participate in, the overthrow of any non-Islamic government--anywhere in the world--in order to replace it by an Islamic one," one American-born convert remembers protesting in dismay that this would involve people like himself in political treason. "Yes, that's true," was the lecturer's blithe response (Jeffrey Lang, Even Angels Ask: A Journey to Islam in America, 1997).
Well, screw them.

Ben--all the people who knew the 911 murdering suicide creeps said they were friendly and helpful and just seemed like ordinaruy guys. they partied and drank and fit in. They even dated American girls--they can not appear 'muslim'--like a rattler waiting to strike they play a vicious game. The Buffalo 7 were described as perfect teens.

El Fadl and Andrew from post #115 are the ten percent that ruin Islamofacsim for everyone.
Their like the good old fashioned honeybees that don't sting. When your use to the bees buzzing around them african killer bees come in to catch you unaware . Worse yet, the africanized bees kill off all the honeybees. Yep this analogy is better then I thought.

atrocities muslims are committing

The ones who prayed for a 1000 Mogidishus.

Unfortunatly, that would be our own Columbia Prof. Nick DeGenova

See LGF thread here

Muslims and leftist profs are similar--hate America and friends of terrorists.

#78 EW1(SG)

Then you'd probably like this gadget. With a little luck, I'll get to play with one this month. (OR, are you jealous yet?)

Nice, but not my kind of toy. Impossible to conceal, and useless in close quarters.

can you imagine if a major American newspaper carried a story about Muslims using Jewish or Christian blood to bake pastries.?

and no one said anything?

No, but I can imagine major American newspapers and the newletters of every mainline American denomination printing stories about them using Jewish blood to make "jihad", and suggesting that we need to "understand" how we made them do it.

We are involved in politically correct terrorism. Politically correct assholes are reluctant to define the enemy. It has become politically incorrect to describe the Islamic terrorists who have killed thousands as "Islamic terrorists." The muslims I fear most are those nice guys who pretend to be something they are not-- moderate muslims.

Is the real threat Islamic radicalism or Islamic liberalism?

 
 By Lee Jay Walker  Dip BA MA
 
It is often perceived that Islamic radicalism is the real threat and not Islamic liberalism, yet how true is this?  For history teaches that Islam not only conquered by the sword, but alsovia liberals who preached a different Islam in order to convert the masses.  Yet irrespective if former nations were either conquered by the sword, or via Sufi mystics or liberal versions of Islam, the outcome was normally the same and this applies to gradual Islamization of society which eventually leads to Islamic conservatism and oppression.
 
Today the sword of Islam is still forcing non-Muslims to convert in nations like Sudan and Indonesia, and in Sudan many African Christians and Animists are still being sold into slavery.  Yet in the West, and the world in general, it is clear that Islamization must apply to two simple strategies, and this applies to massive Islamic migration and having large families; whilst the second strategy applies to Islamic liberalism, and this applies to manipulating world leaders and institutions.
 
For example in the United Kingdom the current Prime Minister, Tony Blair, often praises the beauty of Islam and that he often reads the Koran.  And similar major figures like Prince Charles glorify Islam and he supports Islamic organizations in the United Kingdom.  At the same time the mass media ignores major issues like forced conversion, Islamic Sharia Law which discriminates against both women and non-Muslims; and nations like Saudi Arabia who kill all male converts to any other faith are free to spread their propaganda and build Islamic institutions throughout the West.
 
At the same time Islamic leaders at major institutions are spreading a liberal version of Islam and if you didn't know about the "real" Mohammed, you would believe that Mohammed was gentle, loved humanity, treated women with respect and that he was a forerunner of global human rights.  Yet the "real" Mohammed made it clear that the enslavement of non-Muslims and war was justifiable in order to spread Islam.  Mohammed also made it clear that male Islamic apostates must be killed and he made sure that non-Muslims were inferior in law and had to pay extra taxes.
 
Therefore, while Islamic militants are a threat with regards to Islamic terrorism and persecuting non-Muslims in nations like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan and countless other mainly Islamic nations; this does not apply to the whole picture.  For in Western Europe, North America, East Asia, and other parts of the world, Islam can not conquer by the sword, yet the message of Islam and Islamization can take place via mass migration and liberal Muslims spreading an enlightened version of Islam, which does not apply in the real "Islamic world."
 
Given this, the real threat of Islamization is not via people like Osama Bin Laden, but the university lecturer who is spreading liberal Islam and Western liberals like Karen Armstrong who are teaching an alternative history of Islam and the teachings of Mohammed.  For the spread of Islam is growing in nations like the United Kingdom and at least 50,000 people have converted to Islam.  Yet why did they convert?  Was it because of people like Osama Bin Laden or because of people like Karen Armstrong and Islamic liberals?
 
It is also baffling that religious leaders in the West are also quiet about the threat of Islam or the persecution of non-Muslims in mainly Islamic nations.  And when brave religious leaders rebuke Islam, Sharia Law and the Hadiths, they in turn become rebuked by their own co-religionists, why?  For surely religious leaders have a duty to tell the truth and to warn their co-religionists about Islamic persecution in mainly Muslim nations.  However, their silence is helping Islam to grow and would 50,000 British nationals convert to Islam if they knew that Mohammed had slaves, had sex with a child, killed Jews and Pagans, raped a Jewish lady and had countless wives and concubines?
 
The irony is that Osama Bin Laden is a "real" Muslim who follows the teachings of Islam; and even if you hate this person, he at least follows his convictions which have been installed into him from reading the Koran, Hadiths and Sharia Law.  Yet Islamic liberals, like Sufi teachers, are hypocrites and they are the real threat.  For once the liberal period of Islam manages to Islamize society, then only one conclusion will happen, and this applies to a future society being backward and based on Sharia Islamic Law.
 
In the past the Islamization of many nations took place slowly and Sufi leaders talked about the love of God, yet this love of God in time became replaced by conservative Islam and non-Muslims were subdued to either being a small minority, or in the case of Buddhism in Afghanistan, then being wiped from the face of Afghanistan.  Given this, then who is the real threat, is it Osama Bin Laden or Islamic liberals who are re-writing Islam?
 

#136 kat

excellent...do you have a link?

#125 Ben F

"Condemning the entire religion only builds the strength of the extremists by alienating more and more of the Muslim community."

Ben, I have passed caring whether I alienate more and more of the Muslim community.

I consider Islam a far greater threat to the world than Nazism ever was. As such, I consider the term "moderate muslim" in the same way that I consider the term "moderate nazi".

People called Ben are dead in the future Muslim world and people called Andrew will not lift a finger to save Ben when the "extreme muslims" knock on Ben's door.

And Ben, Andrew will be called Abdullah when they come to call.

139 youcancallmemeyer

you are right

#8 freedomsound

From your link:

In 1981, Abol-Hassan Bani-Sadr, the first president of the Islamic Republic, announced that "scientific research had shown that women's hair emitted rays that drove men insane."

After that, what else can one say?

about this Muslim preacher from Britain with a hook ,
Looks like he met Islamic Justice first hand

> pardon the pun.

Did they ever mention how he lost his hand?

JeffS

is that why all the men I have dated were nuts?

Ben the human doormat:

Who gives a rat's ass if muslims are alienated? They can go to hell and take useful idiots like you with them.

You have been posting here for quite some time. Have you ever taken the half-hour that it would take you to read the "Book of Jihad" in the Bukhari Hadith? You lack the dignity to test your crackpot indulgence of islamaniacs, with any measure of scrutiny. Your brain is nothing but a dogma regurgitation factory. Your ideas are the equivalent of unflushed sewage, with the exception that at least human waste is usable as fertilizer.

#125 Ben F

Condemning the entire religion only builds the strength of the extremists by alienating more and more of the Muslim community.

The extremists are hiding inside the Muslim community. Only the Muslim community can tell the extremists apart and root them out. If non-Muslims have to do it, expect massive collateral damage.

As long as the Muslim community is not doing anything to root out its extremists and keep protecting and hiding them, they deserve to be condemned as a whole. They will also deserve any harm that falls onto them when non-Muslims attept to root out the extremists.

It's their problem, and they aren't tackling it.

Said he was clearing landmines in afghanistan.
Ya right . Hook on you right screams muslim Ex-con as loudly as a teardrop tatoo on some one from san quentin. Whats the real story ?

#145 Mr. Pol--

In Israel / Palestine, I agree with you 100%.

In the USofA, I don't know that we are in a position yet to accuse Muslim communities of harboring large numbers of murderers and traitors in their midst. I do worry about what is taught in some of their schools, though.

===

And to a few folks I don't care to name, you are turning LGF into a hate site by spouting things that are no less horrible than the rantings of Islamist fanatics. Why don't you stop flinging insults at me and go write your Senators to oppose the Pipes nomination because, deluded soul that he is, he believes in the "moderate Muslim" nonsense that you have so wisely seen through.

Ben F (#147)

In Israel / Palestine, I agree with you 100%

Since when???

#147 Ben F

1/ There is no such thing as "Palestine"

2/ The problem is the same in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, France, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Canada, Italy, ... and the U.S. of A.

3/ Show me one Muslim (not an apostate) that is doing something to root out the extremists from the Muslim community, and I'll believe in the mythical moderate Muslim. Until then, I'll file "moderate Muslim" under "PC bullshit", where it belongs.

## 148/149

There has been such a thing as Palestine for quite some time. According to my Constitutional Law professor, the late lamented Gene Rostow, the Mandate still governs the portions of Palestine that are not now Israel, and supplies a clear legal basis for the right of Jews to settle anywhere in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza.

#113 rizzo

If you are going to act like an a**hat expect to be treated like an a**hat.

I believe you just uttered the new Golden Rule...

LOL

Ben F (#150)

"Israel / Palestine" is loaded, and you know it. Quite frankly, I'm disappointed.

#125

Condemning the entire religion only builds the strength of the extremists by alienating more and more of the Muslim community.

I believe that Muslims alienate themselves. It's a mandate of their religion. Unlike Christianity, which also taught to "come out from among them", Islam does not teach its practitioners to love the infidel/kaffir/apostate.
Quite the opposite.

