Islamic cartoons, merged multiple threads

[Meplat]

Anyone else remember Mapplethorpe hysteria?

Actually I do. What I don't remember are any armed protests by Christian organizations, or calls for terrorism over the Mapplethorpe exhibits. What I do remeber is a government who basically told its people to "shut up, WE know what art YOUR money should be supporting".

 

[shootinstudent]

Seen any Christians at Fox Network with AK's using threats as protests over the way He is portrayed in "The Simpsons" or "Family Guy"?

These protests are clearly wrong and irrational. But they shouldn't surprise people...you're talking about a mostly third world, ill educated, and poor population.


Take a statute of the virgin mary down to a small, rural community in south america and desecrate it in front of a wedding party. I guarantee you will be able to start a riot if you want. Do the same with icons of the King in Thailand, images of Buddha in Cambodia, etc. etc. and you will be able to start riots if you want to. It's wrong, but nothing liminted to any one particular religion/culture.

 

[Meplat]

So? Are you scared?

I don't live in fear. I do not kneel for any group like that.
And if someone tried to kill me because they were offended by my tshirt, they better hope to whatever deity they're obedient to that they're faster on the trigger than I am, because if they're not, they'd quickly be going to meet them.

I DO NOT LIVE IN FEAR.

Recently went to a gun show wearing a shirt I had custom screened which simply stated that the racist, anti-gun city councilman of that city was created solely because every village NEEDED an idiot. Since he is known far and wide for being escorted by his armed lackey bodyguards, and attempting (unsuccessfully) to intimidate both vendors and customers at these shows, the lady at the desk asked I were not afraid I'd get shot wearing that shirt. Told her "No ma'am. I shoot back. And I don't hold my .45 like it was a Black and Decker drill." This man is an elected official, and a public figure by choice. Should he choose to act a fool, I'll be glad to point it out. One of the vendors asked me if I'd caught any flack over wearing the shirt as the dillweed in question had just gotten into a physical confrontation the week before with a fellow African American because he called the man an "Uncle Tom" and accused him of "kissing Whitey's butt" over a disagreement that had absolutely NOTHING to do with race. Told him "No sir. Didn't think to worry about it." Still don't. I LOVE that shirt. It in no way denegrates anyone because of any race, creed or culture, merely states the fact that one particular idiot is an idiot.

I'll be damned if I won't express my opinion, no matter who likes it. Why bother with worrying about the Second if the First is already gone?

 

[tellner]

And Jesus of Nazareth is considered by Christian religions to be the both the Son of God and God himself as part of the Trinity. He is also considered to be the salvation to their souls. Jesus is not the founder or Christianity, He IS Christianity. Seen any Christians at Fox Network with AK's using threats as protests over the way He is portrayed in "The Simpsons" or "Family Guy"?

I'm not going to get into a theological debate here about the foundations of Christianity or similar. Wrong venue. Wrong topic. Besides, I've had to learn more about Christian dogma than I ever really wanted to. But to answer your incorrect assertion, Mohammed is the founder of the religion, a prophet, but he is not considered to be G-d by any Muslim.

Christians with AKs protesting "The Simpsons"? Dunno. But I have seen them on the street corners calling for death and damnation for anyone who doesn't conform precisely to their beliefs. The Nuremburg Project, Army of G-d, the Klan and any number of other evil murderous people perform their abominations in the name of Jesus. The first people I ever had to seriously hurt with my empty hands or weapons were Christians who objected to the simple fact that I wasn't one. From the perspective of someone who doesn't have a horse in the race the Cross and the Crescent can both be mighty frightening.

 

[Meplat]

These protests are clearly wrong and irrational. But they shouldn't surprise people...you're talking about a mostly third world, ill educated, and poor population.


Take a statute of the virgin mary down to a small, rural community in south america and desecrate it in front of a wedding party. I guarantee you will be able to start a riot if you want. Do the same with icons of the King in Thailand, images of Buddha in Cambodia, etc. etc. and you will be able to start riots if you want to. It's wrong, but nothing liminted to any one particular religion/culture.

Then why, pray tell, does the US State department not come out and condemn The Simpsons and Family Guy? Aren't they afraid some of us more "third world, ill educated, poor people" might be offended? Or is it "selective" protection of just certain groups? I suspect the latter.

 

[Meplat]

Mohammed is the founder of the religion, a prophet, but he is not considered to be G-d by any Muslim.

You need to re-read. I never CLAIMED he was considered to be God, merely that Jesus WAS.

Christians with AKs protesting "The Simpsons"? Dunno. But I have seen them on the street corners calling for death and damnation for anyone who doesn't conform precisely to their beliefs. The Nuremburg Project, Army of G-d, the Klan and any number of other evil murderous people perform their abominations in the name of Jesus.

And are roundly and soundly condemned for those actions by the mainstream Christian religions.

The first people I ever had to seriously hurt with my empty hands or weapons were Christians who objected to the simple fact that I wasn't one. From the perspective of someone who doesn't have a horse in the race the Cross and the Crescent can both be mighty frightening.

As one who would glady stand side by side with you should you be assaulted by ANY group merely because you didn't accept that group's belief system, I'd be very interested in hearing (via PM so as not to inflame anyone else's "sensibliities" and to avoid being shut down for non-topical posts - honestly curious about your situation and what you might have faced). I give you my word that this IS NOT an ivitation to a private pie throwing contest - I am honestly interested in the circumstances you describe.

 

[Cosmoline]

These protests are clearly wrong and irrational. But they shouldn't surprise people...you're talking about a mostly third world, ill educated, and poor population.

Like the wealthy, well-educated Saudis who drove jets into the WTC? Or the millionaire's son OBL? Or the well-educated doctor at his right hand?

 

[Cosmoline]

Cosmo if this was about juvenile rude cartoons I would be more on the anti-European papers front; however that is one half of the beef - the other is that it is against Islam to even depict Mohammed, which causes offence by itself. Of course, the fact that the people who drew, commissioned, and the intended audience were all non-Muslim doesnt enter into the debate. Its kind of like Israel boycotting the US because all of your food isnt kosher.

I am aware of that. But I think this whole thing has really helped to throw the inherent madness of Islam into sharp relief. They feel the world MUST bend to their religious edicts. There is no distincition, at heart, between government and religion for them. And they see their religion as being THE world religion. So we must all bow to its fundamental tenants.

I see no resolution to this, ultimately, until the back of Islam is snapped and it is properly reduced to the level of a western religion.

 

[shootinstudent]

Like the wealthy, well-educated Saudis who drove jets into the WTC? Or the millionaire's son OBL? Or the well-educated doctor at his right hand?

