The Mosque issue isn’t going away and it just got more interesting. Apparently Steve Emerson, Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism (a large storehouse of archival data and intelligence on Islamic and Middle Eastern terrorist groups), has unearthed hours of audio in which Imam Rauf sounds not so moderate after all. The audio hasn’t been released yet, nor the context, but from the sounds of it….the context won’t matter a whole lot:
Steve Emerson has unearthed 13 hours of audio tape of Imam Rauf. Emerson and his team of investigators has spent the past four weeks going through the newly found material. Rauf is a “radical extremist cleric who cloaks himself in sheep’s clothing.”
Among the shocking revelations Emerson’s team will reveal next week — they found Rauf:
Defending wahhabism – a puritanical version of Islam that governs Saudi Arabia
Calling for the elimination of Israel by claiming a one-nation state, meaning no more Jewish State.
Defending Bin Laden’s violence
Ace takes Obama to task for his support of the Imam and the Mosque:
Remember: You — Obama and the MFM — went out a limb to vouch for this guy, putting the whole of your credibility and judgment behind the proposition that he is a well-meaning, peaceful moderate and you’d have to be crazy to think otherwise.
~~~We know the first, second, and last defense that will be screamed by the left: B-b-but Bush said he was moderate….!
Yeah? And? Bush didn’t stake his political future on the man’s purported “moderation,” either.
Let Me Repeat: Obama and the MFM staked the entirety of their credibility and judgment on the assertion that this was a moderate man interested only in peace, and of course in no way a supporter of terrorism, and anyone who suspected otherwise was an ignorant bigot with a heart full of hatred.
So let’s see. Let’s see.
Let’s see whose judgment was sound and whose judgment was really full of ignorance and hatred — hatred for the concerns of their fellow Americans.
You can hear Emerson on the Bill Bennett show earlier this week:
[audio:http://media.townhall.com/townhall/bennett/SteveEmerson2.mp3]Let the fireworks begin.
See author page
If that’s true, that will certainly bypass all those pesky Constitutional issues that graw at my craw… i.e. changing laws to prevent Muslims from building, despite being within legal development ordinances.
If he’s proven to be linked to terror, perhaps the Bush finance laws can come into play. However before celebrating, there’s two pesky details….
1: Bush used this same Imam for the same “outreach” overseas efforts. Did they not know if Rauf’s mosque is a terrorist stronghold?
2: Since we haven’t heard Emerson’s evidentiary tapes, and he did this interview almost a week ago, is Rauf’s mosque *not* a terrorist stronghold, and this is another “let’s hype it up and prounounce him guilty in advance in the media” maneuver? After all, we have Mr. Mantra, Hannity, constantly moving on his disinformation campaign – saying that Rauf demands America become Shariah compliant when Rauf has all over his books that America and the Constitution *are* Shariah compliant. And why did Emerson go onto these shows, without backing up his claims with even a few soundbytes? Why hold back the tapes for weeks if what he says is true?
So is this this actual evidence? Or is this twisted hype?
Hey… I’m all for it if real. Bring it on. But if it’s just another rewording to make it sound like he’s a “Hamas supporter”, all you got is media misinformation driving it. And what would be needed is enough legal reason to deny that building from going up to calm some.
Then all that’s left is the problem with the rest who simply hate all of Islam (i.e. Geller, Newt), or those who want to stop mosques everywhere, chase ’em out of the country, and deny them all Constitutional rights based on prejudice.
I am a bit confused as to why the tapes are hyped instead of raw data dumped out into the public. Is there audio specialist teams examining these recordings to ensure the person on the tapes is indeed who it is and legal teams examining how to legaly release these recordings? I guess I am used to the gaming culture where materials are dumped onto a forums index or community IRC channel within seconds of acquistion of such data without concern or awareness of the legalities of the data dump.
Yup, Mr. Irons… the media “release” method here is somewhat questionable. Promises, promises? And if media is quick to release military intel via WikiLeaks, why a two week hype, with not so much as even out of context soundbytes to accompany the claims? Also, Emerson is a frequent Fox News guest as one of their regular “consultants”. Why take this to Bill Bennett’s radio show, and then wait for Pamela Geller to pick up on it four days later? Did Fox say “bring us the audio proof, or no dice”?
Head scratcher… something seems somewhat amiss. All we can do is see if they release the tapes, and in what form… severely edited? Or in total?
Could be a language problem. If they are as stated, chances are that they are in arabic…
Who do I trust?
Maybe the last Taliban guy that shot at me and hit me.
Was he a Southern Baptist, a Presbyterian, a Methodist, Amish or an Orthodox Hebrew type?
Was he a Scientology type or a Mormon, or a Christian Scientist?
Lets stop this Islamic Tolerance business right now before some folks decide that visiting FA is like a date with my ex-wife. I am tolerant to a point but getting my nose rubbed in notions of tolerance by folks that should know better is not on my agenda.