I believe your friend Andrew is a good person in spite of his religion, just as there were Nazis who were "good people" in spite of their affiliation (sp?).
Just as the "nice Nazis" didn't absolve the Nazi party of its basic, rotten, evil, core, being a "nice" Muslim does not absolve Islam of the same.
Hundreds of millions of "nice" people are enslaved by this evil ideology, and follow it with righteous fervor, just as millions were enslaved by Islam's ideological cousin, Communism.

I don't want Muslims to die.
I want Islam to die.
Whether you choose to believe that or not is not my call.
What I do know is this: when the core of an ideology/religion/belief system/society is as rotten as is the core of Islam, there is no saving it.
Go here for enlightening information from ex-Muslims who know the religion inside out.
This site opened my eyes and hardened my heart toward Islam.
It also softened my heart toward the victims of Islam.
I hope it will offer you some background and illuminate the dark corners of a religion that are purposely hidden for it's advancement.

#150 Ben F

The Palestine Mandate ended in 1948. "Palestine" then went the way of the Roman Empire, which existed for quite some time, too. Nonetheless, there is no Roman Empire, and no "Palestine".

Mr. Pol--

Eugene Victor Debs Rostow was not only the dean of Yale Law School for over a decade, but also served high up in the State Department when UN SC Res. 242 was being negotiated. Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has approvingly cited Dean Rostow's conclusion that the Mandate's authorization of Jewish settlement throughout Mandatory Palestine was never terminated.

I should discount his opinion in favor of yours because . . . ?

And if the Mandate ended in Yesha in 1948, did Jordanian law apply thereafter? Because no other alternative springs readily to mind, and I think that you and I can agree that the settlements are illegal under Jordanian law.

zulubaby--Do you know any non-loaded terms for the geographic region administered by the UK under the Palestine Mandate following the severance of Transjordam?

#153 Celissa--

Why don't you surf to a few ex-Christian websites and see if you think that they fairly portray your religion? If you are of a different faith, please accept my apologies, make the appropriate adjustment to my suggestion, and proceed.

Speaking for myself, I have yet to encounter an ex-Jewish website that contains what I would consider a fair presentation of Judaism. They may be very useful to non-Jews in understanding Judaism because they raise issues that are well worth discussing with knowledgeable Jews. But anyone would be ill-advised to look to sites such as these for answers, rather than looking to them for questions.

Please don't misunderstand me; I fully understand that there are huge problems with a great number of teachings and doctrines that are espoused by many Muslim leaders and organizations. But there are other Muslims who reject such teachings and doctrines. I do not understand why so many who post here insist that the latter group is either ignorant, or insincere, or wrong, or nonexistent.

Ben F #156:

Why don't you surf to a few ex-Christian websites and see if you think that they fairly portray your religion? If you are of a different faith, please accept my apologies, make the appropriate adjustment to my suggestion, and proceed.

Just for the record, I'm agnostic, but raised Baptist.

Please don't misunderstand me; I fully understand that there are huge problems with a great number of teachings and doctrines that are espoused by many Muslim leaders and organizations.

The real problem is not just what is "espoused by many Muslim leaders and organizations", but by the core tenets of Islam itself.
While you may find Faith Freedom "unfair", nothing that they publish is untrue. History, current events, and eyewitness accounts bear the webmaster and his colleagues out.
A thorough reading of the Qur'an and the Hadith and Sunna will reveal the absolute despotism, barbarism, and selfish disdain for the well-being of others displayed by Islam's most revered icon, Muhammad.
I also think that it is very easy for a Westerner to overlook the practice of abrogation that so conveniently permeates the Qur'an and Islam.
One last thing, those raised as Christian or in Western countries find it difficult to accept that a religion--which we associate with kindness, enlightenment, self-improvement, honesty, and spiritual discovery--could be so rife with deception and double standards. It is quite easy to forget while reading cuddly verses about "killing one man is like killing all mankind" (paraphrase), that different rules apply to those outside the Ummah, outside Dar al Islam, the abode of Islam.
That would be us. Westerners, infidels, kaffir, and apostates. We inhabit Dar al Harb, or the abode of war where lies, murder, torture, rape, duplicitousness, and even denial of one's faith is considered fair--is in fact sanctioned and presented as a religious duty--if it furthers the cause of Islamic domination.
I'm not going to waste any more of Charles' precious bandwidth on this, I'll just say that there are numerous books on these subjects, numerous websites, etc. that can tell you so much more than I.

But there are other Muslims who reject such teachings and doctrines. I do not understand why so many who post here insist that the latter group is either ignorant, or insincere, or wrong, or nonexistent.

It may come off as insisting "that the latter group is either ignorant, or insincere, or wrong, or nonexistent", but it is hard to convey the status of "Westernized Muslims" and apostates in gentle terms.
"Westernized" or "moderate" Muslims are not considered "true" Muslims by those who practice Islam as it was meant to be practiced. To "true" Muslims, their Westernized "brothers" are no better than Christians who must be subdued. They are regarded with contempt as evidenced by the teachings and sayings of Imams, Sheikhs, and other assorted clerics.
Apostates, I'm sorry to say, are not even deserving of dhimmitude. They are to be put to death, plain and simple.

I'll admit that I am guilty of these characterizations.
But being unflattering or generic doesn't make them incorrect. The point that is trying to be made by these types of statements is this: "Islamic Fundamentalism" is a fallacy.
Islam is fundamental.
The Qur'an is the absolute last word. Final. It was given to Gabriel by Allah who gave it to Muhammad. It rests in paradise, carved in stone, unchanged in time.
To reject this, is to reject Islam and to be either a) an infidel, b) a kaffir, or c) the most dreadful--an apostate.
The Hadith and the Sunna are the teachings of Islam's founder. They are the revered sayings of those who lived with Muhammad, fought with Muhammad, died for Muhammd. They are part and parcel of the belief structure and dogma.
You could no more separate the Qur'an or the Hadith, or the Sunnah and use them in their own "context" than you could connect your keyboard to a binder full of paper and expect to produce a letter!

I've gone on way too long, but I suggest you first read, "Why I Am Not a Muslim", by Ibn Warraq. There is so much to learn, and I'm afraid that by doubting any ex-Muslim's sincerety, you will never be able to see the full picture of Islam and the horrors that it has inflicted and continues to inflict on mankind.

ploome#137:
[Link: www.faithfreedom.org...]
Some great reads here:[Link: www.faithfreedom.org...] This site is created by ex-Muslims.
It used to be at Lycos but muslims had it shut down. I can find muslims knocking Jews and Christians on all islam sites, but they get real excited when one questions the koran. They are now using the same clout trying to shut down Pipes. They don't want the truth exposed--that the koran condones terrorism.

#155 Ben F

Let's cut the bullshit for a few seconds...

1/ Appeal to authority is a fallacious argument.

2/ Some Napoleon laws that have never been abrogated still apply in France today. Nevertheless, the Napoleon Empire is gone and does not exist any more. Some Rhodesian laws that have never been abrogated still apply in Zimbabwe. Nevertheless, Rhodesia is gone and does not exist any more. Some British laws that have never been abrogated still apply in India. Nevertheless, British India is gone and does not exist any more. Roman law principles still apply in Italy, France and Belgium. Nevertheless, the Roman Empire is gone and does not exist any more.

There is no such thing as "Palestine", "Rhodesia", "Napoleon Empire", "British India" or "Roman Empire".

3/ In all times and all places, the only law that applies is the one that can be enforced. Everything else is intellectual masturbation. Yes, might makes right, even if you don't like it. Or rather, especially if you don't like it.

4/ When Yesha was controlled by Egypt and Jordan, Egyptian and Jordanian law applied. No, you couldn't go complain to a "Palestinian" cop that you didn't have access to the wall despite the text of the mandate. When Yesha was controlled by Israel, Israeli law applied. Today, the "law" in PLO-controlled areas is made by the PLO thugs, while Israeli law applies in areas controlled by Israel.

5/ Not all areas are under the rule of law. Lawlessness is also a fact of life. False dichotomy is another fallacious argument.

Celissa--

So the Muslims who deprecate the authority of the Hadiths are not true Muslims?

Don't forget, the Qur'an is not only final and the absolute last word in traditional Islam; it is also perfect and complete. The very completeness of the Qur'an calls into question the authority of the Hadiths. This is one of the principal areas where Judaism and Islam differ, btw. The written Torah is not complete, although the Law is no longer in Heaven.

#159--

So is the question whether Jewish settlements in Yesha are legal or illegal meaningless?

#161 Ben F

Yes, it is totally meaningless. If Israel has the will and the might to protect the settlements, they will stay. If Israel has not the might or the will to protect the settlements, they will be destroyed.

#159--

And Jordan's refusal to allow Jews and others to visit holy places in the West Bank and East Jerusalem was legal?

#161 Ben F

By the way, you just attempted to use another fallacious argument. The legality of the settlements have nothing to do with the existence of "Palestine". The testis unus, testis nullus principle still applies, and the Roman Empire is still gone.

#163 Ben F

According to Jordanian law, it was legal. No other law was enforced.

#163 Ben F

Oh, and appeal to emotion is also a fallacious argument.

Mr. Pol--

It looks like your principal argument is "might makes right."

#167 Ben F

Another fallacious argument.

My first point is that, although some laws dating from the Mandate still apply, the Mandate is finished and Palestine does not exist any more. Gone.

My second point is that, when contradictory laws exist, the one that does apply is the one that is enforced.

Now, what are your points? If any?

#168 Mr. Pol--

You know, maybe you and I are doing the wrong thing here by desecrating the Sabbath . . .

But to return to your point, Israel has not annexed Yesha, so the laws of territorial Israel do not clearly apply.

Applying Jordanian law would amount to recognition of Jordan's unlawful annexation of the West Bank, and would also imply that this is truly occupied territory under the Fourth Geneva Convention. So that doesn't sound promising.

That takes us back to the terms of the Mandate. If that is not the governing authority, what is?

Ben, if the koran "is perfect and complete, then what you have is a perfect manual for terrorism, because that perfect and complete manual calls for the murder of all non muslims. I am hoping and praying islamism goes the way of naziism. Islam is much like naziism,but is far worse.

#169 Ben F

1/ I don't give a shit. I'm not religious.