Actually, no...you didn't find them protesting in the streets and wasting their time. Those are truly radicals, dedicated and thoroughly bloodthirsty, and that's why they are able to do so much damage despite having a small number of followers. Highly motivated and organized international terrorists are apples compared to the onions doing the rioting.

Rioters: more like a bunch of south americans mobbing you for breaking a statue of the virgin mary.

Al Qaeda: more like the KKK/Fascist gangs that terrorized Europe.

Thank heavens we are fortunate enough here in America to stop our radical racist gangs from gaining any real power. I worry much more about a resurgence of racism/anti-semitism in America (where we have a longer history of the problem than any Muslim country does) than I worry about someone coming from the Desert and using magic to conquer my country.

I see no resolution to this, ultimately, until the back of Islam is snapped and it is properly reduced to the level of a western religion.

That's not going to happen. This is an area where I think Israel may play an important role...it's an excellent model of a religious state that is clearly committed to its religion, but that is loyal and accountable to its citizens' freedoms. Obviously, as you know, I think there are problems with discrimination. But beside that, there you have a fundamentally religious state that works well and integrates all levels of religiosity. I see no reason why Islam is incapable of doing the same in the future, especially considering that it had a similarly successful system in the past.

Here's an article that explains the myth (propogated by the fascist terror groups like Al Qaeda) that Islam has anything remotely like a "religiously required" form of Government:
http://www.meforum.org/article/14

 

[NineseveN]

Wow, they can rally across the world to condemn some cartoons, but when someone flies a few planes into buildings or bombs some innocent folks, cuts some peoples' heads off or calls for the murder of women and children that don't go to their church, all of these peaceful folks are nowhere to be found...unless they're cheering the terrorists on.

I think the so-called "moderate muslims" aren't so moderate after all, at least when it comes to critiquing cartoons anyways.

I am sick and tired of saying, "I know all Muslims aren't like that", if they're not, they need to stand up, raise their hands and let their voices be heard...I simply won't be bothered to make the distinction for them anymore. Time to put your money where our mouths have been for you.

I am so tired of this.

Muhammad Cartoon 'Offensive'


Feb. 3, 2006
Hundreds of Muslim worshippers gather after Friday prayers to shout slogans denouncing Denmark for published cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in 2005 at the revered Abu Hanifa Mosque, Friday, Feb. 3, 2006, in Baghdad, Iraq. (AP)



"Inciting religious or ethnic hatred in this manner is not acceptable."
Janelle Hironimus, State Dept.


The State Department criticized on Friday cartoon drawings in Europe of the Prophet Muhammad, calling them "offensive to the beliefs of Muslims."

While recognizing the importance of freedom of the press and expression, department press officer Janelle Hironimus said these rights must be coupled with press responsibility.

"Inciting religious or ethnic hatred in this manner is not acceptable," Hironimus said. "We call for tolerance and respect for all communities and for their religious beliefs and practices."

The 12 cartoons first appeared in a Danish newspaper in September and were reprinted in several European newspapers this week in a gesture of press freedom. When the cartoons were first published five months ago, though, the controversy was low-key, CBS News correspondent Richard Roth reports. Boycotts were called against Danish goods in the Middle East. But the anger spread fast.

One of the drawings shows Muhammad wearing a turban shaped as a bomb. Another portrays him holding a sword, his eyes covered by a black rectangle.

Hard-line Muslims in Indonesia stormed a building housing the Danish Embassy and burned the country's flag Friday to protest the caricatures, as outrage over the drawings rippled across Asia.

Pakistan's parliament unanimously passed a resolution condemning the provocative cartoons, and Singapore's top Islamic advisory body said their aim was to incite hatred.

Rowdy demonstrations were held in Bangladesh and Malaysia, where crowds chanted: "Destroy our Enemies!"

In Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, 150 demonstrators pelted the high-rise building housing the Danish Embassy with rotten eggs, then pushed their way past security guards.

Before leaving the building in the heart of the Indonesian capital's business district, they tore down the Danish flag and set it on fire.

"We are not terrorists, we are not anarchists, but we are against those people who blaspheme Islam," a protester wearing a white Arabic-style robes shouted outside the building.

Indonesia's government reiterated earlier criticism of the paper's decision to publish.

"This is about insensitivity and a trend toward Islamaphobia," said foreign ministry spokesman Yuri Thamrin.

"As a democratic country we are very aware of press freedom, but we also believe it should not be used to slander or defame sacred religious symbols."

Afghanistan, like Indonesia, has criticized the drawings.

In Iraq, thousands staged demonstrations after weekly mosque prayer services on Friday. About 4,500 people joined rallies in Basra and hundreds at a Baghdad mosque. Danish flags were burned at both demonstrations.

"We strongly denounce and condemn this horrific action," Iraq's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, said of the caricatures in a statement posted on his Web site and dated Jan. 31.

In Pakistan, where insulting the prophet is punishable by death, President Gen. Pervez Musharraf also expressed outrage, saying there was no way to justify publication of the cartoons.

"I have been hurt, grieved and I am angry," the military leader said, adding that those who printed the cartoons were "totally oblivious of what is happening in the world."

Moderate Muslims were also offended, Musharraf said, and felt their faith had been demonized.

Earlier, Pakistani lawmakers called the drawings blasphemous, then passed a resolution condemning them as hurting "the faith and feelings of Muslims all over the world."

The resolution urged the government to take unspecified "economic and political actions to prevent uncivilized behavior" by the European media that printed the drawings.

In mostly Muslim Malaysia, about 60 members of the opposition Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party demonstrated outside Denmark's Embassy in Kuala Lumpur demanding the Danish government stop newspapers from reprinting the drawings.

"It's an uncivilized act, it's heinous," Hanifah Maidin, the party's youth chief, said after submitting a letter of complaint to Danish officials.

In Bangladesh, about 500 Muslims rallied outside a mosque after Friday prayers, and the top Islamic advisory body in Singapore said the drawings had no purpose other than to "incite hatred."

"No one is allowed to ridicule or cast aspersions on the faith of a people under the cloak of free expression," the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore said in a statement.

Indonesia has 220 million people, most of them moderate Muslims, but Friday's protest was among the first held in the sprawling archipelago over the cartoons.

Fearing more in the days ahead, Foreign Minister Hasan Wirayuda urged restraint and said he had asked police to upgrade security at embassies in Jakarta, the capital.

Those who took part in Friday's rally were members of the Islamic Defenders Front, which campaigns for Islamic law and often takes to the street against perceived violators of Islamic rules at home or abroad.

Three protesters said they were received by the Danish ambassador, and claimed he told them he planned to apologize to Indonesian Muslims for causing offense.

"If he doesn't, then we will demand the government kick him out," said protest organizer Ali Reza.

