I’ve never believed the “Obama is a secret Muslim” nonsense, but…

August 11, 2011

He is either appallingly naive about the religion or is doing his usual “say anything they need to hear to like me” act. Regardless, the kind of meaningless pabulum he served at the White House Iftar dinner last night is just jaw-dropping:

Welcoming guests at the annual White House Iftaar party, US President Barack Obama said, Islam has always been part of the American family and Muslim Americans have long contributed to the strength and character of our country in all walks of life.

Attended by some 100 special invited guests including ambassadors of mostly Muslim countries and eminent Muslim academicians and community leaders, Akram Syed of the National Association of Indian Muslims was among the few Indian-Americans to attend the high-profile annual event at the White House.

Other special guests included families of Muslim victims of the 9/11 attacks, as well as Muslim members of the US Armed Services.

Obama said the annual Ramadan dinner, a tradition that President Clinton began and President George W Bush continued, is quintessentially American.

“No matter who we are or how we pray, we’re all children of a loving God,” he said.

Tell that to the Copts in Egypt, Mr. President. And that’s just one example of the nearly 1,400-year legacy of Islam’s jihad against everyone else.

That quote is just the start. For more, and for a detailed deconstruction of the President’s blather, visit Jihad Watch.

PS: To clarify, I am not questioning the loyalty of Americans who practice Islam but who don’t seek to impose Sharia law here or wage jihad against the United States, and I especially do not question the loyalty and honor of the many Muslims who have served and do serve in the military. It is with Islam itself and its doctrines of (to name a few) jihad, Jew-hatred, female inferiority, enmity toward the outsider, and the supremacy of Sharia that I have deep problems.

PPS: Regarding Obama’s religious beliefs, if he has any, in my opinion he is most attracted to the Black Liberation Theology preached by James Cone, Cornel West, and Jeremiah Wright. (Although I’m not above believing that his time in Wright’s church was wholly cynical, and that Obama’s only real “religion” is himself.)

via Weasel Zippers, which has video.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Pat Condell: “Let’s blame the Jews!”

May 27, 2011

British comic Pat Condell rants about the rise of Antisemitism in Europe, Jewish conspiracy theories, and the pathetic truth behind Islamic Jew-hatred.

(Fair warning, both for a bit of rough language and for Pat making his contempt for all religion quite clear.)


“My journey toward Islamoawareness”

May 25, 2011

That’s the title of a post at Big Peace from a person who works in Hollywood, but has to post through a friend because of the bigotry shown toward anyone who doesn’t toe the orthodox left-liberal line there. His awakening to the truth about Islam –that it is an aggressive, totalitarian faith driven by its core doctrines to force all others into submission– mirrors my own, though my journey began right after September 11th. Here’s how he begins:

I use the term “Islamoawareness” because people who are critical of Islamic doctrine are often smeared as “Islamophobes”.  I reject this label because a “phobia” is an irrational fear of something, but to fear something that is, indeed, out to kill you is the height of rationality.

Read the whole thing. Like David Mamet’s story of his transformation from unthinking liberal to thoughtful conservative, it’s a tale of opening one’s eyes to facts –not bigotry, facts– and casting off comfortable blinders of political correctness in order to see reality, no matter how uncomfortable it makes us. It’s a path we all need to walk in the face of a continuing jihad, both cultural and violent.

And be sure to take note of the recommend reading list at the end; I’ve read most of them and heartily agree.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


What people hold sacred: compare and contrast — Updated

March 16, 2011

Five members of the Fogel family were slaughtered by Muslims waging jihad last week in the village of Itamar: Udi 36, the father; Ruth (35) the mother; and three of their children Yoav (11), Elad (4), and Hadas (3 months). All were stabbed or had their throats slit.

Above Yoav’s bed hung the following Hebrew prayer:

May it be Your will, L-rd G-d and G-d of our forefathers, that I love every one of Israel as myself, and to graciously perform the positive commandment of loving your neighbor as yourself.

And may it also be Your will, Lord G-d and G-d of my forefathers, that you cause the hearts of my friends and neighbors to love me fervently, and that I be accepted and desirable to everyone, and that I be loving and pleasant, and that I be gracious and merciful in the eyes of all who see me. As water reflects face to face, so the heart of man to man. And all for the sake of Heaven, to do Your will, Amen.