2/ In the parts of Yesha that are controlled by Israel, Israeli laws do apply, and are enforced.

Anything else is intellectual masturbation.

#171 Mr. Pol--

Religious or not, this isn't generating any good vibes. I could argue about civil versus military jurisdiction in Yesha, but I think I'll drop the thread.

Here is a timely article in today's Arutz. There is no link when I go there from the Christian Action for Israel site so if you want that you have to go to CAFI site and access it from the August 15 articles.      

Arutz Sheva IsraelNationalNews.com

The Road Map & International Law
by Dr. Yoram Shifftan
August 15, 2003
It is remarkable that Tony Blair and George W. Bush, who are currently under intense pressure for what some say is a transgression of international law in going to war against Iraq without the blessing of the United Nations, are seeking to be involved in a real transgression of international law.

Setting aside the question of the importance of the settlements, opposition to the Road Map arises from its being a transgression of law in general, and international law in particular, and a violation of basic common sense. A fundamental principle of law is that if a trustee ceases to be a trustee, the purpose of the trust and the rights it confers on the beneficiary persist. This applies whether the beneficiary of the trust is an individual or a nation. Indeed, the rights of nations obtained by virtue of a League of Nations mandate are enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, and this has also been confirmed by the International Court of Justice.

The Mandate of the League of Nations on Palestine is not only compatible with the settlements, but actually calls for the encouragement and facilitation of "close settlement" by Jews on the lands of all of Western Palestine. The original Mandate included the Golan and Transjordan, but later Jewish national rights there were "withheld" or "postponed". The Mandatory took upon itself to build in Palestine the infrastructure needed for a Jewish national home, which also involved facilitation of Jewish immigration to Palestine and the submission of an annual report to the Council of the League of Nations satisfying the Council that measures had been taken during the year to carry out the provisions of the Mandate. The Mandate forbids the ceding or leasing of the land destined for a Jewish state to the "Government of any foreign Power". All these rights of the Jewish people are currently still valid and binding in international law.

Yet, if the Road Map is implemented, then the continuing obligations of the Mandate will be violated. The Road Map is clearly a transgression of international law. Thus, whereas the Road Map calls for the freezing of settlements and the dismantling of some, international law as expressed in the Mandate calls for the opposite, namely for the facilitation and encouragement of Jewish settlements.

It may be argued that Israel is entitled to give away what belongs to it, just as an individual is entitled in law to give a gift. But here we come to the second major transgression of law and common sense arising from the Road Map. It is a principle of law that the donor of a gift shall do so from his free will and will not be under duress. A gift or a promise made under duress is not binding. It is clear that when George Bush Senior connected the granting of loan guarantees with the settlements, this introduced an element of duress.

Now, duress is the main feature of the Road Map. The requirement, emanating from a campaign of terror against Israel, to create another Palestinian state in Palestine by December 2003 - a requirement that, if fulfilled, will irreversibly take away the national rights of the Jewish people that were valid according to international law for almost a century - is unparalleled in the annals of nations. No nation has been asked to do anything like it. It also introduces a timescale that, in itself, constitutes a major source of duress. This is true in particular in view of Palestinian violations of all the Oslo requirements and the additional violence that erupted following Ehud Barak's generous offer, and also in view of decades of anti-Jewish violence in Palestine.

There should be enough time not only to conduct full internal Israeli discussions on the matter, but also - if Israel were to unwisely decide that it is willing to consider making a gift of the little that remains of its national heritage as recognized by international law, for the sake of 'peace' - to check the sincerity of the other side before any further concessions are made. In view of past experience, this is of paramount importance. The expression of sincerity would need to include a complete cessation of anti-Semitic incitement and the teaching (with success) among the Arab population that the Jews deserve at least one Jewish state, as is indeed also required by international law. Such a re-education program (which is comparable to the de-Nazification program after WWII) would have to be maintained over a number of years, and not simply be a temporary tactical deception of the kind practiced at the beginning of Oslo and which made Israel give so much (out of its own initiative and compelling the Americans to accept it), only to be rewarded by a much worse situation than that existing at the beginning of the process.

Anything short of this would be the imposition on Israel of such a degree of duress as to make any subsequent Israeli commitments not binding in law.

#173 kat

Timely indeed. Just like the creation of Transjordan and the 1948 partition plan were violations of international law, the "road map" is a violation of "international law". De facto "international law" cannot be enforced. Which means that the whole "international law" concept is pure, vanilla bullshit. In the real world, either one can defend oneself and one's possessions, or one gets screwed.

#170 Kat--

As I said in #145, you should write your Senators and ask them to oppose the Pipes nomination, because (by your lights) Dr. Pipes is a dupe.

I think Dr. Pipes' response to such charges is worth thinking about:

[I]f one sees Islam as irredeemably evil, what comes next? This approach turns all Muslims—even moderates fleeing the horrors of militant Islam—into eternal enemies. And it leaves one with zero policy options. My approach has the benefit of offering a realistic policy to deal with a major global problem.

#160 Ben

So the Muslims who deprecate the authority of the Hadiths are not true Muslims?

HADITH. A tradition of the sayings or practice of the Prophet. One of the main sources of Islamic law[Shari'ah]. -
(Warraq, Why I Am Not a Muslim, pg. 362)

SHARIA. Islamic law consisting of the teachings of the Koran, the sunna of the Prophet which is incorporated in the recognized traditions; the consensus of the scholars of the orthodox community; the method of reasoning by analogy. (Kiyas or Qiyas)- (Warraq, Why I Am Not a Muslim, pg. 363)

SUNNA. Properly, a custom or practice, and later narrowed down to the practice of the Prophet or a tradition recording the same.- (Warraq, Why I Am Not a Muslim, pg. 364)

According to the above definitions, in a nutshell, the answer to your question is yes.

Don't forget, the Qur'an is not only final and the absolute last word in traditional Islam; it is also perfect and complete. The very completeness of the Qur'an calls into question the authority of the Hadiths.

How so?
These are not changes to the Qur'an. They are a supplement, if you will. I believe the practice of abrogation gives even more credence to the Hadith.
They function as the "Gospels" of the Islamic world. One could not discard the Gospels in the New Testament, read around the edges of Christ's life and expect to be a Christian. The same applies here. How can one live like Allah's most divine prophet, if one doesn't follow the sayings, traditions, the gospels if you will, of Muhammad?

To deprecate the Hadith or Sunna is a direct deprecation of Muhammad.
I'm sure this sounds simplistic, sophomoric, and even over-generalized to you. That doesn't make it any less true. Questioning Islam is apostasy, period. The intent of the questioner is not figured into the equation.
The simple fact is, people are jailed, people are put to death, for even questioning the Hadith. The absolue implacability and demand for complete subjegation is what makes Islam so uniquely dangerous.
Ask a Muslim from an Islamic country what he believes. Ask if he questions the Hadith.

If you survive intact, I'd really love to know the answer.

And how would you propose to do that, Ben? Turn us all into headbangers and koran klangers and then there will be peace? Where in the world do muslims give non-muslims equal rights and respect? Pipes is being politically correct, and he has to be--but the brutal truth is that if you believe in the koran, you believe in killing innocents--simply becuse they don't worship the way you want them to. I would rather see islam destroyed than have it destroy the decent people in the world--and everywhere muslims infiltrate, terror follows. I used to believe in turning the other cheek--no more-Turning the other cheek gets you a knife in the back. The reason why evil persists is that good is rarely willing to do what is neccessary to defeat it. God gave us the institutions of government to protect honest citizens and to punish anyone who would harm them.  Government’s real purpose is to insure justice and peace, not forgiveness and mercy.  Verse 4 especially seems to give government explicit authority to exercise war, noting that “the emperor does not bear the sword in vain,” but instead “is the minister of God to execute His wrath on the wrongdoer.” The government is expected to take whatever action is necessary, up to and including the use of deadly force (even war) in order to protect its citizens and promote justice and peace. When con-fronted with the dreadful choice of either living in chaos under the dominance of some evil invader or going to war in an attempt to restore peace and justice, government must act, even violently.  In this case the moral responsibility for the evil rests squarely upon the aggressor, and those who are the victims fighting back are not out of God’s will.
The world needs protection from Islam--it kills thousands montly. And the moderate muslims are nowhere to be found. They can march on embassies when they fight the cause of islam but they can't protest against radicals. Why? Do they agree with them? Please show me where these moderate muslims are--I have looked and listened--I see none and hear none--just whining about muslim rights and screw the rights of the victims they maim, murder, behead, debreast, burn alive, rape, drive spikes into heads, acid baths, tongue cut out, stoning,babies fed to dogs, heads impaled on poles, etc.--where the hell are the decent muslims toprotest against these barbaric animals?

#175 Ben F: you see a contradiction when there's none. Pipes is pointing out the impracticability, the uselessness and the irrelevancy of the argument (on whether it's Islam or militant Islam that is the problem) to the end of addressing the problem here and now :

My response, however, is that no matter what Islam is now or was in the past, it will be something different in the future. The religion must adapt to modern mores.

And he argues that can be done, and it must be done - but he's also clear in his articles on how there's little hint of progress towards a central reform of Islamic doctrine. Which is what is needed, not just individuals being more or less detached from religion, or apostates writing critiques, or any other variation at peripheral level.

He's not denying those statements raised as objections by his readers either. He actually appreciates how informed and erudite those critiques are. He's only pointing out that those objections don't matter much cos the issue has to be addressed now and for the near future.

Agree with him or not there, but what he's saying is not a negation of what he calls "antagonism to Islam". He's just making a practical point.

#177 Kat--

I don't believe you have answered Dr. Pipes' question—What comes next? For starters, how many articles of the Bill of Rights would you propose to repeal, and what efforts are you making to build political support for your agenda?

Do muslims respect the Bill of Rights?

#178 zaza--

Dr. Pipes writes, in the article you quote: Islam can adjust to modernity no less than have other faiths. I'm not sure that Kat and Celissa are prepared to concede this based on their posts.

"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance." 
- Article 18, Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Make ye no excuses: ye have rejected Faith after ye had accepted it. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others amongst you, for that they are in sin. (Q. 9:66)
 
Now when islam can learn to respect the rights of others, I will gladly respect islam--I will not condone murder and make excuses for murderers--I do not want a future under allah the asshole, for my kids' kids. They deserve better.