Meanwhile, Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen called a meeting Friday to detail the government's position and actions in the matter. He reiterated his stance that the government cannot interfere with issues concerning the press. More than 70 ambassadors attended, including those from predominantly Muslim Egypt, Turkey, Iran and Lebanon.

Egypt's ambassador said that Rasmussen's response to the Muhammad drawings controversy has been inadequate and that the country should do more to "appease the whole Muslim world."

Mona Omar Attia said after meeting with Fogh Rasmussen that she will urge diplomatic protests against the Scandinavian country to continue.

The Islamic reaction in Europe has been muted compared to the scenes of rage in countries like Pakistan, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia, where demonstrators have burned Danish flags.

Demonstrators marched from a London mosque toward Denmark's Embassy on Friday to protest the newspaper caricatures.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw criticized the decision to republish the cartoons, saying that while freedom of speech should be respected "there is not any obligation to insult or to be gratuitously inflammatory."

"I believe that the republication of these cartoons has been unnecessary, it has been insensitive, it has been disrespectful and it has been wrong," he told reporters.

French President Jacques Chirac on Friday urged respect and reason when dealing with religious beliefs, in response to caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad that have incensed Muslims in France and worldwide.

Chirac met Friday with Dalil Boubakeur, head of the French Council of the Muslim Faith. "France, a country of secularism, respects all religions and all beliefs," he said, but added that "the principle of freedom of expression constitutes one of the foundations of the Republic."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006...?CMP=OTC-RSSFeed&source=RSS&attr=HOME_1277068

 

[shootinstudent]

I am sick and tired of saying, "I know all Muslims aren't like that", if they're not, they need to stand up, raise their hands and let their voices be heard...I simply won't be bothered to make the distinction for them anymore. Time to put your money where our mouths have been for you.

When's the last time you read a muslim publication?

It's pretty hard to figure out what people are condemning/supporting if you don't read the things they write. Expecting them to pay for full page ads in the NY times to deal with events they weren't individually responsible for is ridiculous, but that seems to be what some people want.

 

[tellner]

Muslim publications? A good one is muslimwakeup http://www.muslimwakeup.com

 

[wingnutx]

 

[NineseveN]

When's the last time you read a muslim publication?

It's pretty hard to figure out what people are condemning/supporting if you don't read the things they write. Expecting them to pay for full page ads in the NY times to deal with events they weren't individually responsible for is ridiculous, but that seems to be what some people want.

The so-called radical publications outshine the "moderates" by frequency and volume so much that only someone actively trying to make the case you just did would even bring it up. The so-called moderates have plenty of outlets to voice their support or dissent, funny how they voice their support by dancing in the streets and holding demonstrations when bad things happen.

Now, I can understand that when the radicals perform terrorist acts it would be very unsafe for even the moderates to come out physically in public and demonstrate immediately afterwards, but this is the information age, they have plenty of outlets.

I am not saying that they are terrorists themselves, they are likely too afraid to say anything for fear of backlash and attacks, but cowardice is a poor excuse. Do you think our service members are without fear? Or how about the Iraqi security forces that are targeted every day? How do you think most of America feels deep down in places they won't talk about at the dinner table?

Read the stories, there are Muslims sacking embassies and burning flags, holding protests in large numbers. What can we derive from this? They may not be the majority, but I would submit that there are less moderates than those with a rosy world-view would like to believe.

And yes I do read what they write, obviously more so than you. We had this type of argument last time you and I were involved in a thread. You make accusations that I am uniformed because I don't agree with your loose interpretations and opinions. I read, at a minimum, from 15 Islamic/Muslim sources per week. Care to be honest enough to declare how many you read from and how often?

You seem to have this vision of an ideal that sadly just does not jive with how things really work and have worked since the dawn of civilization. If they want support, they first have to loudly declare in one voice whose side they are on...otherwise, how can we count on them? How can we not be suspicious? I have Muslim friends, I'd prefer to stand beside them instead of in front of them...anyone that calls themselves your friend but will only stand with your back to them can't really be that much of a friend at all.

 

[CentralTexas]

Doin' it for

the kids! They blow up so fast don't they?

 

[shootinstudent]

The so-called radical publications outshine the "moderates" by frequency and volume so much that only someone actively trying to make the case you just did would even bring it up.

Uh, you figured this out how? Tellner posted a good link for American Muslims...reading through the english language papers I can find in the Arab world and Pakistan, I see no such "overwhelming majority." I read religious material more than I do just plain news, and that is overwhelmingly anti-terror...it's literally a small gang of crazies considered heretics by the rest that publish the really insane stuff.

I am not saying that they are terrorists themselves, they are likely too afraid to say anything for fear of backlash and attacks, but cowardice is a poor excuse.

Think about the logic of what you are saying here. Have you ever read a buddhist condemnation of terrorism? When's the last time you read a CNN piece on America's buddhists condemning anti-american attacks? Yes, I know if you go looking you can find them...but they're not out in the open. Does that mean that buddhists support terror, because they're not fighting to get on the news and condemn it?

And yes I do read what they write, obviously more so than you. We had this type of argument last time you and I were involved in a thread. You make accusations that I am uniformed because I don't agree with your loose interpretations and opinions. I read, at a minimum, from 15 Islamic/Muslim sources per week. Care to be honest enough to declare how many you read from and how often?

Great, want to name some of those sources that you read? I'll post some here, so that people can go through and read coverage of the cartoon debate.

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/index.htm

http://www.nourizadeh.com/archives/cat_denglish.php

http://www.kuna.net.kw/home/default.aspx?Language=en

and of course, my favorite english news from the region:

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/home2.asp

Religious material (Shafi'i):http://www.livingislam.org/maa/dcmm_e.html

And another interesting Shafi'i (this is a conservative textualist Sheikh who argues, quite convincingly, that Israel is sanctioned by the Koran, and that any plan for Palestinian statehood is simply a tool for radicals to gain power): http://www.amislam.com

I have Muslim friends, I'd prefer to stand beside them instead of in front of them...anyone that calls themselves your friend but will only stand with your back to them can't really be that much of a friend at all.

If you don't trust your friends because they follow another religion, you're no friend to them.

 

[ozarkhillbilly]

Take a statute of the virgin mary down to a small, rural community in south america and desecrate it in front of a wedding party. I guarantee you will be able to start a riot if you want. Do the same with icons of the King in Thailand, images of Buddha in Cambodia, etc. etc. and you will be able to start riots if you want to. It's wrong, but nothing liminted to any one particular religion/culture.

I am sorry I did not realize a bunch of Danes went to mecca and published these cartoons, I was under the impression that they did it in Denmark.