Compare that to one of the famous “verses of the sword” from the Qur’an, the sacred book of he who stabbed a three-month old girl twice through the heart:

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

And before someone argues that the Qur’an is filled with all sorts of peaceful verses — I agree, it is. But then familiarize yourself with the doctrine of abrogation, in which chronologically later verses of the Qur’an supersede and invalidate those that came earlier. In this case, classical Islamic scholarship considers the verse cited above to have abrogated 124 peaceful verses. It is those later, non-abrogated verses that represent the current ethos of Islam, just as the prayer above little Yoav’s bed represents that of Judaism.

“But,” one might argue, “that verse specifies ‘pagans,” and the Fogels were Jews, ‘People of the Book.’ Where is the command to fight and kill Jews?”

Okay, let’s take one of the hadiths, the sayings of Muhammad, considered a source second only to the Qur’an and necessary to understanding that book. This is one of the most famous antisemitic hadiths, from the Sahih Muslim collection, one of the two most highly regarded collections of hadiths in Sunni Islam:

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

In other words, the Day of Resurrection won’t come until Muslims fight and kill the Jews.

But the prayer hung above Yoav’s bed by his parents asked for the grace to love his neighbor, not to hate them and kill them.

The comparison is revealing.

via Israel Matzav through Legal Insurrection

LINKS: An earlier compare and contrast, this time on forgiveness.

UPDATE: Andy McCarthy has a must-read article today on the massacre of the Fogels — Why They Celebrate Murdering Children:

As the Israeli press reported, jubilant Muslims crowded Gaza’s streets, handing out candy and sweets in the wake of the murders. Jennifer Rubin notes that the outpouring of joy over the slitting of an infant’s throat was, according to one resident, “a natural response to the harm settlers inflict” on Palestinians.

It is a natural response, if you are a monster. If you have been reared in a culture that worships suicide bombers, that dehumanizes Jews as the children of monkeys and pigs, and that insists Israel is not merely the enemy but does not have a right to exist. And these positions, it bears emphasizing, do not represent some fringe Islam of al-Qaeda terrorists who have purportedly hijacked an otherwise peaceful religion. This is mainstream Islam, the sorts of things you would hear in a classroom at al-Azhar University or a television show on al-Jazeera — the place where, according to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, people turn for “real news,” the place where Muslim Brotherhood guru Yusuf Qaradawi lionizes suicide bombers in his popular weekly program, Sharia and Life.

McCarthy surveys the religious justification for terrorism in Islam and then tells the story of the Kaiser family, who in 1979 lost two children and a father to jihad-by-murder. Their killer, Samir Kuntar, was lionized as a hero by the Palestinians and Hizbullah on his release a few years ago.

And yet we’re the bigots when we draw the logical conclusion upon noting the common religious thread in atrocity after atrocity.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Lara Logan’s rape as a symbol of Islam’s “silent scandal”

February 23, 2011

“Silent scandal.” Those are the words former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy uses to describe the miserable condition of women under Islam, in which inferiority to men is theologically sanctioned and non-Islamic women — or a Muslim woman who doesn’t behave as she should — are open targets for beatings, rape, and even death.

While horrific crimes against women occur in all parts of the world, it is only under Islam that these receive religious sanction. As McCarthy relates in “Who Attacked Lara Logan, and Why?

Tahrir Square is also the place where, in the frenzy after Hosni Mubarak’s fall, CBS news correspondent Lara Logan was seized and subjected to a savage sexual assault by an Egyptian gang. Coverage of the attack has been muted. There have been testimonials to Ms. Logan’s courage, and one anti-American leftist lost his comfortable fellowship at NYU Law School for failing to conceal his glee over the atrocity. We have heard much about the attack, but have heard next to nothing about the attackers. You are just supposed to assume it was a “mob” — the sort of thing that could have happened in any setting where raw emotion erupts, say, Wisconsin’s capitol.

Except it doesn’t happen in Madison. It happens in Egypt. It happened in Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, in the riots that led to Suharto’s fall — as Sharon Lapkin recounts, human-rights groups interviewed more than 100 women who had been captured and gang raped, including many Chinese women, who were told this was their fate as non-Muslims. It happens in Muslim countries and in the Muslim enclaves of Europe and Australia, perpetrated by Islamic supremacists acting on a sense of entitlement derived from their scriptures, fueled by the rage of their jihad, and enabled by the deafening silence of the media.

As Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer has detailed, al-Azhar University endorses a sharia manual called Umdat al-Salik. It is quite clear on the subject of women who become captives of Muslim forces: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.” This is so the woman can then be made a concubine of her captor.