#180 Kat--

Let's say for the sake of argument that some do and some don't. Actually, this is a safe bet, since polls repeatedly show that popular support for many freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights is tenuous.

Now what? What comes next?

Maybe we should listen to ex-muslims---{The only way to confront Islamic terrorism is to eradicate Islam. Islam is the ideology behind Islamic terrorism. As long as this reality is overlooked more lives will be lost and the world will not know peace.} Ibn Warraq or Ali Sina--I forget

#282 Kat--

Supporting Article 18 of the UDHR worldwide is the primary focus of the commission that President Bush has appointed Mr. El Fadl to. So he, at least, appears to believe that Article 18 can be squared with his Muslim beliefs.

Perhaps you should try to persuade him of his error?

Again, do not think that I am trying to minimize the scope of the problem. But does the OIC represent Islam, or does it simply represent the corrupt and repressive regimes that are its members?

Could you name a muslim organization that is NOT CORRUPT? Just one... The world does a lot of stupid things where islam is concerned--shit, they allow countries like Libya to be in charge of human rights abuses--could they start right in Libya?? The UN is a joke and muslim organizations are islamization orgs--to help promote murder of infidels.

#181 Ben F:

Dr. Pipes writes, in the article you quote: Islam can adjust to modernity no less than have other faiths.

He's not saying it has though.

He's not saying "Islam can reform" from a totally naive perspective of someone saying hey look it's just a matter of time don't get so hung up about it. The whole of his position cannot be reduced to what sounds like a mere wish when taken out of the context of his work.

I'm not arguing for what I personally think of the argument, or what Kat or Celissa wrote - I'm just telling you, in my own reading (which obviously may be wrong, but hey, that's how I read it), there isn't such an inherent contradiction as you see it there, cos Pipes's point of view in making those statements that are open to considering the possibility of a reform is very precise, and very much contained within the rest of his work, which may be hopeful in part but is surely not deluded. He's making a point as a scholar. If he were to just say, "yes, Islam his irredeemable", then he might as well stop writing about it, right? close shop, that's it, bye bye (tsk tsk, it's probably just marketing reasons that drive his "political correctness"... just kidding!)

No seriously. His point is quite self-evidently right in the sense and context he's making it: if we (ie. those like Pipes who wish Islam could reform) stop at the level of simply considering Islam as ireedemable and unchangeable (which is what actually Islamic preachers think and Islam itself teach...), then there goes any hope for reform. On the other hand, if we accept it's unchangeable, we give up on dealing with it in feasible political terms. Cos whatever anyone thinks of Islam, it's pretty clear it cannot be eliminated, so there's no point in making that argument to a *practical* end (there's a point in principle though). That's what I think is implicit in that "no matter what Islam was or is, it must reform" response from Pipes.

He's saying we (scholars, politicians, Muslims themselves etc.) have to encourage reform by finding ways to live with Islam and push it towards modernity. We have to push for that against Islam's own hostility to it.

Its a practical consideration about the policies that should be adopted.

However, he does point out that knowledge about 'what Islam was in the past and is at present' is necessary to avoid falling into the trap of the apologists.

So, you can't reduce his argument to "yes reform is possible" cos that's not all he's saying, certainly not in the careless apologist fashion, as that phrase extrapolated *by itself* might be taken. You can't ignore he's taking very seriously those objections that despair of a reform based on what Islam was at the origins; he's not dismissing them - he's simply saying they're not relevant to the job of at least devising some practical solution.

This all came out more long-winded and convoluted than I meant, but I hope you get my point here.

My question to you,Ben, is this--are you willing to sacrifice your kids for islam? How many innocents must die before we accept islam for what it is--a terrorist cult. Islam has NEVER been peaceful--they are only peaceful when the infidels are killed, the women raped, and non believers converted or forced to dhiminitude.

#184--

See #156.

Then please supply me with a muslim organization that is honest--I would like to meet an honest muslim, if such exists--the Koran does condone lying and those Saudis, Pals, Egyptians, Pakistanis, etc. do it well. They use us and our rights, freedoms, technology, etc. to kill us. They raise money in our countries to help them kill. Muslims say one thing in English and quite another in Arabic--like a serpent with a forked tongue.

#188 Kat-- no.

#187 zaza--

Well, if we need to promote reform in Islam, and if that reform can ONLY be effected by Muslims, not by non-Muslims, then we'd best not engage in blanket condemnation of all Muslims, and of Islam, as enemies of freedom, America, and democracy, eh?

All I'm really saying is that I think over-generalization is counterproductive, and that I don't see that it is in any way beneficial to brand the religious beliefs of moderate Muslims as heretical or inauthentic. They face an uphill battle already, to put it mildly.

#181 Ben F.

Dr. Pipes writes, in the article you quote: Islam can adjust to modernity no less than have other faiths. I'm not sure that Kat and Celissa are prepared to concede this based on their posts.

I must confess, I am not prepared to concede.
I have seen no tangible evidence that Islam can adjust to modernity. Even Turkey, (as zaza has pointed out quite thoroughly on another thread) is losing the tenuous grip that it has on the small amount of modernity that it has acheived.
If a "modern Islamic" state like Turkey--that was dragged kicking and screaming to the edge of true, free statehood--cannot hold off the jihad hungry hoardes, what chance does an Islamic state like Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, or any of the others have at acheiving a modicum of progress?
I think, in stating that I am not prepared to concede to Mr. Pipes' most assuredly more learned opinion than my own, I should define what I believe modernity to be.
To me, modernity is a state of mind, a set of principles, a base on which to build a society.
It is the embodiment of freedom in a nation/nation state. The freedom to worship; the freedom to take risks and face the consequences of those risks or reap their rewards; and most importantly, the freedom to be an individual. I believe that individuality, above all things, defines modernity. To me, the idea of the individual encompasses free will and the choices that make life worth living, and make us individuals. Individuality and the inherent right to define one's own destiny was the basis for the formation of our great nation, it is the reason we have thrived, it is the reason that the line to get in is always crowded with those just wanting a glimpse of what we natural born citizens take for granted.
I believe that this is where Islam fails and will continue to fail until it either a)collapses of its own accord under the death and hatred it breeds, b) is reformed from the ground up--which we discussed earlier, and I believe will not happen, at least not from within, or c) the jihadists get their fondest wish and the banner of the Ummah is flying over every person and nation on earth; in which case the failures will not end, only those at the mercy of those failures will not feel safe enough to point them out and will be powerless to do anything about it.
Islamic law is incompatible with modernity.
Islamic dogma is incompatible with modernity.
Hell, even the name, Islam (submission before Allah), is incompatible with modernity.
While I bow to Mr. Pipes' greater knowledge and incomparable experience, I must stand my ground and point out that I believe that even Mr. Pipes is not immune to the pressures of the ideological war that is being waged, or the politically correct tighrope that we all seem to be walking these days. I believe he, of all people understands what is at stake and how very delicate those in power, and those with influence must be at times.
I sincerely hope that I am wrong in all my asssertions.
You may find that hard to believe, considering my true distaste of Islam as an ideology, but I am being honest and speaking from the heart.
I want nothing more than the end of the centuries long plague of horror, death, tears, war, and hatred that results from subjegation to Allah.
I want a free exchange of ideas, free trade, and pleasant relations with all Muslims.
I want Muslim women to feel safe and worthy, not live in fear for their lives, their virtue, their souls just for the crime of being female.
I want Muslim children to have a proper education, so that they may better themselves and their people instead of suffering through decades of Islamic brainwashing that results in children, fucking children, who wish for death, who are eager to commit suicide, and who find joy and spiritual fulfillment in the pain and suffering of others with different beliefs because it means a free ticket to paradise.
I want nothing more that to see them happy and healthy, employed and prospering. This would mean a better world, and a greater pie from which we all could take a piece and better ourselves.
I am not, however, very optimistic.
But, a girl can dream, can't she?

#187 zaza

This all came out more long-winded and convoluted than I meant, but I hope you get my point here.

LOL
I seem to be having a serious case of diarrhea of the keyboard today, so I can sympathize.
Jeez, I keep expecting Charles to ban me for hogging bandwidth!

Quick question: Are you a man or a woman? Just curious. I like to know the sex of the person whose post I'm reading. It's kind of like putting a face with a name... I've been reading you in a male tone, am I right?

Kat #190--

Well, I don't think that Diogenes ever found his honest man, but there are American Islamic groups that do not come across to me as un-American.

Have you taken a look at submission.org, for example? Here is a recent editorial, and here and here are articles noting that adherence to the post-Qur'anic hadiths plainly contravenes the Qur'an (and, ironically, a hadith wherein the Prophet forbade the recording of any of his extra-Qur'anic utterances). These people even like dogs!

Here is the group's letter supporting the Pipes nomination.

#192 Celissa--

Heaven knows there is much to support your perspective. But that still leads back to the question Dr. Pipes posed to his readers over a year ago: if you assume that Islam is incapable of reform in a meaningful time frame, and that all Muslims threaten our lives and liberty, what comes next?

#191 Ben F

...we'd best not engage in blanket condemnation of all Muslims, and of Islam

*sigh*

Islam does not equal Muslims. It's two different things - like Celissa also wrote very clearly in #153.

I don't think you got what I was trying to say either. Oh well.

And you're actually making some sweeping generalisations yourself, if you claim that lack of any hope that Islam can reform equals blanket condemnation of all Muslims. You sure cannot base that conclusion of yours on Pipes' words, cos he says nothing of the sort. He actually calls the reform-despairing critics erudite and informed, and sorry if keep calling your attention to this part, but, like, seems you've missed it...

Now, aside from what Pipes says, reform of Islam is to a good degree irrelevant of how many Muslims want it. Since at *central* and doctrinal level it's an authoritarian system, a lot more authoritarian than any other religion is today, well, it's got to take more than simple opinions, and that uphill battle has to start from within first of all, so that "we" in "we have to, we must" has to be coming from Muslims first and foremost, cos even with the most conciliatory and hopeful approach, Ben, you're not gonna change a thing from the outside if there's NO significant movement from the inside.