When a couple of years ago muslims took over the Church of the Nativity in Bethlhem and used bibles as tolit paper I do not rember seeing abunch of South Americans rioting or threatening to kill any muslim they found. When a few years ago in Afaganistan mulsims blew up the statues of Buddha I don't recall Buddhist rioting or threatening to kill people.

So I guess your wrong, it is limited to one particular religion/culture

 

[ozarkhillbilly]

Last I checked, no one was arguing that Germany should be nuked and that all germans should be exterminated because "there are no peaceful Germans" or because the Germans didn't "stop the nazis."

Thats because WWII has been over for 60 years. Sixty years after 9/11 I will agree with you that anybody wanting to nuke anybody over it at that point in time, will be in the wrong.

However during WWII we did not have nukes so we did the best we could and fire bombed their cities killing just as many as possible. As soon as we did get nukes, and I believe you can check with Japan about it but I am pretty sure we used them. Last I check most Americans thought and still do that it was a good idea.

 

[NineseveN]

Uh, you figured this out how? Tellner posted a good link for American Muslims...reading through the english language papers I can find in the Arab world and Pakistan, I see no such "overwhelming majority." I read religious material more than I do just plain news, and that is overwhelmingly anti-terror...it's literally a small gang of crazies considered heretics by the rest that publish the really insane stuff.

Look kid, I read this stuff as part of my job, so I figured it out based on intel that comes from good sources. No, I'm not some ninja commando, but my employer and the nature of the work I do make it a necessity to keep an eye on things of this nature. You do this as a hobby I presume, you're not getting all of the facts, I can tell you that much.

Think about the logic of what you are saying here. Have you ever read a buddhist condemnation of terrorism? When's the last time you read a CNN piece on America's buddhists condemning anti-american attacks? Yes, I know if you go looking you can find them...but they're not out in the open. Does that mean that buddhists support terror, because they're not fighting to get on the news and condemn it?

But we're not talking about Buddhists, are we?

Great, want to name some of those sources that you read? I'll post some here, so that people can go through and read coverage of the cartoon debate.

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/index.htm

http://www.nourizadeh.com/archives/cat_denglish.php

http://www.kuna.net.kw/home/default.aspx?Language=en

and of course, my favorite english news from the region:

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/home2.asp

Religious material (Shafi'i):http://www.livingislam.org/maa/dcmm_e.html

And another interesting Shafi'i (this is a conservative textualist Sheikh who argues, quite convincingly, that Israel is sanctioned by the Koran, and that any plan for Palestinian statehood is simply a tool for radicals to gain power): http://www.amislam.com

I'm not getting into this with you. Arguing with you gets verbosely obtuse in short order. Needless to say, we'd end up posting link after link after link, you post 5, I post 5, you post 5 more, I post 5 more...the point is, if they wanted to, these organizations could very easily get press time on the issue in this country...Cindy Sheehan is surely proof of how one could parrot the same stuff over and over again, and as long as it is a hot button issue, you'll get press time.

My information comes from sources often outside of the press, sorry, I am not at liberty to share them and I don't expect you to believe me on my word, but I am also not willing to get into a link match with you because no matter what I submit, you're just not willing to see things as they are...remember, we did this before.

Here's a quick fun one someone just PM'd me. Not sure why they don't just post it themselves but whatever.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/2005/07/007262print.html

The collection of links in there ought to be enough to counter those you posted...while the article and site are rather pointed, I would say the majority of those links are from pretty unbiased sources. Of course, these are not Muslim sources, only Muslim folks speaking to non-Muslim sources, same difference, no?


http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/
http://www.altmuslim.com/
http://www.montrealmuslimnews.net/
http://www.nourizadeh.com/archives/cat_denglish.php
http://www.islamonline.net/english/index.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/news/newsmuslim.shtml
http://www.milligazette.com/
http://www.webstar.co.uk/~musnews/
http://www.abbc.com/
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/index.htm
http://www.mcb.org.uk/
http://www.ummah.net/directory/menu/muslimnews.html
http://www.islamicity.com/news/
http://www.bignewsnetwork.com/index.php/cat/11caa946bf11fe44/
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/home2.asp
http://www.cair.com/
http://www.islam.tc/main.php
http://www.jannah.org/mamalist/News/
http://www.parvez-video.com/muslim_news.asp
http://talkislam.com/portal/index.php?env=-innews/index:m2-1-1-1:l0-0-0:n0-0-0:bb0-0-1-1&
http://www.pluralism.org/news/intl/index.php?xref=Anti-Muslim+Violence/Vandalism&sort=DESC
http://www.world-newspapers.com/islam-magazines.html
http://www.troid.org/
http://www.quraan.com/index.aspx
http://www.islaam.com/
http://www.islamworld.net/
http://muttaqun.com/
http://www.therighteouspath.com/home/
http://www.bakkah.net/


These links are about 1/5th of a list I specifically crawl (or use RSS feeds when I can) and were gained from a quick web crawl of Muslim issues earlier last year. However, I now go direct and I have software that crawls the web every 15 minutes for every new article published or propagated with certain keywords, "Muslim" and "Islam" being the main qualifying strings as well as secondary strings relating to terrorism and politics. I also have one set up for firearms and legal news. Google's News service would suffice in the absence of such software...in addition to that I get news flashes and security bulletins which reference back to Islamic news and publications that I review.

Once you have all of these sources (and some of them are no doubt biased, some silly, some not typically useful), you get the big picture.

If you don't trust your friends because they follow another religion, you're no friend to them.

As I said, obtuse, not quite verbose yet, but obtuse none the less, as that is nowhere near what I said. I'm an Agnostic, friend, I don't care what church you go to, it has nothing to do with that...try another angle.

 

[shootinstudent]

Look kid, I read this stuff as part of my job, so I figured it out based on intel that comes from good sources.

Great, except that the sources you listed (and some of which I read or have read, like cair), do not condone violence. There might be some I'm missing from a quick read through, but I'll quote from number one on your list regarding the riots over cartoons:

“There may be elements that would want to exploit the genuine sense of anguish and hurt among British Muslims about the manner in which the Prophet has been vilified to pursue their own mischievous agenda. We would caution all British Muslims to not allow themselves to be provoked. They should respond peacefully and with dignity at all times,” added Sir Iqbal.

Not so crazy sounding to me.

But we're not talking about Buddhists, are we?

You missed the point. The point was that not seeing a CNN headline from a group condemning something every day doesn't mean that group supports said thing.

. Needless to say, we'd end up posting link after link after link, you post 5, I post 5, you post 5 more, I post 5 more...the point is, if they wanted to, these organizations could very easily get press time on the issue in this country...Cindy Sheehan is surely proof of how one could parrot the same stuff over and over again, and as long as it is a hot button issue, you'll get press time.