This arrangement is encouraged by the Koran. Sura 4:23–24, for example, forbids Muslim men from consorting with the wives of other Muslims but declares sexual open season on any women these men have enslaved. (“Forbidden to you are . . . married women, except those whom you own as slaves.”) Moreover, Mohammed — whose life Muslims are exhorted by scripture to emulate — rewarded his fighters by distributing as slaves the women of the Jewish Qurazyzah tribe after Muslim forces had beheaded their husbands, fathers, and sons. The prophet himself also took one of the captured women, Rayhanna, as his concubine. And, as Spencer further notes, Mohammed directed his jihadists that they should not practice coitus interruptus with their slaves — they were encouraged to ravish them, but only in a manner that might produce Muslim offspring.

Emphases added. Be sure to read the whole thing, because McCarthy is one of the few willing to speak bluntly about this problem, rather than turn a multicultural blind eye. The sum, as he and other writers such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali have noted, is that Islamic law reduces women to a less-than-human status, encouraging such abuse, and the silence of Western liberals and leftists only abets it.

via Patrick Poole, who notes that the Umdat al-Salik, mentioned above, received a disturbing endorsement from an American imam.

LINKS: Phyllis Chesler on jihad by rape and liberal blindness. Power Line on “no-go zones” in France and the catastrophic failure of European multiculturalism. Jamie Glazov on Muslim rape and feminist silence (Disturbing photo warning). Bruce Bawer on the challenge posed by fundamentalist Islam in Europe and tolerating intolerance .

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Lara Logan attacked because she was “Jewish”

February 16, 2011

In a follow up to yesterday’s nauseating story, we see two themes that are central to Islam: contempt for  women and hatred of Jews.  Tragically for Lara Logan, they came to a focus in her. From The New York Post:

“60 Minutes” correspondent Lara Logan was repeatedly sexually assaulted by thugs yelling, “Jew! Jew!” as she covered the chaotic fall of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Cairo’s main square Friday, CBS and sources said yesterday.

The TV crew with Logan, who is also the network’s chief foreign correspondent, had its cameras rolling moments before she was dragged off — and caught her on tape looking tense and trying to head away from a crowd of men behind her in Tahrir Square.

“Logan was covering the jubilation . . . when she and her team and their security were surrounded by a dangerous element amidst the celebration,” CBS said in a statement. “It was a mob of more than 200 people whipped into a frenzy.

“In the crush of the mob, [Logan] was separated from her crew. She was surrounded and suffered a brutal and sustained sexual assault and beating before being saved by a group of women and an estimated 20 Egyptian soldiers.

“She reconnected with the CBS team, returned to her hotel and returned to the United States on the first flight the next morning,” the network added. “She is currently in the hospital recovering.”

A network source told The Post that her attackers were screaming, “Jew! Jew!” during the assault. And the day before, Logan had told Esquire.com that Egyptian soldiers hassling her and her crew had accused them of “being Israeli spies.” Logan is not Jewish.

Her real religious affiliation, if any, is immaterial. Logan had become the embodiment of the paranoia and conspiracy-mongering in a society that can take seriously claims that Israel has trained sharks to attack Muslims or is sending AIDs-carrying women to Egypt. And Jews have been the declared (by Muslims) enemies of Islam since the days of Muhammad, the invocation of the Muslim massacre of the Jews at Khaybar being a rallying cry to this day. Indeed, the Muslim version of the anti-Christ will be born of a Jew and lead an army of Jews. Thus calling Logan a Jew, as well has her “immodest behavior,” justified her rape. If she had just worn a niqab and stayed in her room like a proper woman… .

But don’t you dare say Islam isn’t tolerant or doesn’t respect women.

via Jihad Watch

UPDATE: The Washington Post reports that Logan is home with her family and adds this chilling note:

When Logan returned Saturday to the United States, she was described as being in shock and not speaking, the source added.

Poor woman. To think what she and her family are going through right now.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Religion of Tolerance Watch: one-legged man to hang for leaving Islam

February 7, 2011

We as Americans value religious freedom. Descended from people who themselves were persecuted for their religious choices, we made it a core article of our civic creed that one may freely practice one’s religion (within certain broad boundaries) and even change one’s beliefs without fear of punishment from the State. Not happy as a Catholic or a Buddhist? Then you can become Jewish, Eastern Orthodox, Hindu, Taoist, some brand of neo-pagan, even atheist — whatever you want. And if your new beliefs don’t make you happy, switch again. You’re religion is your own business, and no one else’s.

Except in Islam, where the punishment for apostasy is death:

An Afghan physiotherapist will be executed within three days for converting to Christianity.

Said Musa, 45, has been held for eight months in a Kabul prison were he claims he has been tortured and sexually abused by inmates and guards.