In fact - a risk that Pipes has clearly pointed out, so - too much of a hopeful and conciliatory attitude is often only exploited to get more concessions for Islamists rather than pushing the very modern concept of citizenship with its duties and equal (not special) treatment for any group or religion, and the other very modern concept of secular law, which Islam does not accept.

Whatever Pipes says on the chances of reform, he's not blind to those issues, Ben.

Whatever we think of Islam in principle, the reality is what needs to be addressed. And the reality is *also* that nothing that gets said here is going to be either a push or advance for any flipping reform, cos this is not a Koranic school. And no talk can 'endanger relations with Islam', cos this is not Congress, and even if it was, I can't think of one thing that would 'endanger relations with Islam' more than those two holes where the WTC was and the suicide bombers in Israel, Russia, Asia, etc.

So you can't use one phrase from Pipes as a shut-yer-mouths PC speech weapon. It's not even what he himself does, he's not telling anyone of those who objected to him to please please avoid offending the sensibilities of Muslims, actually, that was the argument used by CAIR against him. So, you know, don't confuse different points being made here.

Well, what came NEXT for Naziism--an ideology not even as sick s islamism? There will come a time when we will say enough is enough and bomb the shit out of Mecca and Medina. Ambon,Kosovo, Armenia, Sudan, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Lebanon ,Kashmir, Philippines,
Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Algeria, Bangladesh, Lebanon, Iran - there is hardly a country where muslims live, that is not plagued by terrorism.

Is that guy so called "Moderate"? or is he smart enough to know what NOT TO SAY and WHAT TO SAY in Public ..Temorarily? Hmmm?

I watched the Campaign that Diane Rheam of NPR waged for about 10 years. (Mid or late 80's on) You all know Diane, Dont you? She started out very very slowly and when she was accepted and respected, she let a couple antisemitic callers call into her show and spew their lies...These callers became more and more numerous. (the old Classic Western Antisemitism AND Arab Jew Haters) She didn't respond like she did when the callers were anti Black..THOSE she hung up on or yelled at. (For anyone in the DC area..Do you remember Dianne's constant caller--SALLY?)

Finally it became a trial to listen to this "premier" Talk Show..and all of a sudden old Diane lets out that SHE is of Syrian/Leb/Christian Ancestry. Then she went on in earnest to trash Israel AND Jews in every way she could. Very calculated campaign to get her Pro Pal/ ANTI Israel points across. Must have taken her 8 years or so...Smart girl...Had Diane trashed Israel right way and not done it incrementally she wouldn't have even kept her job. MOST people think Diane is a MODERATE Arab...She ISNT..just smart enough to know what goes in America and what doesn't. Soon as someone in American society got away with an Anti Israel or Antisemitic remark--Diane moved further and further OUT OF THE CLOSET.

And what is a Moderate Moslem? Is it OK to believe in the general values of America..spew out Pro Women, Pro Freedom, Pro Capitalism..etc..but STILL hate Jews and work actively to hurt Jews? Notice I said Hate Jews..not just Hate Israel. Will that be OK then? Will they get a Pass...if they agree with MOST of the American Values? DIANNE agrees with most American values...

Be ready for all Arab Americans to be PR trained just like Dianne ...ie learn what NOT to say in Pubic..what to say but how to qualify it...what to say by using "code"..so as not to trip the Antisemitic wire...

Incidentally thats how Peter Jennings did it..only HE didn't have as much patience as Diane ...he went after Israel faster than she did but he knew how to NOT use certain "words"...and make certain remarks..These aren't Stupid People..people...They know what will and will not trigger a backlash.

Will the "Moderate" stuff be REAL? or will it be PHONY, an Act, until there is enough of a Critical Mass of Islamic Power established in the US? Note..the Islamic call to get Politically Active...

Size and Money and Size Counts..ALOT.

#193 Celissa: heh, tell me about verbal diarrohea... and the worry over bandwidth abuse, same here, I nearly feel guilty just at reloading the page to see more comments.

As for your curiosity, hmm, erm, cough cough, well it's not really a secret anyway, so, I'm female. So you're wrong, ack. I've been taken for a male before though (only in writing, I should add!), which is nice, and funny. Don't know how or why, but it's cute.
I'm sure I wouldn't sound much of a male at all if we were talking other more revealing topics though!

- plus [opens dangerous potentially sexist aside] isn't verbal diarrhoea a typically female syndrome? ;-)

All of a sudden..the Koran doesnt ?dislike DOGS. Just what I was talking about. It doesnt LOOK GOOD to Westerners who love pets, and recoil in horror to see animals abused, for Moslems to SHOW that they dont like Dogs. Sooo ...presto, chango.They like Dogs now? This is just PR training to seem to adopt Western attitudes towards animals.

Know what I noticed FIRST when I went to Israel? The treatment of ANIMALS by the two different populations. I remember being horrified at the treatment of the Camels by Arabs and Donkeys by Arabs there. There was such a difference between how Israelis looked upon animals and how the so call Pals there looked upon animals. I saw it for MYSELF.

Little story...Israeli was scudded in Tel Aviv in the first Iraq War. Would NOT get into the Ambulance to go to the hospital unless the ambulance people put his little Weiner Dog INTO the Ambulance with him. Guy was bleeding to death but would not give permission to go..unless his little doggie was put right on his stomach...Sweet...

Little Story 2. Canan dog was a totally destroyed breed in Israel. The Israelis completely reclaimed their ferrel Canan Dog. Like the Language..the Canan, Dog of Israel, is back in biz now. Gettin better and better looking as they work on the breed. Refining the face and hair and making sure it still retains the sturdiness it is known for.

Story 3: Israel had some kind of Attraction? Wrestling of Alligators..Israel put a STOP to it. They found it was abuse of an animal for no real purpose at all...

IF there is mistreatment of animals you can count on Israelis to scream bloody murder about it.

#201 Leah

IF there is mistreatment of animals you can count on Israelis to scream bloody murder about it.

Now if only they'd do the same when Israelis are mistreated, the whole Pali problem would have been solved decades ago.

Understanding Jihad

In endeavoring for the establishment of the ascendancy of Islam over all other systems of life, members of the Islamic movement will have to go through the following stages:

Passive Resistance, enduring all verbal and physical persecution without retaliation;

Active Resistance, challenging the un-Islamic system when there is enough strength available to do so;

and finally, the Armed Conflict (or a non-violent and disciplined popular movement)

It should be obvious from the above discussion that armed conflict or Qitaal constitutes only the last of the nine stages or aspects of Jihad, and that these two are not synonymous terms.

Leah, zaza, Celissa, Mr Pol, Kat

fabulous discussion..

Mr.Pol...right...

[Link: www.itb.it...]

Of course I spelled the name Canaan wrong in the above post. What else is new? Sorry..

Its off topic BUT Im a Dogaholic and an Animal Lover and had to talk about this subject as long as there was this link where Islam is supposedly a Religion of Animal Lovers..Give me a break.

Above is a address to Canaan Dogs. WOW..they are doing some job of reclaiming and refining the little momzer dog. Love it. Its a great Dog..

#205 Leah

From IMRA:

Israel Accepts "Growing Cocked Gun Hudna" - Drops Requiring Dismantling Terror Infrastructure

WTF?

#195 Ben F.

if you assume that Islam is incapable of reform in a meaningful time frame, and that all Muslims threaten our lives and liberty, what comes next?

I assume that Islam and its call to jihad--its requirement of jihad to be a good Muslim--is a threat to our lives and liberty.
I do separate the ideology from the people.
I am well aware that Islam doesn't exist in a vacuum, it must have practitioners to further jihad, etc., but I don't believe that ALL Muslims are a threat.
Having said that, I do believe that all Muslims have the potential(built into their belief system in the form of jihad), to be a threat to our life and liberty. I didn't arrive at this conclusion lightly, and frankly, it makes my stomach churn and my heart cold to try and comprehend the scale and scope of the pool of potential jihadis. Allah is apparently not picky about who his mandates kill, which followers must sacrifice themselves, or about what might happen to innocents in the way of his ambition.

That brings me to your question, taken from Mr. Pipes: What next?
It really is the $64,000.00 question, eh?

I don't know.

I do know that I am not willing to risk my way of life, or the safety, freedom, and happiness of my family on the chance that Islam will miraculously pull itself up by the bootstraps from the mire of religious hatred and intolerance propogated by its prophet, to suddenly become an all inclusive club of sunshine happiness and candy cane smiles.
I honestly don't know where to start to affect a change on the scale needed for this deeply entrenched culture, steeped in religious fervor and ruled by the fear for one's eternal soul.

How can I compete with someone's idea of God?

I'm just a Jane Schmoe with a really bad sugar jones, an aversion to any parasitic insects (eyuuu, ticks!), a wonderful husband, and a deep love of my nation.
I can't offer the promise of an afterlife filled with 72 smooth-cheeked, virgin houris created to satisfy any carnal desire, in exchange for a follower's life.

I can't provide the last dying gasp needed to sustain an ideology that is slowing rotting away from the inside like an insidious, single-minded cancer intent only on satisfying it's own appetite; leaving death and destruction in its wake.

How do you change millions who don't even know that there is something better than the life of poverty, need, and abject submission that they have been handed?
What can I do to ease the humiliation felt by so many, fostered by the stubborn blindness to their own belief system's corruptness and incompatibility with the promise of a happier, more fulfilling existence?

How do I even begin to make nations who have built their identity around the hatred of a race, or religion be more accepting and tolerant of those who are different?
How do I start awakening people to their own sense of personal responsibility instead of watching them wallow in the mud pit of the perpetual, responsibility-free, victim culture that has been offered to them as a viable alternative to honest hardwork and creativity ?
How can I push them to let go of their unending supply of blame for "the other", make them stop foisting their problems and projecting their shortcomings onto anyone but themselves while exhibiting the unmitigated gall to demand handouts from those they vow to destroy as if the objects of their misplaced hatred and blame owe them something?

Easy, I can't.
At least, not alone and not without all the answers--which I don't even wanna IMPLY I think I have.

All I can do is what I'm doing now.
Educating myself, engaging in productive discourse, and telling the truth.
I can make small steps toward an answer by keeping myself informed, changing my opinions when it's right to do so, and supporting freedom in the best way I know how: living my life as the individual that I am.
Individuality will always win out over groupthink, mindless obedience to "unseen powers", and the most strident efforts of anti-humans to quash freedom-loving spirits.