You didn't post any links from any of the four madhabs that support terror. Most of your links I know for a fact do not support terror. I'm still investigating www.bakkah.net though, that one is authored (and by the looks of things, by someone who can't afford a web designer) by "salafists", a group regarded as heretical by all four of the Sunni madhabs (ie, 80 percent of the Muslim world) and Shiites (the other 20).

My information comes from sources often outside of the press, sorry, I am not at liberty to share them and I don't expect you to believe me on my word

Let's see, we were talking about what most muslims believe...if you are using a source that is secret, by definition, it's not going to be something that most people know of, right?

If your sources are secret from the public, how do all the Muslims get to see them so that they can find out what their religion teaches? Are you arguing that Muslim religion is spread by secret codes, classified from the view of the public? Interesting....must be some security network if it gets a billion people to keep the secret.

Once you have all of these sources (and some of them are no doubt biased, some silly, some not typically useful), you get the big picture.

Again, your sources almost uniformly condemn terror and violence. That they aren't very professional and aren't put out by the Sunni schools (and that they're mostly amateur jobs) should be a good indicator of how popular they are, but again, that's not relevant because they don't support terrorism.

I'm an Agnostic, friend, I don't care what church you go to, it has nothing to do with that...try another angle.

Yes you do. You said you don't trust them because they are Muslim. I don't know how much more clearly based on religion that comment could've been.

As for jihadwatch....as a semi-pro student of history, that has to be one of the worst websites I've ever seen. Spencer is not a historian or a professional, and it shows in the quality of his work. His so far published history is so bad and biased that a refutation would be longer than the books themselves.

 

[TABING]

Manedwolf

My location is AZ AND Abu dhabi, UAE, United Arab Emirates,

Guess where I am now.

 

[NineseveN]

Great, except that the sources you listed (and some of which I read or have read, like cair), do not condone violence. There might be some I'm missing from a quick read through, but I'll quote from number one on your list regarding the riots over cartoons:

How many Muslim attacks have been attempted or perpetrated world-wide in the last 13 months? Not just the dozen or so these sources talk about. It runs into the hundreds, yet we only see a news blurb here or there between all of these sources...they only condemn the ones that the mainstream media talks about. It's not like they don't know, they report about them collectively. None of these sources live in an information vacuum. You're focused on what they do say, which is mostly PR and damage mitigation, let's look at what they don't say for a change.

I could easily post the pro-terrorism sources as well, but they're obviously biased towards terror and would serve no point other than to prove what we already know; not many overtly support terror, but not many speak out against it with enough frequency to amount to anything other than PR.

Let's see, we were talking about what most muslims believe...if you are using a source that is secret, by definition, it's not going to be something that most people know of, right?

If your sources are secret from the public, how do all the Muslims get to see them so that they can find out what their religion teaches? Are you arguing that Muslim religion is spread by secret codes, classified from the view of the public? Interesting....must be some security network if it gets a billion people to keep the secret.

Don't be stupid, I said nothing of the sort. The less-than public information concerns when these things that happen, who says what at that time, not who knows about them. If I knew that Irish people were being blamed for supporting terrorism, I would use every opportunity to clear my nationality and work towards changing that perception, so would most Irish folks I would assume.

You get a report of a bombing on Tuesday at 9am when it took place at 5:30am, I get that information before 9AM...or information on security concerns and warnings of attacks. Then I crawl the news for information on the intel I receive. Sometimes there's a blurb here or there, but no condemnation...they only condemn the mainstream attacks, or the big ones because they know everyone is watching.

If I turn a blind eye when I see black people passed over for jobs or promotions solely because they are black, and watch as white guys jump a black kid or two once per month without batting en eye, but then only come out against racism when 40 or 50 black kids are hung from trees in Mississippi because it is on the news and everyone is watching me, what does that say about me and my view on equality and hate crimes?

Where is the Million Muslim March against terrorism?

How well did THIS turn out?

Good?

But some cartoons spurn these warm and fuzzy feelings?

Like I said, I can understand being in fear for coming out, some do individually and even they are asking some of the same questions I am. Where is the outrage? There is a difference between saying "Islam is a religion of peace and we condemn violence and terrorism" and actually getting up and doing something about it or saying it loudly and often enough to make a difference. right now we get:

Bombing
They say, Islam is a religion of peace and we condemn violence and terrorism"
Heads cut off
They say, Islam is a religion of peace and we condemn violence and terrorism"
More heads cut off
They say, Islam is a religion of peace and we condemn violence and terrorism"
More bombings
They say, Islam is a religion of peace and we condemn violence and terrorism"
Even more bombings
They say, Islam is a religion of peace and we condemn violence and terrorism"
Children murdered
They say, Islam is a religion of peace and we condemn violence and terrorism"
Embassies sacked, flags burned
They say, Islam is a religion of peace and we condemn violence and terrorism"

As for jihadwatch....as a semi-pro student of history, that has to be one of the worst websites I've ever seen. Spencer is not a historian or a professional, and it shows in the quality of his work. His so far published history is so bad and biased that a refutation would be longer than the books themselves.

But the information in it is none the less true, is it not? His opinion on the facts are not my concern, the facts speak on their own accord.

Yes you do. You said you don't trust them because they are Muslim. I don't know how much more clearly based on religion that comment could've been.

I said:
If they want support, they first have to loudly declare in one voice whose side they are on...otherwise, how can we count on them? How can we not be suspicious? I have Muslim friends, I'd prefer to stand beside them instead of in front of them...anyone that calls themselves your friend but will only stand with your back to them can't really be that much of a friend at all.

There is nothing in there about not trusting them because they are Muslim. You lose at reading, try again. If you try to say I said something I did not one more time, this conversation is over and I'm just going to have to put you on ignore again. I'm not doing this again.

 

[shootinstudent]

I could easily post the pro-terrorism sources as well, but they're obviously biased towards terror and would serve no point other than to prove what we already know; not many overtly support terror, but not many speak out against it with enough frequency to amount to anything other than PR.

Alright, you wanted to prove that Islam supports terror, so you knowingly posted a litany of sources that condemn terror. What was the purpose of the post of sources?

If I knew that Irish people were being blamed for supporting terrorism, I would use every opportunity to clear my nationality and work towards changing that perception, so would most Irish folks I would assume.

This is an EXCELLENT comparison. Even though a US senator made a point of reaching out to Sinn Fein (Mitchell), and several American organizations were known to send money and weapons to the IRA, in addition to openly supporting the IRA, no one blamed all Irish Americans for violence in Northern Ireland. This despite the fact that elected representatives from the US were even (name escapes me, a Rep from new york) known to go on trips and have drinks with IRA members in Northern Ireland.