Mr Musa, who lost his left leg in a landmine explosion in the 1990s, has worked for the Red Cross for 15 years and helps to treat fellow amputees.

He was arrested in May last year as he attempted to seek asylum at the German embassy following a crackdown on Christians within Afghanistan.

He claims he was visited by a judge who told him he would be hanged within days unless he converted back to Islam.

But he remains defiant and said he would be willing to die for his faith.

This punishment is in line with what is written in the hadiths, the sayings and deeds of Muhammad as related by his Companions and those who came after. For example, we read in one of the most highly-trusted collections, the Sahih Bukhari:

Narrated ‘Ikrima:

Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to ‘Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn ‘Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Apostle forbade it, saying, ‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.‘”

Emphasis added. Keep in mind that, according to the Qur’an, Muhammad was a perfect pattern of conduct for all mankind and, since the Qur’an is supposed to be the eternal words of Allah, for all time, too. Thus, while the sentence of death per se for apostasy doesn’t appear in the Qur’an, its presence in Bukhari’s collection as the words of Muhammad spell bad news for Mr. Musa.

Or anyone who wants to leave Islam.

This news prompts two questions:

How fragile and insecure must a religion be, that it threatens to kill those who dare leave it?

And why isn’t Secretary Clinton on the phone right now with Afghan President Karzai to remind him that a nation dedicated to religious freedom might have a problem with fighting and dying on behalf of a nation that kills people for exercising that freedom? Correct me if I’m wrong, but, so far as I can tell, the administration has said nothing.

via Jihad Watch

RELATED: A good discussion of Islam and apostasy at Sheik Yer’mami.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Brave Knights of Allah hide behind women

December 31, 2010

But then, women are little better than chattel in Islam, so why not use them as living bombs?

The Taliban and al Qaeda have established female suicide bombing cells in remote areas of northwestern Pakistan and northeastern Afghanistan. The female suicide bombers have struck in both Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The existence of the cells, which appeared evident after female suicide bombers attacked twice over the past five months in Afghanistan and Pakistan, was confirmed by a 12-year-old Pakistani girl named Meena Gul.

Gul, who said she was trained to be a “human bomb,” was detained by Pakistani police in the Munda area in Pakistan’s northwestern district of Dir, according to the Times of India.

“Gul said that women suicide bombers were trained for their deadly task in small cells on both sides of the porous border and were dispatched to their missions with a sermon, ‘God will reward you with a place in heaven.'”

Oh, and did I mention some of the women are just girls? Yes, for the valiant jihadi, it’s women and children first. Preferably in the same person.

A long time ago, someone explained to me the First Rule of Texas Common Law: “He needed killing.”

Well, these barbarians need killing.

RELATED: These “holy warriors” also exploit emotionally abused women, the elderly, and the developmentally disabled. Such wonderful people.

 


Nazis and Muslims had a common enemy: the Jews

December 21, 2010

Here’s a recent piece from the Jerusalem Post that reminds us of the ideological simpatico between Islam and Nazism, focusing on Yasser Arafat’s uncle, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini:

A newly released report by the US National Archives details the close collaborative relationship between Nazi leaders and the grand mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, indicating that Nazi authorities planned to use Husseini as their leader after their conquest of Palestine.

Husseini was paid handsomely by the Nazis for his efforts, recruited Muslims for the SS and was promised that he would be made Palestine’s leader after its Jewish population of 350,000 had been murdered.

The report, Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, US Intelligence and the Cold War, was prepared on the basis of thousands of documents declassified under the 1998 Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act.

(…)

“We thought the April 1945 contract between the [German] Foreign Office and Husseini was striking evidence of an ideological collaboration both sides hoped would continue after the war.”

Husseini, who died in Beirut in 1974, was apparently paid 50,000 marks per month, and 80,000 additional marks a month for living expenses, according to a contract with the Germans. This was a time when a German field officer typically earned 25,000 marks a year.

According to the report, on November 28, 1941, Adolf Hitler told Husseini that the Afrika Korps would “liberate” Arabs in the Middle East and that “Germany’s only objective there would be the destruction of the Jews.”

SS leaders and Husseini both claimed that Nazism and Islam had common values as well as common enemies – above all, the Jews,” the report states.

And this Nazi influence stretches down to the present day, as statements by current Islamic leaders show.

Some scholars have argued that this Nazi influence corrupted Islam, selectively playing on antisemitic elements that were in the Qur’an. I take a different view, that in each other, Nazism and Islam found a soul-mate, a sympathetic ally, and that each used the other to achieve their desired end: the destruction of the Jews. As Dr. Andrew Bostom has shown, Jew-hatred is a continuing theme in Islam from Muhammad, himself, to the present day. The Nazis didn’t exploit an aberration — they found a friend.