***

Whoa...
I gotta stop. I'm sounding like a freaking interview with Tony Robbins done by Shirley McClane...

Help...me...
I've...entered...the..."I'm Talking (typing) and I Can't Shut Up" zone...

;0]

#208 Celissa

What next, you ask?

Look up what happened to the Thugees.

#200 zaza:

isn't verbal diarrhoea a typically female syndrome? ;-)

You've never seen my husband with 6 beers in him and a rapt audience.
Rite Aid couldn't provide enough Imodium to cure THAT verbal case of Montezuma's Revenge.
He's so freakin' cute!

Man, I do love him so!

I think the straighforward structure of your posts and your willingness to confront the other denizens with no apologies, made me lean toward a male...
Please don't be insulted.
It's nice to read posts that get to the point, are intelligent without being pompous, and are actually sprinkled with a few info. gems.

ploome:

Feel free to jump in and save me from giving myself Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (and everyone else a word overdose)!
I'm just running off at the, uh, fingers today.

:o]

Celissa...

you guys are awesome

I just sit and watch..:-)

Wading back in . . .

#201 Leah--

I don't think you followed the link. Submission.org is an American Muslim group that is anti-Hadith. The article I linked to pointed out that the Qur'an portrays pious folk in a cave with their dogs, which suggests a positive view of the animals. The anti-dog teachings in Islam come from Hadith.

I do not for a moment question your observations concerning treatment of animals in Israel and Yesha. And I do not for a moment claim that the Islam promoted by groups like Submission.org is widely practiced. But the core of dar-al-islaam is, from a Western perspective, rotten. More tolerant strains of the religion tend to thrive at greater distances. Andalusia. The Balkans. Parts of Asia. Now, America. The question is, can the periphery feed back and create change in the center.

Here is the transcript of a Bill Moyers interview with a law professor who heads a Muslim women lawyers' civil rights group. She says that she came to America to study, not to become an American, but when she returned to her native Lebanon she found that she had in fact become American, and she returned here. Now she is involved in, among other things, efforts to teach Muslims in Arab lands that their religion teaches love, respect, and peaceful resolution of conflicts, but she says it's a hard sell, partially because she is seen as an American emissary.

#196 zaza--

You say: And you're actually making some sweeping generalisations yourself, if you claim that lack of any hope that Islam can reform equals blanket condemnation of all Muslims.

Well, I tend to define a religion in empirical terms. Islam, to me, is what practicing Muslims practice. So yes, I do equate "Islam is an evil death cult that cannot be reformed" with "Muslims pose a threat."

As for your comment that Islam is authoritarian, it seems to me that it becomes so only to the extent that the Shari'a of classical Islamic jurisprudence is the law of the land, or when religious figures with large followings endorse and promote violence, whether of the mob or the guerilla variety. Which is why it is so critical that the US and the West win the ideological war being waged by the two principal sponsors of radical Islam—Saudi Arabia and Iran. And why it is so crazy-making that the US is giving the PLO a free pass despite its adoption of the vilest aspects of militant Islamic rhetoric and its brazen efforts to cast its campaign against Israel as a religious conflict.

Ben...Let YOU be right and me Wrong. That would be OK with me. Fine..actually. Im living in America and I would love for there to be an American..type of Islam. BUT..I dont think this is really going to be.. at least in the near future. I think that the Old Ways..and the Old Religion is what we are going to face EVEN in America.

I think Islam isnt stupid. Islam in America especially will learn how to "play the game"...I believe they will do just what they have done in the past 30 or so years..that is PRETEND that they have moderated their views.

The little example of how Dianne Reahm did what she did is perfect and a template for what these very smart, Media Saavy people are going to do. There is this PULL to the Old Ways and the Worst of this not updated "religion". And further ..it isnt just a religion..its an all encompassing way of life and law and culture. We all have our own cultures, we all love our own cultures..but here in America anyway weve modified them to fit the terrific values of the US..I dont think that group WANTS to do that..they only want to appear to do that.

Again..I wish YOU to be right...would save a whole lotta trouble in the next 20 years. Ben..you dont want to have to paint with such a broad brush..BUT on the other hand, Ive seen what Ive seen over these years..and Im afraid the American Moslem population NOW is more connected with the old ways than with the Wests Values. (Im leaving out the hatred of Jews and Israel)

Ben...just a little note..I have a friend on another board who is expert in the "Balkans"..She is Yugoslavian..and what she told us about the once moderate Moslems in the Balkans is chilling (for Europe its chilling).. Im afraid that in that area the extreme form of Islam is making tremendous inroads (including use of Terrorism) and winning out by a mile. Thats what she describes..Actions of the KLA and other Moslem groups there are described. These Actions by Islam in the former Yugoslavia are just not publicized. It a growing problem there.

Dont know about Spain.

I have heard that in some SE Asian Countries the influence of the Extremeists is overrunning the so called Moderates. When is this going to be equalized or turned around? I dont know...

And we have to all agree on what the term "Moderate Islam" means. Once again, can you agree on MORE of the Western Values in Public but still put your time, effort, and funds to work to delegitimize and stigmitize Jews and Israel in General?

BenF

I have to laugh when you say..

Wading back in . . .

you are the person who brings the thick gooey stinky smelling stuff in

and yes, its slow 'wading' through the combination of projection, wishful thinking and shallow conclusions you present, in the face of overwhleming evidence to contradict your position.

#216 ploome--

Please re-read this, and then this.

#214 Leah--

There are American Islamists with the agenda you describe, and there are other American Muslims without that agenda. It's way too early to predict how this will play out. Dr. Pipes has an interesting observation at the end of this blog entry on a story that Charles also covered.

Re Diane Rehm, I agree with you about her bias. When she does a show on just about any other topic, though, I usually like it. Apart from Israel, does it seem to you that she has an Islamist agenda? You know, anti-feminist, anti-gay, anti-capitalism, generally xenophobic, seeing Afghanistan and Iraq as attacks on Islam, that sort of thing?

Leah #215

Saudi petrodollars at work. I just picked up a copy of Baer's latest. The bad guys have been at it for decades, and we're still at the starting gate.

Ben: How long you been listening to Diane? I used to listen to her..maybe?? since the mid 80's. to the mid to late 90's..After that..I just couldnt...couldnt... I listened to her very adroitly morph into a Lobbyist for Islam and "explain" practically any action that the early terrorists took against Israel and or Jews. That includes making excuses for Arafat (This is a STONE COLD KILLER)..That includes playing the game of BUT...ie the terrorist action was terrible..BUT...you fill in the rest..I know you can.

Thats what Ive been talking about. How are our fellow citizens going to rate Islamic Americans that: Are Feminists..Are Capitalists (good Dems or Good Repubs) claims that they are against bias, Love their family, Love their Dogs, Wave the Flag, all the acceptable and/or popular Values that American holds..? What IF they hold most of the values that the rest of Americans hold BUT they are in the vanguard of the New Antisememtism in a very skillful way? Will that be excused? Will they get a "pass" on that? Will America be going down that road again?

WE ARE going down that road. Ive seen it...I hear it...especially with someone as smart and calculating as Dianne. Its scarey really. So much for Antisemetism being linked to a lack of education...That "theory" is gone now.. least I hope so...SHEESH

Let me answer you Ben on this one thing. Yes there will be false claims of "child abuse"..Now lets get into reality here. What form of correction is used mostly in the ME for: 1. Children 2. Wives 3. Employees..?
A hint here. NONE of these are being given a "time out". They get anywhere from smacked across the face to beaten seriously. Thats the USUAL not the unusual. That reality.

Our old timers had to learn that NO it is better to not beat the heck out of your children..Live and learn. Discipline YES..but beating children and wives into submission..NO... Others changed their ways..will the Islamists in America do it too? OR will their children be handled their time honored way..and be told it will shame the family to tell the truth?

Going to leave the discussion of the handling of women..to later..

Leah--

You keep juxtaposing Diane Rehm with closet Islamists. But she is an Arab Christian, as you have acknowledged. Her parents emigrated from Turkey.

I was trading e-mails for a while this year with a Lebanese woman who's attending grad school here in the U.S. She made a brief appearance here on LGF and was banned for, among other things, posting an obscene curse in Arabic that appeared to have been aimed at Israelis, though she insists it was directed at Arafat and his cronies, whom she loathes, though she is by no means fond of Israelis either. She tried hard to convince me that, in Lebanon at least, the political views of Sunni, Shi'a, and Christian Lebanese (at least those who were relatively well-off and educated) were not generally different. In other words, knowing someone's religion is not enough to know their politics.

I think that some of what we tend to think of as Islamic insanity / sickness is actually cultural. Find any statement by Saeb Erekat, and ask yourself if it would sound "off" were it attributed to Hanan Ashrawi. Or vice versa. Or consider Western-born and -educated Michael Tarazi and Diana Buttu, the PLO's dynamic duo legal tag team. He's Christian, she's Muslim, and if you can tell the two apart by their rhetoric you have a better ear than I.

Anyway, to answer your question, neighbor(?), I moved to DC in '82, and so have been exposed to Ms. Rehm for about as long as you. FWIW, she's on vacation until after Labor Day, so it's safe to listen to WAMU for a couple of weeks.

#221 Leah--

My guess is that America will not see the numbers of unassimilated second- and third-generation Muslims that we see in Europe. American culture is so much stronger and more dynamic. This country not only transforms religions, it is also keen at creating them. Mormon/LDS, Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses, Scientology, and Reconstructionist Judaism spring immediately to mind.

There are xenophobic strains of Orthodox Judaism, but they are largely insular, and so they can survive in our live-and-let-live society. Ditto for Amish and Mennonite sects. I don't think a xenophobic outward-directed culture like that of Saudi Arabia can be handed down in this country from generation to generation. In America, the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells either mellow or get marginalized.