Did I, as an Irish American, feel the need to take out ads in the paper to declare that I was against terror? No, not at all, because I realized that, not being in Ireland and not being a terrorist, I have absolutely zero responsibility for what Irish terrorists do. Why should we expect Muslims to feel responsible for what other people do in their name any more than we expect Irish in America to do the same regarding Irish terrorism?

There is a difference between saying "Islam is a religion of peace and we condemn violence and terrorism" and actually getting up and doing something about it or saying it loudly and often enough to make a difference. right now we get:

Okay, now you seem to be admitting that at least in rhetoric, Muslims condemn terrorism. If your problem is that they don't stop terrorism, I have this to say: If the entire US government can't catch one man (Osama), what on earth makes you think the mostly third world governments in Islamic states should be able to catch him and stop all terrorism?

But the information in it is none the less true, is it not? His opinion on the facts are not my concern, the facts speak on their own accord.

If you strip away Spencer's absurd opinion that the Crusades were defensive, there's really no substance to his historical work. It's a haphazard collection of sources designed to feed the thesis, not an attempt to look at what was actually going on at the time.

As far as Spencer's information about the religious teaching itself, it is pretty much uniformly wrong and misleading. Not even the facts are right.

 

[NineseveN]

Alright, you wanted to prove that Islam supports terror, so you knowingly posted a litany of sources that condemn terror. What was the purpose of the post of sources?

Again, obtuse, breeching into being Puerile.

Again, what I said:
I am sick and tired of saying, "I know all Muslims aren't like that", if they're not, they need to stand up, raise their hands and let their voices be heard...

My point is that they as a whole need to respond louder, more often and with more passion than they have been. Posting those links shows lukewarm condemnations for only the most mainstream attacks and hot button concerns when there is much going on and anyone with a search engine or a news reader knows this. These so-called condemnations do not rise to the level of their outrage over some stupid cartoons, and even though I can see how they are insulting and could easily generate outrage, I would like to see the same energy put into their condemnations of terror.

This is an EXCELLENT comparison. Even though a US senator made a point of reaching out to Sinn Fein (Mitchell), and several American organizations were known to send money and weapons to the IRA, in addition to openly supporting the IRA, no one blamed all Irish Americans for violence in Northern Ireland. This despite the fact that elected representatives from the US were even (name escapes me, a Rep from new york) known to go on trips and have drinks with IRA members in Northern Ireland.

Did I, as an Irish American, feel the need to take out ads in the paper to declare that I was against terror? No, not at all, because I realized that, not being in Ireland and not being a terrorist, I have absolutely zero responsibility for what Irish terrorists do. Why should we expect Muslims to feel responsible for what other people do in their name any more than we expect Irish in America to do the same regarding Irish terrorism?

The IRA did not fly planes into buildings on US soil. I don't much care if the Muslim community becomes more or less vocal about what goes on in other parts of the world, only on US soil (including embassies) and US citizens (soldiers, journalists, civilians, airline passengers whatever)...at least, what I do care about what happens on foreign is a distant second.

Secondly, many prominent Irish Americans were in fact called to task on their support or lack of condemnation for the IRA issue.

Okay, now you seem to be admitting that at least in rhetoric, Muslims condemn terrorism. If your problem is that they don't stop terrorism, I have this to say: If the entire US government can't catch one man (Osama), what on earth makes you think the mostly third world governments in Islamic states should be able to catch him and stop all terrorism?

Never said I didn't, my original opinion was that they do not do it loud enough, they do not work hard enough to combat it, stopping it is not relevant at this point. Reading is good for you, I swear.

If you strip away Spencer's absurd opinion that the Crusades were defensive, there's really no substance to his historical work. It's a haphazard collection of sources designed to feed the thesis, not an attempt to look at what was actually going on at the time.

As far as Spencer's information about the religious teaching itself, it is pretty much uniformly wrong and misleading. Not even the facts are right.

The link I gave was a piece from DC Watson, had nothing in it about the crusades that included quotes from prominent Muslims from decent sources regarding the subject we are discussing.

Learn to read.

Funny though, what you wrote about Spencer mirrors something often said about him on Democratic Underground. I looked into him a little (the link was not mine, it was PM'd to me, remember) and he holds a Master's degree in Religious Studies from the University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill and has apparently studied religion for more than twenty-five years. He has written 5 books, have you read them? You comment as if you have intimate knowledge of their contents...where did that come from? Something is suspicious about this...

 

[NineseveN]

BTW, the article in the link I posted.

July 19, 2005
Watson: Muslims condemn terror attacks? Really?

DC Watson discusses Muslim condemnations of terror attacks:

Well, it appears that all of this remains our fault. Apparently, we just don’t get it. According to the Council on American Islamic Relations, they’ve continued to condemn terror attacks carried out by their fellow Muslims, but we just aren't hearing them. This issue was again brought to the forefront in a July 13, 2005 article from the Florida Times-Union, entitled “Muslim leaders condemning terror to deaf?”. The author, Mark Woods, apparently feels that accurate information regarding Islam can be obtained through the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) filter:

In the wake of the London bombings, I called Parvez Ahmed, a Jacksonville resident who three months ago became chairman of perhaps the best-known Muslim organization in America, and asked him that. And there was silence.

Well, just when the phone cut out.

Once I got him back on the line, the University of North Florida professor who is the new chairman of the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, did what he has been doing ever since he woke up Thursday, logged onto his computer and saw the news.

He condemned the bombings. He condemned the people behind them. He did it immediately and unequivocally.

"This is just absolute madness," he said. "It does not make any sense whatsoever.”

You want a Muslim condemnation of terrorism?

How would you like it delivered?

Well, Parvez, certainly not like this: "The term 'civilians' does not exist in Islamic religious law," according to Hani Al-Siba'i, head of the Al-Maqreze Centre for Historical Studies in London.

Or this from Syrian-born Muslim cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed: "We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity." "We will use your democracy to destroy your democracy."

Or this: Siraj Wahhaj was the Imam of Masjid Al-Taqwa in Brooklyn, New York. “Take my word; if 6-8 million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us."

Or this: "Imam Zaid Shakir was the former Muslim chaplain at Yale University, and political science professor. He believes that the Quran ‘pushes us in the exact opposite direction to the forces at work in the American political spectrum.’…As a result he maintains that Muslims cannot accept the legitimacy of the existing system.”

Or this: "Ahmad Nawfal, a well-known Jordanian speaker, “if fundamentalist Muslims stand up, "it will be very easy for us to preside over this world once again."

Or this: "At a Muslim convention held in San Jose, just one month after the atrocities of Sept. 11, 2001: "By the year 2020, we should have an American Muslim president of the United States."

(When pigs fly, and Hell gets hit with an ice storm.)