LINKS: More on the Husseini-Hitler friendship at WILLisms.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Four lessons in Islamic Jew-hatred

December 10, 2010

I’ve often written here about the antisemitism that is an integral part of Islam, something that has been a constant of the religion since the time of Muhammad, himself. Below are four videos, courtesy of Palestinian Media Watch, that illustrate the vilification, demonization, and barefaced Jew-hatred that are a daily part of Islamic life in the Palestinian Authority.

First, a reminder that fighting Jews is a religious duty, to be carried out until the day of resurrection:

Note the insistence that all agreements are temporary, until Allah commands otherwise. This comes from Muhammad’s example, specifically the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, which Muhammad broke when it was convenient for him to resume fighting his enemies in Mecca.

Next, a charming PA cleric calls for the genocide of the Jews and the killing of Americans. In his words, we must be butchered:

Obviously, he didn’t get the memo that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance.

Next up is video of a sermon given during the Second Intifada, helpfully reminding us that Jews are evil and that they should expect to die:

Not quite the Sermon on the Mount, is it?

Finally, a sermon in which a PA cleric relates Allah’s promise that, if the Muslim will fight the Jews, then Muslims will be the masters of the Jews:

Call me a cynic, but, somehow, I’m willing to bet that the sheikh in the video who was so happy that a young boy would promise to commit suicide and murder by blowing himself up among Jews has yet to strap on the explosive belt, himself. They’re always happy to send some poor dumb schmuck who thinks he’s going to be rewarded with wine and virgins, but, somehow, they never get round to doing it themselves.

Odd, that.

Anyway, the point of posting these isn’t just to point out the vicious, murderous Jew-hatred that’s an everyday part of Islam, but to ask a question: How can the supposedly moderate Palestinian Authority be considered a legitimate “partner for peace” when their religious leaders are daily calling Jews enemies of God and demanding their death and destruction, when their educational system inculcates this in their children from the earliest age?

The answer is, of course, they can’t. Not when they’re told every day that fighting and killing Jews –in Israel and around the world– is a command from God, himself. Were Israel to give up all the occupied territories and return to the 1947 borders, there would at best be a temporary truce, a modern-day Hudaybiyyah, which would end with the Muslims resuming their assault on the Jews at their convenience. This is a religious war, not a battle for territory.

The great former Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky, in his book The Case for Democracy, argued that no genuine peace is possible with the Palestinians until their minds were freed of the totalitarian group-think forced on them through their schools and mosques, and their society purged of the intellectual and spiritual poison.

I have to agree. Sadly, I don’t expect it to happen any time soon.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


In Islam, marriage is a contract for pleasure, so there can be no rape

December 9, 2010

See, the husband isn’t raping her if he forces her into sex against her will, he’s just enforcing the terms of the contract. You know, like making some vendor deliver the goods you paid for. Yeah, that’s it! The good Islamic husband is just making her deliver the goods.

But don’t take my word for it; just ask the honored Egyptian Islamic cleric, Yousuf al-Badri:

From the MEMRI transcript:

Interviewer: What if it is against her will, using violence?

Yousuf Al-Badri: According to the hadith, if a husband summons his wife and she refuses – she incurs the wrath of God in Heaven when she’s asleep. The husband is not allowed to rape her, but she incurs the wrath of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad said that she must come to him even if she is baking by the stove or riding a horse.

[...]

Interviewer: A marriage of contract is not a deed of ownership, in which the woman relinquishes her honor, her mind, and so on.

Yousuf Al-Badri: This talk about honor is a new thing. We never heard of it until these days. If a woman is at home with her husband, and she is his companion and runs the household, and he asks her to give him food, drink, and so on – how can we possibly consider it rape when he derives pleasure from her, even if she doesn’t feel like it, of if she abhors it… How can we possibly consider it a kind of what is called “rape”? This is not true.

Interviewer: She’s his wife! Do you justify beatings or sadistic behavior?

Yousuf Al-Badri: Islam forbids beating unless it is done with a stick – a stick the size of a pencil or a toothpick.

Are we clear, now, ladies? A Muslim wife who breaks the pleasure contract incurs Allah’s anger and can get beaten with a stick. And then, if he enforces the contract, it isn’t rape.

Glad we’re all on the same page, now.

PREVIOUSLY: We’ve heard this “It’s not rape-rape* inside marriage” argument before, from American and British Muslim clerical groups.