No, Ben, he is a pretend Christian. You can't call yourself Christian and call for the death of Israelis. Thou shalt not kill. He plays the Christtian card to score pomts for muslims--he is one sick hypocrite--using Christianity as a guise--but so did Ressam--the terrorist Canada imported. One of our 10,000. Wonder how many of them pretend to be Christian---I read terrorists do that in order to not draw attention to themselves. Arafat's fat ugly wife says she is Christian yet would give her sons,if she had any, to be fitted with homicider vests. There is nothing sicker than a muslim asskisser calling himself a Christian--two different Gods--ours and the idiot allah.

Ben...So you are here in the DC area like me.. And you listened to Dianne like I did. Alrighty now. First...last I heard Dianne said she was Syrian..She explained that she was really Leb. but something about all Arab CHRISTIANS (yes, I know she is Christian) designated themselves as Syrians in years past. I forget exactly why that was.. She was Syrian but her parents and she came from Turkey? I missed that. Maybe she has added that lately or I just missed it altogether.

Ben..You remember SALLY from Greenbelt on Diannes show? Little old lady with a sweet little voice spewing the worst plain ole antisememtism youve ever heard. Later..much later in the life of her show Dianne asked Sally where she got her information.."SPLOTLIGHT..says Sally. Spotlight..the Nazi Newpaper.(from WAR?) Guess what..you know that Dianne STILL let Sally get on. Least once a week when she was told she couldnt call once a month...

Most people STILL didnt get it and Dianne let her PREMIER (you know it was THE Show here for people that think and--THE Show that the Congress listened to on the way to work) Show be used by the likes of this stinkin antisemite among all the others that called in.

So it ISNT just Anti Israel cr*p from a Christian Arab that finds ***her Ethnicity trumping her Religion. Its plain ole JEWISH Hate that Dianne made respectable. Dianne helped make Antisemetism RESPECTABLE!!! Ill not forgive her or PBS for that. OUR money paid for that...

---

Ben..Im not sure the same American Magic will work on the population of Islam here as it did on all of us. Why didnt this work on James and John Zogby? These are also Arab Christians whose life is all about Trashing Israel and Trashing JEWS. America's magic didnt work on Sununu either..or Obey...Possibly, the "Arab" ETHNICITY trumps everything for a whole lotta people. NOT EVERYONE..but it doesnt have to be everyone. IF this is a MINORITY..it is one hellova big minority..A Lotta People...with gelt. Alotta gelt. BIG gelt. HUGE gelt. Soo if we cant get many Arab Christians to drop the hate..what makes you think so many Arabs/Moslems will drop the hate, take on American Values fully and change? Im not at all sure now..that everyone is the same in these situations. Its PC to say so..but what is the reality of the situation? Just look around the world...doesnt look all that hopeful for the near future.

DANIEL PIPES ADVANCED BY BUSH IN RECESS APPOINTMENT

President Bush used a familiar Clinton tactic to advance a controversial insider to a paid government position over the objections of the US Senate.  Daniel Pipes has been given a recess appointment to the US Institute of Peace, which was created by Congress to come up with solutions to world conflict.  Like the Democracy Project and the neocon Project for the New American Century, the Institute of Peace is merely a taxpayer boondoggle that allows establishment insiders to get paid by government for thinking up new and unique ways to undermine American sovereignty.  Bush made the recess appointment in order to avoid a likely Senate refusal to confirm his nominee.  By bypassing the Senate confirmation process Pipes will be allowed to serve on the institute’s board for a year before the Senate can again object. 
 
Pipes’ nomination has been stalled for months by Democrats objecting to his controversial statements and writings. Muslims are particularly offended by Pipes’ suggestion that mosques in America be targeted for police surveillance.  I will give additional warnings.  Daniel Pipes is an establishment insider who goes out of his way to undermine anyone who accuses the governments of the US or Israel of conspiracy against their own people.  He authored a book entitled The Hidden Hand: Middle East Fears of Conspiracy (1996) and Conspiracy (1997), both superficial cheap shots debunking with straw man arguments the full range of conspiracy theory here and abroad.  Only government insiders take time out from legitimate scholarly endeavors to engage in this kind of unscholarly work.
 
Pipes, in my opinion, is arrogant and dishonest, even as he applies his scholarship to his own publication, the Middle East Quarterly.  In the summer edition of 2002, Pipes published a book review by Sheikh Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi.  Pipes did not like the few negative comments the Italian Islamic scholar proffered, so he altered Palazzi’s review and changed the wording, without informing Palazzi before or after the fact.  When the professor read the article, he wrote a strong letter of protest to the Quarterly, asking for a correction.  Not only did Pipes refuse, but he called the professor a “fruitcake.”  Such scandalous conduct would normally be grounds for permanent discreditation-but Bush has successfully used the recess loophole to ensure Pipes is saved further embarrassment.  That’s how the insider protection system operates.

Ben..I think the correct term for Dianne would be an Arabist. She is Arab first..especially in terms of Israel and Jews.

So Americas magic TOOK with her on alot of issues(I know her issues and her stances)..but not concerning her attitude about Jooosss who dare to want a safe and secure Israel.

Noone can underestimate the effect of her show on the Congresspersons and their staff. SHE, among others, did help pave the way for the establishment of the Palistinian State.

And you expect me to believe a lying Italian mullah--like the one in DC that helped the terrorists, or the 10,000 who celebrated the anniversary of 911 in Finbury Park by thanking Allah for killing so many. If we should get rid of anyone, get rid of every muslim in government or in places where they can promote terrorism--those moderate guys raising money, teaching kids, and preaching hatred.

Dang..another mess up..I meant NPR not PBS..altho Dianne happens to be on our PBS show as well...Is there a way to fix your post AFTER it is up there?

AND Ben...its the third quater and the Skins are losing again...If you were here in the 80's you might have caught Redskins (yes they should change the name..no SKIN off their teeth) Fever.

#143 ploome

You mean you don't wear a hijab ??

In this heat!

Hey, at least the air conditioner's back on...for a while there i knew what it felt like to be Ted Kaczynski...sans the pathological hatred for modernity, technology, and capitalism...or a copy of Al Gore's "Earth in the Balance"

#222 Kat--

Suha Arafat is calling herself Christian again? Oy!

I don't know anything about Michael Tarazi's religious bona fides. But if you don't think you can be a Christian and call for the death of Israelis, you have a poor grasp of the history of Christianity. Given your fondness for ex-Muslim websites for info on Islam (#158), you might find this tome eye-opening.

Are you familiar with the work of the World Council of Churches? They have an Israel / Palestine Project. I do not detect much Christian concern for Jews killed and maimed as a result of Islamist terror campaigns on this website.

Ben F. (#232),

Ben, If you want the skinny on the World Council of Churches that Nobody Goes to Anymore visit Christopher Johnson's Midwest Conservative Journal. He's very much on top of most religious organization issues, and can probably answer many questions you might have.

Jeff S.

Where are you? It's cooking in LA.

zulubaby

NYC...only balmy here

Well, guess what ,Ben--Christians are complaining--you politically correct assholes in the UN , Amnesty, and all those lunatic leftists hate Christians as much as you hate Jews. Christians are persecuted by muslims wherever they are--in the most heinous ways--in Nigeria 3000 Christians were slaughtered in one village--the women were debreasted, babies' heads impaled on poles, and animals ate their bodies. Some ran away and were eaten by lions. Muslim fanatics are some subhuman race which takes great pleasure in barbaric acts.
And Ben, we are not going bacjk to the days of the Muslim blood bath at Fez or any other 1000 year ago shit--we are talking about muslims murdering TODAY. Can we stay with the present as we can do screw all about the past. Hell, even the guillotine was acceptable then, but I'd like to think we are more civilized now--unless there is a lesser race we don't know about still living in caves practising that Dark Ages shit.

#236--

In the immortal words of Tom Lehrer,

the Catholics hate the Protestants,

and the Protestants hate the Catholics,

and the Hindus hate the Muslims,

and everybody hates the Jews.

Jeff S. (#235)

Be grateful...

Well, I must be odd--I love Jews, Atheists, Hindus, Budhists, Protestants--and I hate those murdering wh--es. I believe in love thy neighbor but I can't love thy murderer. I believe we must fight islamism and to hell with political correctness--it's time to call a terrorist a muslim.
[Link: www.catholicexchange.com...]

#239 Kat--

Fine article.

I unequivally endorse the argument, including the following: [P]art of the purpose of this [Taliban] regime and the radical Islam they embrace is to ram down the throat of the larger Islamic world a religious vision which is one of the darkest in the history of the world. . . . If their vision gains ascendancy in the Islamic world, they shall have succeeded in hijacking, not only four planes, but a religion of a billion people.

We are at war with the adherents of a radical, malignant ideology. Not with Islam and its followers per se.

#240 Ben F

And the name of that "radical, malignant ideology" is?

Ben,there are over 100 million adherents to the sick ideology and the moderate muslims are too stupid to speak against them. The Saudis are doing a fine job in jails, schools, and mosques brainwashing the masses. Muslims in Berkeley, in Chicago, and other universities in America cheered 911. I'm not so sure there are any moderate muslims---I don't hear them and I don't see them marching against the Saudi embassy, or the Pakistani one, or Lebanon's---in fact I assume that by their silence they condone the atrocities. Until muslims speak against fanatics they can eat shit, for all I care.

#242 Kat

The question is, should we expect moderate Nazis Muslims to reject the teachings of Mein Kampf the Quran?

And if not, what's a "moderate" Nazi Muslim?

#241 Mr. Pol--

I think in English it's something like "surrender."

I was going to suggest that you read more about it at this website, but the site seems to be down for some reason. Maybe the power outage.

#242 Kat--

I'm still waiting for a straightforward answer to #183.
Be sure to look at ##208, 209, and, if necessary, ask Mr. Pol to compare the numbers, and the worldwide geographic distribution, of Muslims and Thuggees.

Is Tom Friedman talking sense?

Talking to young Iraqis such as Hassan, you sense how much they want to break the old mold—how much they want to be Arabs, with an Arab identity, but to build a modern state that actually focuses on tapping its people's talents and energies, rather than diverting them, and one that seeks to base their dignity on what they build, not on whom they fight. Root for them to succeed, for having such a state in the heart of the Arab world would be a very, very good thing.