Or this: Muslim Cleric Sheikh Abu Hamza (Aug. 2002) “told young British supporters that murder, bank robbery and looting are legitimate weapons against the enemies of Islam.”

"But a struggle means sometimes arguing to convey the message. Even if it means you convey the message by carrying a sword. "Allah wants to know who will sacrifice for him." “Robbing them and kafirs, or unbelievers, could be acceptable because they were not protected by Allah” He said: "I say go and do it (steal), take shoot and loot.”
_http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12146169&method=full&siteid=50143_

“So why don't we hear Muslim leaders condemning terrorism?”

“Maybe we're not listening.”

This would be comical if it weren’t so asinine. Since 9/11, there have been in excess of 2400 terrorist attacks perpetrated by Muslims all around the world.
_http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/_

How many of them have been condemned by name by CAIR? How many imams and clerics have we caught preaching hate during their sermons and speeches, or lying on their visa applications?
_http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-06-17-imam-convicted_x.htm_

Why condemn them, when they can write one of their Islamic puff piece letters to the editors of local newspapers, stating that terrorism goes against the teachings of Islam?

Oh, no, it doesn't. Aren’t the men I quoted above Muslims -- Muslim leaders? Radical Imams and their followers have, for the most part, driven the more moderate Muslims out of many of the mosques. Yet, these same fanatical Imams are permitted to reside here on religious visas as they upchuck their hate, for us.

There are many in the American media who continue to jump at the chance to obtain their information from CAIR. As the evidence continues to stack up against groups such as these, evidence clearly demonstrating that they are not a friend to this nation, they are still a main source of information as it pertains to Islam.

Shouldn’t Mr. Woods, and others in the media instead be asking CAIR about the link on their website that appeared after the 9/11 sneak attack, which called for donations to help the 9/11 victims, yet lead to the Holy Land Foundation site?

_http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12470_

Shouldn’t our friends in the mainstream media be asking CAIR about Ghassan Elashi, the founder of CAIR's Texas chapter, convicted for selling technology, goods and commodities to designated terror-sponsoring states, related the Deputy Chief of the Hamas terrorist organization’s Political Bureau, and the Holy Land Foundation’s Chairman of the Board?

_http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43805_

_http://www.4law.co.il/hlf3.htm_

Parvez Ahmed said: “No ideology can even remotely justify what's going on."

While this is true, Muslim fanatics, with their own whacked-out sense of reality, justify all of their violence by blaming it on their victims. Victims labeled by them as occupiers, infidels, invaders, non-believers, Islamophobes, bigots, racists, intolerants, etc.

Has the CAIR organization publicly condemned those who worked for them who have been convicted on terror charges? Any condemnation of Royer, Elashi, or Khafagi? Have they publicly condemned Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hizbollah, or the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade?

Perchance it would be beneficial to them if we truly were deaf. Dumb and blind too. Unfortunately for them, we see and hear everything. This routine has far surpassed the stage of being tiresome. However, with that being said, so long as their facade and games continue, Muslim organizations, Islamic Imams, Muslim Clerics, and “scholars” can count on being confronted at every turn they make, every word they speak, and every tactic they employ.

A little bit on DC Watson (whom I like quite a bit honestly, he's entertaining).

From this link.

Monday, April 11, 2005
An Interview with D. C. Watson
D. C. Watson has emerged as an arch-typical example of the new force to be reckoned with: The American Patriot. And, he has deliberately and publicly served notice to all those who would wage Islamic jihad on America, that he and millions more will be fully American in dealing with them. D. C.’s op-ed pieces began appearing in Jihad Watch/Dhimmi Watch over the last year, but D. C.’s comments in the same publication had already made him very difficult to ignore nationally and internationally. He has been utterly refreshing because he writes filter-free. He says what he believes, and it is clear that he makes no allowances for pabulum such as “political correctness” and multiculturalism. In fact, some have even voiced wishes that he become the Secretary of Defense. (We think he would best serve as the Secretary of State).

His articles show that this rough-hewn appearing, man-mountain can just plain write as well as think, and express himself without bull????ting in both. Recently, we have had the opportunity to get to know the D. C. Watson that one tosses down beer and pork rinds with while watching N.F.L. games and working to set the world straight.

6thCAJ/SC: D. C. Watson, welcome to 6th Column Against Jihad and its companion blog, Sixth Column.

Watson: Thank you.

6thCAJ/SC: You have been involved in corporate executive protection, professional wrestling, nightclub security, amateur boxing, and power-lifing. Currently you work in both the Radiology & Physiology areas of medicine. You have had two fractured cervical vertebrae, a fractured wrist, two thumb surgeries, and dislocations at the knees, hip, shoulder, wrist and lower jaw. Some would conclude that you’ve had an “eventful” life.

Watson: That’s what’s so wonderful about living in this country. Opportunities are always in front of you.

6thCAJ/SC: You are an active community supporter, using wrestling events to raise money for several charitable organizations. Whom have you been able to help?

Watson: The promotions that I worked for did a great job with this. We worked and raised money for the Toys-for–Tots program, Muscular Dystrophy, and several Church and community Food Banks.

6thCAJ/SC: You seem to have hit the counter-Jihad scene quite suddenly, seemingly out of nowhere. The articles you’ve written are very direct, and they’ve been very well received. Some have even been picked up by several European and Asian websites. What started all of this?

Watson: I have unconditional love for the United States, and I refuse to sit idly by and watch a clump of sawed off, militant Islamic warts waltz into our house expecting to rearrange our furniture.

6thCAJ/SC: It’s good to see that you’re not mincing your words today.

Watson: What does “mintsing” mean?

6thCAJ/SC: Mince. Mincing.

Watson: What?

6thCAJ/SC: Never mind.

6thCAJ/SC: You’ve been a part of writing to the nation about Islamic Jihad, terrorism, and Muslim organizations in America for a while now. How do you think this war against terror is going?

Watson: Well, our Armed Forces are the very best in the world. However, from what I’ve witnessed, the war planners sent them into the wrong country. The Saudi Arabians have proven to be much more of a threat to the United States than Iraq ever was.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban was a street gang passing themselves off as a government. And they were intertwined with al Qaeda. Although they were adept at hanging Muslims from light posts, cutting throats, beating and shooting Muslim women, and burning families alive, American forces easily, and rapidly forwarded them on to their Allah.

6thCAJ/SC: So I’ll take it that you think Afghanistan is a success.

Watson: Definitely. But still no bin Laden. The government says we can’t find him.

Let’s see. We can put a land rover on Mars that’ll send back surface data and photographs from thirty-million miles out. We can pull in a license plate number from a satellite in space, yet we can’t pin down a six-foot-five inch toilet brush with kidneys so bad he can’t even go pee on his own?

6thCAJ/SC: How do you feel our government is doing protecting the homeland?