PS: The interview was conducted on the BBC’s Arabic channel, and I was glad to see the interviewer challenge this schmuck on his medieval misogyny, unlike the Egyptian interviewer who looked like he was excited to hear the good news that he could honor his wife by beating her.

*On a related note, thank you, Whoopi Goldberg, for demonstrating once and for all just how stupid and morally bankrupt you are.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Jihadist Muslims force US cartoonist into hiding

September 16, 2010

Fatwa this!

The Religion of Tolerance again shows that “irony” has real meaning: Because of threats against her life by Muslims outraged* over her suggestion that everyone draw cartoons of Muhammad to show support for freedom of speech, Seattle political cartoonist Molly Norris has been forced to abandon her identity and go into hiding:

You may have noticed that Molly Norris‘ comic is not in the paper this week. That’s because there is no more Molly.

The gifted artist is alive and well, thankfully. But on the insistence of top security specialists at the FBI, she is, as they put it, “going ghost”: moving, changing her name, and essentially wiping away her identity. She will no longer be publishing cartoons in our paper or in City Arts magazine, where she has been a regular contributor. She is, in effect, being put into a witness-protection program—except, as she notes, without the government picking up the tab. It’s all because of the appalling fatwa issued against her this summer, following her infamous “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” cartoon.

We’re told again and again that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance, yet, again and again, people are forced to go into hiding or get police protection because they have dared to criticize Islam and have been threatened by Muslims: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Geert Wilders, Lars Vilks, Salman Rushdie, and a bunch of Danish cartoonists, among others, all now run a real risk of being killed and have to live a life on the run. And they’re not just being paranoic “Islamophobes:” the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was gunned down by a Muslim and was stabbed and had his throat slit while begging for his life. All for exercising the liberty of free speech that is our inalienable, natural right.

Apologists will again try to tell us that what happened to Norris was just the work of a tiny minority of extremists who don’t represent the real Islam. (And is that true for Hirsi Ali, Vilks, van Gogh, and all the others, too?) Forget it. The Qur’an tells us that Muhammad is a perfect example for all mankind: his actions define what is moral. Thus the killing of those who criticize Islam carries the imprimatur of Muhammad, himself. While there are many, many Muslims who are rightfully horrified and embarrassed by moments like this, it is without doubt that those Muslims who threaten and act against critics of Islam are just following the path of Islam’s prophet.

I truly hope Ms. Norris, whatever she is calling herself now, has a concealed carry permit, a weapon, and knows how to use it, because it’s all too likely she will have to.

*(What else is new?)

LINKS: More from Sister Toldjah, who asks “How would the media react if Christians had made this threat?” Good question. Also Big Peace and at The Sundries Shack.


Klavan on the Culture: Does Islam Suck?

August 27, 2010

Rueful satire and reflections on the Ground Zero Mosque from PJTV‘s Andrew Klavan:

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Now I’m confused: Can Muslims be Islamophobic?

August 9, 2010

I mean, that’s the only explanation why two Muslims would call the mosque to be built just a few hundred feet from Ground Zero a provocation, and that every Muslim knows that’s what it is, isn’t it?

New York currently boasts at least 30 mosques so it’s not as if there is pressing need to find space for worshippers. The fact we Muslims know the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation to thumb our noses at the infidel. The proposal has been made in bad faith and in Islamic parlance, such an act is referred to as “Fitna,” meaning “mischief-making” that is clearly forbidden in the Koran.

The Koran commands Muslims to, “Be considerate when you debate with the People of the Book” — i.e., Jews and Christians. Building an exclusive place of worship for Muslims at the place where Muslims killed thousands of New Yorkers is not being considerate or sensitive, it is undoubtedly an act of “fitna”

And the Iranian Muslim-American woman who lost her mother when United 175 slammed into the South Tower, she must be an Islamophobe, too:

When I am asked about the people who murdered my mother, I try to hold back my anger. I try to have a more spiritual perspective. I tell myself that perhaps what happened was meant to happen — that it was my mother’s destiny to perish this way. I try to take solace in the notion that her death has forced a much-needed conversation and reevaluation of the role of religion in the Muslim community, of the duties and obligations that the faith imposes and of its impact on the non-Muslim world.

But a mosque near Ground Zero will not move this conversation forward. There were many mosques in the United States before Sept. 11; their mere existence did not bring cross-cultural understanding. The proposed center in New York may be heralded as a peace offering — may genuinely seek to focus on “promoting integration, tolerance of difference and community cohesion through arts and culture,” as its Web site declares — but I fear that over time, it will cultivate a fundamentalist version of the Muslim faith, embracing those who share such beliefs and hating those who do not.