Well, I suggest we start playing hardball with Islam. I suggest monitoring all mosques and madrasas in America and deporting every illegal muslim here. I suggest we stop immigration for muslims until they clean up their act.
I suggest we stop this islam is peace shit and be honest. I suggest that we allow the building of no mosques unless a Christian church, a synagogue or a temple is allowed to be built in Arab countries for every mosque built in westrn ones. I suggest we condemn islamism by supportig the following petition. Forget political correctness and making excuses for murderers. I have had enough--until I see different, I will never trust a muslim and will view them with disdain--a bunch of allah assholes murdering for a pedophile.
Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights
Contact: Mary Elizabeth Hansen
1-703-234-3954 x 7542
[Link: www.dhimmi.com...]

“Radical Islamism is a form of religio-racism, should be condemned at
UN Racism Conference in Durban,” rights group says.

DURBAN, SOUTH AFRICA (August 29, 2001) - The Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights (CDHR), an umbrella coalition representing minority religious and ethnic communities from around the world, today called on the World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) in Durban, South Africa, to condemn "Radical Islamism as form of religio-racism."

In a letter to Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, the Coalition asked that the voices and plights of those oppressed, enslaved and murdered by adherents of the ideology of "Radical Islamism -- a deviation from Islam" — be heard at the Conference.

Coalition spokesperson Mary Elizbeth Hansen said, "Radical Islamism is not the religion of Islam, founded by Mohammed 13 centuries ago. It is a 20th Century movement based on a totalitarian ideology, which promotes violence and militancy in the form of Jihad. Its segregationist view of society — based on the concept of 'dhimmitude' — is racist, intolerant, xenophobic, supremacist, discriminatory, anti-democratic, and has become genocidal."

CDHR, which represents Hindus, Buddhists, Bahais, Humanist Muslims, Copts, Assyrians, Syriacs, Southern Sudanese, Maronites, Southern Phillipinos, West Africans, Ibos, Slavic Christians, Armenians, Arab Christians, Nubians, secular intellectuals, and women's groups, published today on its website, Dhimmi.com, a Declaration entitled "Radical Islamism = Racism = Genocide: Jihad-Islamism (not Islam) abuses human rights worldwide."

The Declaration argues that Radical Islamists:

* persecute the Copts in Egypt;
* in Sudan, massacre and enslave the black African Dinkas;
* in Lebanon, terrorize the Christians;
* in Nigeria, butchered Biafran Ibos and oppress the Christians;
* in Iraq and Syria, secular radical regimes… penetrated by Jihadic norms suppress native Christian cultures;
* in Iran, persecute Christians and Bahais;
* in Kashmir, wage a terrorist war against the Hindu minority;
* in the southern Philippines, terrorize Catholics and kidnap foreigners;
* in East Timor, endorse ethnic cleansing against Christians;
* in Indonesia, routinely assault the native Christians, particularly in the Moluccas.
"Radical Islamism is a world ideology, fielding a world terror-army, and now oppresses millions with its racist ideology. This threat to world peace and racial, ethnic and religious harmony needs to be urgently addressed at the UN Conference," said Hansen.

#246 kat

Note the political correctness of this "petition":

"Radical Islamism = Racism = Genocide: Jihad-Islamism (not Islam) abuses human rights worldwide."

What is the difference between Islam and Radical Islamism?

Mr. Pol--that is the question. I'm not sure there is a difference, but to be politically correct, we must keep saying we are not talking about moderate muslims for fear they scream racist bigotry at us---that happens every time I ask a question(very politely) on those ask an imam and other islam sites--they go crazy if you ask them a simple question and ban me. I read the koran--it was a most depressing revelation--I am convinced you can not be a true muslim and not be a terrorist--that freaking book is a manual for terrorism--it even tells them how to torture their victims. I would like Ben to tell me how one can believe in that book and not believe in terrorism--unless Ben is suggesting we all become head thumpers.

#213 Ben F

Well, I tend to define a religion in empirical terms. Islam, to me, is what practicing Muslims practice.

Well, Ben, you're really wrong there. You cannot define a religion on empirical terms in that sense you say.

What you're looking at there is the behaviour of individual Muslims, which may or may not be orthodox enough depending on who, where, when, etc. In Islam, there's a lot less space allowed for individual variations and choices than in other religions - but it's still there.

But whatever behaviour of individuals or groups you choose to pick as "definition", it is not in itself Islam, ie. the official doctrine - which is where a religion gets officially defined, obviously.

Come on, it's self-evident. It shouldn't even need saying...

So your equation is incorrect in principle, and it's even more incorrect for you to apply it regardless to the statements others make on Islam, the doctrine. Especially when, like Celissa, they're making it clear they're making that distinction of principle with Muslims, the people.

As for your comment that Islam is authoritarian, it seems to me that it becomes so only to the extent that the Shari'a of classical Islamic jurisprudence is the law of the land

No, you're wrong again - the authoritarian structure of Islam is inherent in its texts and origins and traditions and laws, whether or not it gets enforced. Besides, all Muslim countries from Saudi Arabia to Morocco do actually enforce some form of shariah in their official legal system, with the most "secular" states - Morocco, Algeria, etc. - restricting use of shariah to marital and family law. But it is the ambition of Islam to have shariah fully enforced everywhere.

And that is the threat, a threat also to Muslims themselves, cos there's no individual rights or real freedom or safety within Islam even for Muslims, where shariah is enforced.

Of course, Muslims who fully espouse that Islamic "cause" to the point of either support for violence or direct violence are a threat themselves too, doh, so that's where there is a coincidence of doctrine/behaviour.

You can eliminate terrorists and deal with the extremists and those like CAIR and so on, but you still have to deal with the ideological source of the threat. And that, if possible, would require what Pipes etc. call reform, ie. changing things from the centre (doctrine) outwards (individual behaviour), not just the other way round. Especially when change from the outside even where it's wanted (and calls for reform by Muslims are not really widespread are they?) is blocked by authoritarian control held by Islamic authorities.

Sorry to everyone else for repeating boringly obvious things...

My question to Ben is this--are the so-called moderate muslims in this article guilty of terror against these women?? Is watching crime and doing nothing not licencing the crime? Are moderate muslims guilty of terror because they say and do nothing? Is there really such a thing as a moderate muslim? Where are they hiding? What is described in this article happens in all muslim countries--it has happened since Mohammed. How can we claim people who condone this are following a religion of peace? Isn't it like watching a crime and doing nothing--seeing a hurt person on the road and walking to the other side.
[Link: www.dhimmi.com...]

Celissa (#210) - re: verbal diarrohea - I know, I know, there's so many exceptions to that cliché about it being a typically female thing. But clichés can be fun :-)

Thanks for the really nice words, Celissa (and thanks ploome for including me in that 'fabulous', erm, now I'm embarassed, lol...). And no way, why should I be insulted, come on, it's not like you saw me and said, oh gosh you look like a man, which might have been juuust a little offputting, yes, heh, if not outright devastating and requiring years of therapy for which I'd have had to sue you. Yours was a compliment, and very much appreciated. It means I must be doing ok in keeping my yin and yang in balance ;-)

I appreciate your own no-bullshit tone myself, and agree with a lot that you said here. Too bad you're happily married, tsk, or... just kidding!

---

Now, this may be sort of OT here but I just ran into this unmissable pearl from a Berkeley professor, an article in the London Review of Books:

No, it's not anti-semitic
Judith Butler defends the right to criticise Israel

When the president of Harvard University declared that to criticise Israel at this time and to call on universities to divest from Israel are 'actions that are anti-semitic in their effect, if not their intent', he introduced a distinction between effective and intentional anti-semitism that is controversial at best. The counter-charge has been that in making his statement, Summers has struck a blow against academic freedom, in effect, if not in intent. Although he insisted that he meant nothing censorious by his remarks, and that he is in favour of Israeli policy being 'debated freely and civilly', his words have had a chilling effect on political discourse.

It really shows that she's a professor in Rhetoric...

Well, this is a late comment on a very long thread, so others may not see it -- heck, I may even try it again elsewhere.

As to what is being done to address Islamism, I would propose the following:

1. I think Bush is attempting to deal with this issue. Yes, there are gripes to be had. But remember that he is operating in an international/diplomacy arena, facing re-election, and can only do so much (i.e., real life time constraints).

2. Write your Congresscritters re: this issue, i.e., Pipes nomination, and your opinions on this subject in general.

3. Write your local paper --- letters to the editor, opinion pieces, etc.

4. VISIT YOUR LOCAL MOSQUE. Why? Well, it just may be a resource of information. Maybe we'll all discover that radical Islamacism hasn't taken root in America. Or maybe we'll discover that there is a serious threat to our way of life. Maybe we'll find a mix. But at least we'll have first-hand knowledge of the case. And what a helluva blog thread, everyone commenting on what they've discovered in their local neighborhood (and I'd say visit several times, to be accurate). I think this might be very educational. Perhaps we can root out the good, bad, and ugly, and give well-deserved publicity to, and foster, moderate Muslim practices.

Also a late comment: I went camping this weekend and come back to this interesting discussion which occurred.

Ben F: you are awesome! You are much more knowledgeable than me on these topics; I thank for your research and significant number of links. I agree with you just about 100%. I probably would have lost my cool with some of your opponents and ended up in a flame war. It's a good lesson for me.

The most interesting thing you have done is separate your opponents into the thinking, rational ones whom I now have more respect for (Zaza, Celissa, Leah) from the ranters and flamers (Kat, Ploome, Mr. Pol).

Whats written in the Koran..is truly frightening. Learning it little by little... HOWEVER..whats written in the other two old books isn't peachy in SOME instances either. THE DIFFERENCE IS: Christianity and Judaism has F**n MOVED ON. Most Christians and Jews do NOT follow their ancient books to the letter (no stoning of Adultresses...No putting out of eyes etc)..in any Christian and Jewish(one little country) Country. NOW..wether you blame it on CULTURAL or Religious influences a whole Lotta Moslem's are behaving or want to behave like their predecessors. ie rockbottom SHARIA.. HELLO...Thats the Huge DIFF.

Its what you DO that counts. Not what you say all prettied up ..for the Western Media after you have been trained by PR Firms on K St. And it is what you SAY within your own community when you think no one is listening..that counts..

I agree with you, Leah, but there does seem to be a split of opinion here. See ##213, 249