Watson: Between the Saudi Arabians and the U.S./Mexican border, the government has made the jobs of the Intelligence and Law Enforcement agencies that much more difficult. American tax dollars are funding wars in the Middle East, yet our government states that funding additional border patrol agents isn’t in the budget. Where’s the logic in this?

6thCAJ/SC: Tell us what you know about the Saudis and their involvement with America.

Watson: We’ve been infiltrated.


• Saudi owned American media (with their fingers in AOL/Time Warner, who controls CNN, and Disney, who controls ABC).

• Saudi funded Islamic Studies centers on American college campuses.

• Saudi funded mosques that contain literature preaching hate for America, Christians, and Jews.

• Saudi funded schools, whose “teachers” instruct their students that Christianity and Judaism are false religions, and demand allegiance to the Qur’an, not the U.S. Constitution.

• Saudi funded Islamic “civil rights” organizations that attack Americans for speaking out against Islam.


6thCAJ/SC: You’ve publicly called these groups out, haven’t you?

Watson: Yes, on center stage, with cameras rolling, in front of the nation so they could explain to the American people exactly who it is that supports them financially, how it came to be that several of their own have been convicted of terror and fraud crimes, and tell everyone why they’re so concerned about the American public learning about true Islam and its founder, Mohammed.

Since they wouldn’t want Americans to access these links, here they are:

• http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17523
• http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=863
• http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp">http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp
DEPARTMENT_ID=6&SUBDEPARTMENT_ID=20&ITEM_ID=1681
• http://www.faithfreedom.org/comments/MComments.htm

They spend much of their time labeling Americans as bigots for questioning Islam and the Qur’an. They’ve constantly berated counter terrorism efforts in this country, and criticized our troops. Is Islam truly the “religion of peace”? Or is it racism in its purest form? The people should have the opportunity to make that determination for themselves, and they deserve to have all of the facts.

Since Muslim organizations wouldn’t want Americans to access these links either, here they are:

• http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/005623.php Muslims & the Pope
• http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/005627.php Blind
customers rejected by Muslim cab drivers
• http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/005625.php Death for leaving Islam.
• http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/005595.php Islamic
leaders angered over Arab TV's coverage of Pope's death.
• http://www.anti-cair-net.org/ for the latest on militant Muslims in America.
• http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/145144top08-15-2004::11:26reuters.html2004
• http://www.themodernreligion.com/racism/racism-muslims.html Who are the bigots again?

A plea to fellow Americans: Jury Duty in civil lawsuits sometimes includes listening to “poor, oppressed” immigrants who in truth have learned how to play our legal system. Please weigh all evidence carefully in these cases so that professional false victims and trained liars don’t potentially send innocent Americans to the poor house.

6thCAJ/SC: These groups have made it clear that they want an Islamic America, have they not?

Watson: Many Muslims in America want peace, not Islamic law. This may be because Islamic law, or the Shariah, is a century impaired, backward ass, barbaric human rights violation, and should be abolished worldwide. Muslim extremists pretty much had their dreams of an Islamic America shot in the ass on 9/11. While intelligent Muslims realize that peace is the logical solution, the militant Muslim knuckle draggers criticize Americans for not trusting them--what a laughable, yet pathetic scenario.

If some of these Islamic organizations don’t understand why there’s no trust, this copied e-mail should serve as evidence. With thanks to Faith Freedom International:


From: “Ali Mohammed”
Subject: Your site and the Pope
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 07:17:33 +0000
The pope is dead. One Christian scumbag down. Allahu Akbar! You will too soon join the Pope.
Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar!



There are thousands of e-mails just like this one received every month. This one was chosen because it's one of the very few that aren't riddled with misspelled words.

Late 2003, World Net Daily ran a column written by Anis Shorrosh, the Christian Arab-American author of ''Islam Revealed.'' This column, entitled “Radical Islam's 'plan' to take over America”, details a twenty-year, twenty-step strategy to undermine American society, and is a must read because it connects this plan with some of what is happening on our soil today.

• http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,46610,00.html
• http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1506-2005Feb5.html
• http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/news/bn2005/bn-2005-01-28.htm
• http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25234
• http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=9981
• http://www.paktoday.com/6thCAJ/SCorpion3.htm
• http://www.lightmillennium.org/2004_newyear/ypdogan_mkhan.html


6thCAJ/SC: It’s apparent that we need a sustained effort to keep hammering this information home.

Watson: Information is key. Keep exposing some of these Islamic organizations for the bull???? artists they are. Begin at the local school Boards, media, governments, and businesses. Inform them about their record, and keep them out.

Islamic militants just don’t get it. They think America is ripe for the picking. They should read about what happened in this country when the American government told the nation they were prohibited from consuming or manufacturing alcohol (1920-1933). Prohibition failed miserably, because the American people will not be told what to do.

And now, since our government continues to ignore American citizens, and shows no interest in increasing the border patrol, Americans have gathered at the U.S./Mexican border, and in a matter of three or four days, have captured 141 illegal aliens.

6thCAJ/SC: At our site, as well as other anti-Jihad sites, we receive e-mails from Muslims who make threats of violence, and claim that Americans are afraid of “Islamic Jihad.” What do you think about these people?

Watson: (Laughs). I think they have battleship mouths and rowboat asses. There are roughly eighty million gun owners in America, and most of them are tougher than a three-dollar steak. So, what do these blowhards think they’re gonna do?

6thCAJ/SC: D.C., thanks very much for taking the time to talk with us.

Watson: Thank you. Oh, and if it is alright, I have a special message before we close:

Dear Militant Muslims:

Our Bill of Rights is non-negotiable. Your Qur'an does not override it. Make peace your goal. Peace is attainable, where Islam taking over the United States is not.

D. C. Watson

6thCAJ/SC: Aye, aye to that from us as well.

----------------------------

D.C. Watson articles

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/005029.php
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/DCWatson50323.htm
http://www.co-jet.org/cjet/contentsmarch/031405/2005whileitsstill.htm
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/004755.php
http://www.augustafreepress.com/stories/storyReader$30405
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/005206.php
http://sixthcolumn.blogspot.com/2004/12/will-questioners-be-silenced-similar.html

For many more links to Anti-Jihad sites, and important news, please visit the Recommended page on 6th Column Against Jihad, and the links below:

• http://jihadwatch.org/
• http://www.frontpagemag.com/
• http://www.co-jet.org/
• http://www.challenging-islam.org/

Special thanks to Robert Spencer, Ali Sina, Ethelred, Chris Graham, and David Horowitz

posted by George Mason © @ 4/11/2005 06:03:00 AM

I think I'm done with you. And again, I've gone off-topic, MODs will not be pleased...all apologies guys and gals, honest.