The Sept. 11 attacks were the product of a hateful ideology that the perpetrators were willing to die for. They believed that all non-Muslims are infidels and that the duty of Muslims is to renounce them. I am not a theologian, but I know that the men who killed my mother carried this message in their hearts and minds. Obedient and dutiful soldiers, they marched toward their promised rewards in heaven with utter disregard for the value of the human beings they killed.

Liberal multiculturalists and “Big L” Libertarians tell us we’re being intolerant and somehow slighting the principles on which the US was founded when we say a mosque shouldn’t be built at Ground Zero, that it will only cause strife and be a symbol of victory for those Muslims who support the jihad against the West. They imply that we’re being bigoted, ignorant, and Islamophobic.

Yet when lifelong Muslims themselves say the same things, shouldn’t we listen?

LINKS: More from Hot Air.


Endangered species: the progressive Muslim

July 6, 2010

This guy had better be careful; suggesting reform or changes to Islam, or that any portion of the Qur’an is not applicable for all time, can earn one a death fatwa. At Technorati, A. Mohit muses on Islam in the wake of a school teacher’s beheading:

Proponents of Islam maintain that most of these practices are attributed to sharia laws, and many progressive Muslims claim that sharia laws are not always derived from the principles laid down in the Muslim holy book Quran; rather in many instances these laws are contrary to Quranic instructions. The problem is that there is no universal acceptance of these opinions among the Islamic scholars.

Many non-Muslims allege that Islam is a dangerous religion, and I admit that at the core of my heart, I feel I do not have ammunitions to refute this allegation about my faith. I have been taught that Quran is a divine book that God has preserved in the way it came to mankind. Nevertheless, I find many statements in Quran are not defensible in the justice system of the civilized world, just as Muslims find such statements in other holy books, which to them are not holy, since they consider those books to be adulterated.

The divinity of Quran has failed to save my people. I pray that they learn to respect other religions, realize how people of other faiths have reexamined the core concepts of their denominations, and reformed their practices to accommodate the latest discoveries of science to make them suitable for society with its ever expanding knowledge base.

Good luck with that. As I wrote elsewhere, the task of reform seems impossible without tearing out the foundations of Islam, itself. I hope Mr. Mohit and other reformers prove me wrong.

(via Jihad Watch)


No mosque at Ground Zero

June 5, 2010

The great Pat Condell with words for Americans on the prospect of a mosque being built just yards from where Muslim jihadists killed thousands of our people in 2001:

I admit this is a difficult issue for me, since, as an American, anything that smacks of abridging freedom of religious expression gets greeted with great skepticism. As it should.  And yet, this case is different: a mosque is a symbol of Islamic domination and, per sharia law, becomes a permanent possession of the Islamic ummah, or community. It is no longer American soil, but part of the Dar ul-Islam, the House of Submission.  This is as much a part of Islamic law as the call to jihad, that same called that resulted in so many deaths on 9-11.

I’ll have more to say about this some other day, but, for now, I think the mosque should be blocked. It’s not an act of “reaching out” or “building cultural ties.” No, by placing it at the site of Islam’s “great victory,” it’s an act of conquest and domination – of cultural jihad.

RELATED: (via Hot Air) By the way, did you know that the imam of this proposed mosque, Feisal Abdul Rauf, belongs to a group that is the largest donor to the group that organized the Gaza “aid” flotilla? What a coincidence. Hmmm…  Thinking


The Poet Versus the Prophet

May 17, 2010

There’s a great essay at Reason by Mark Goldblatt, who’s sick to death of Western society’s cowardice (disguised as “political correctness”) in the face of jihadist, fascist Islam:

I’ve had a couple of weeks now to think about [Allen] Ginsberg cursing out that cabbie, and cursing out Islam and Muhammad. You see, I live in Manhattan, three blocks from Times Square. As near as I can determine, I was walking with a friend about thirty feet from the car bomb on May 1st right around the time it was supposed to detonate. Except for the technical incompetence of a Muslim dirtbag named Faisal Shahzad, I and my friend would likely be dead now. Note the phrase: “Muslim dirtbag.” Neither term by itself accounts for the terrorist act he attempted to perpetrate; both terms, however, are equally complicit in it. It might have been a crapshoot of nature and nurture that wrought a specimen like Shahzad, but it was Islam that inspired him, that gave his fecal stain of a life its depth and its justification. Why is that so difficult to admit?

Read the whole thing. The closing line deserves a standing ovation.

(via The Jawa Report)

UPDATE: And speaking of cowardice, take it away, Attorney General Eric Holder! And then there’s Michael Barone’s analysis.


The theology of genocide

May 14, 2010

A couple of days ago, I commented on the UC San Diego student, a member of the Muslim Students Association (which itself is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood), who publicly stated her support for another Holocaust against the Jews.

In response to the inevitable question, “How in the name of all that’s decent can she make such a statement,” Robert Spencer, a noted scholar of Islam, explains how the roots of Ms. Albahri’s murderous antisemitism is grounded in the core works of Islam itself: Theology for a Holocaust

None of this should come as any surprise. The genocidal hadith [Sahih Muslim 6985 --Phineas] quoted on Palestinian TV is just one element of an anti-Semitism that is deeply rooted in the Qur’an and Sunnah, and which runs through Islamic history with a remarkable consistency. The Qur’an portrays the Jews as the craftiest, most persistent, and most implacable enemies of the Muslims. Three notorious Qur’anic passages depict an angry Allah transforming Jews into apes and pigs: 2:63–66; 5:59–60; and 7:166. The first of those passages depicts Allah telling the Jews who “profaned the Sabbath”: “Be as apes despicable!” It goes on to say that these accursed ones serve “as a warning example for their time and for all times to come.” The second has Allah directing Muhammad to remind the “People of the Book” about “those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil.” The third essentially repeats this, saying of the Sabbath-breaking Jews that when “in their insolence they transgressed (all) prohibitions,” Allah said to them, “Be ye apes, despised and rejected.”

In traditional Islamic theology these passages have not been considered to apply to all Jews. However, that hasn’t stopped contemporary jihadists from frequently referring to Jews as the “descendants of apes and swine.” The implication is that today’s Jews are bestial in character and are the enemies of Allah, just as the Sabbath-breakers were. The grand sheikh of Al-Azhar, Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, the most respected cleric in the world among Sunni Muslims today, has called Jews “the enemies of Allah, descendants of apes and pigs.” Saudi sheikh Abd al-Rahman al-Sudayyis, imam of the principal mosque in the holiest city in Islam, Mecca, said in a sermon that Jews are “the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs.”

Another Saudi sheikh, Ba’d bin Abdallah al-Ajameh al-Ghamidi, made the connection explicit: “The current behavior of the brothers of apes and pigs, their treachery, violation of agreements, and defiling of holy places … is connected with the deeds of their forefathers during the early period of Islam—which proves the great similarity between all the Jews living today and the Jews who lived at the dawn of Islam.” A 1996 Hamas publication says that today’s Jews are bestial in spirit, and this is a manifestation of the punishment of their forefathers. In January 2007, Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas stated, “The sons of Israel are mentioned as those who are corrupting humanity on earth,” referring to Qur’an 5:64.

It information such as this that our government (and others) willfully ignores when dealing with the Arab-Israeli dispute and the threat from Islamic terrorism. Trading land for peace and clinging to illusory “root causes” makes no sense -in fact, it’s downright dangerous- when dealing with a foe who believes he is fighting for a holy cause. Any concession or act of good faith is seen as weakness on our part and a proof of the righteousness of their struggle.

Be sure to read the whole thing. Of Spencer’s books, I most recommend “The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion” and “The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran.”

(Cross-posted at Sister Toldjah, where I’m guest-hosting for the day)


At least she’s honest

May 11, 2010

During an exchange in a question and answer period with right-wing activist David Horowitz at UC San Diego, a member of the Muslim Students Association admits she is in favor of another Holocaust.

But don’t say it isn’t a religion of tolerance.

(via Allahpundit)

UPDATE: And this antisemitic genocidal imperative is hardwired into Islam. From the the Sahih Muslim, one of the most authoritative collections of ahadith, the sayings and deeds of Muhammad:

Book 041, Number 6985:

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

The young lady at UC San Diego was just following tradition.

(via)


Islamic tolerance in action

May 11, 2010

All the man did was draw a mediocre satirical cartoon of Muhammad’s head on the body of a dog, yet, for that, Lars Vilks has lived for years now in fear of his life. And today, someone shouting “Allahu Akbar” attacked him:

I’m willing to bet the attacker wasn’t Episcopalian.

As Allahpundit observed:

Note to Trey Parker and Matt Stone: If you haven’t hired full-time bodyguards yet, this is your wake-up call.

But don’t you dare say Islam isn’t a religion of peace.  Not talking


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 12,897 other followers