In this reguard, in the culture I grew up around, such “raw” data almost instantly hits the net on some mIRC chat channel or a private forums index where it is shifts into the forward community that is public and then viraly spreads towards adjacent sites (4chan for example). The Wikileaks scandal over military data was one such example of the “here and now” culture that is the gamer mentality that racks the majority of such forums, so it is exteremely odd as to why such “hard hitting” audio is taking a life time in internet terms to hit the broadcast channels. This is nothing about tollerance towards something, but a highlight in how awkwardly slow this “infromation” is taking considering private business data is daily dumped on priacy channels almost hourly without concern (which I don’t advocate). Hell beta code for Half Life 2 back in 2003 was dumped onto the net faster than the time of “discovery” of these supposed audio files to the radio show annoucement about them.
My assumptions are there are legal issues to examine, voice verification of who is speaking (in this day and age, it is exteremely easy to get voice masking software and even headsets/microphones), and as Suek pointed out that it could take awhile to translate if the audio is not recorded in English. It’s just I do not like how this feels to my gut in how “long” ago the audios were discovered versus their public annoucement.
For all you that like to look to the Supreme Court and its interpretation of the Constitution.. let us not forget that the First Amendment’s free speech clause is subject to limitations if there is a “clear and present danger”. The freedom of religion clause should be no different if a religion is a “clear and present danger”.
Of course we’ll have to see what these audio tapes really reveal before I and several others that are ignorant of Islam move into “I told you so” mode.
Signed…. an Islamophobe
“told you so” what, Donald Bly? Even if Rauf trained in a Bin Laden camp, does this “prove” that all of Islam is a “clear and present danger” and that all Muslims are enemies? Or would it simply mean that Rauf, himself, was proven an enemy? Naturally, you’ve already made that assessment. But not on any evidence (i.e. Perdana donating to Free Gaza like Carnegie Foundation, or US policies contributed to OBL and Bin Laden like so many of our elected lib/progs have said and believe). Simply because he’s Muslim.
What a joke….
But it would be good news if there was a way to stop Cordoba House within legal parameters… simply because it’s really getting old listening to all the blanket hatred. Oh wait… then there’s the Tennessee mosque, and the NJ mosque. And two in California you can whine about….
Plus maybe we could dispense with all the anecdotes about Muslims in ME countries, and how they must be exactly like Muslims here in the US.
Or perhaps we’ll hear the last of how we’re to be killed and converted, when the millions of Muslims here have neither done massive killing/converting of infidels, nor killed their apostate ex Muslims…. you know, the bunch who are out there protesting mosques along with Geller? Listening to you all, the US streets must be running red with the blood of unconverted infidels for decades to centuries.
And yet not one person here can relate a tale of an American Muslim making the slightest attempt to convert them to Islam. Don’t you think that’s a big missing ingredient to the rhetoric? Behavior of American Muslims doing exactly what you self-proclaimed experts say they should? ooops…. reality bites, eh?
@ Donald Bly: We are a Land of Laws and have several thousand more than the Founding Fathers would have ever approved of.
Are we a Land of Justice or just a Land of excessive Laws and excessive Tolerance and not so much Justice?
When you FA Folks get it figured out please let me know.
BTW, the last six Mosques that I saw in AFPAK looked like a Georgia Gun Show with enough ammunition to win WWII several times over. There was more Composition 3 than soap to wash
every pair of hands and feet in Kandahar or Kabul. That is not Classified info.
Freedom of Religion is pretty keen stuff but Shariah Law is not Constitutional by any stretch of the imagination.
Take Care All!
@MataHarley:
Everytime my gr-grandson and I visit the corner gas station together they pick him up and give him a sucker. I’m beginning to suspect that they are getting ready to convert him or are throwing me off guard so I’ll be distracted the day they plant the IED in my car. Never again will I let them give me a bag of chips because they say they appreciate my business. It’s just the small bags, can’t appreciate me all that much or they would be giving me a free fill up. 🙄
Probably, but then I doubt any of the posters here are in prison where conversion by Americans is a wholesale proposition.
Neither, I imagine, do the posters here hang around the masjids in Dearborn and other mosques in inner cities destroyed by years of failed social programs, nor around NOI HQ, or any of the other places where “Americans” troll for converts.
You are sorely deluded if, because you don’t see it, you don’t think it is happening.
@A Fine Bunch of Rubens:
That could also mean conversion to…..a number of hardcore gangs. I doubt any of us are converts posting from prison, Curt could probably confirm that for us. 🙄
There are a number of neighborhoods I prefer not to hang around or even drive through from the Quad Cities toChicago and into Indiana. Thankfully, none of my friends in our personal melting pot happen to have the violent tendencies we know people in communities across Northern Illinois experience daily. My son sent me two hours out of my way on my last trip to Indiana just to keep me from making a wrong turn because I was making the trip by myself.
Last time my daughter and I drove home from Midway, she took a wrong turn, a young AA man approached our car at a traffic light with a baseball bat, if he meant to scare us he succeeded. We also built a home in a rural town…..with a cluster of loud and mouthy skinheads living in it. Some made negative comments about “the kind” of friends we had and they didn’t appreciate them coming into “their town.” We’ve since moved, they didn’t drive us away either.
We have dear friends that have had their temple fire bombed twice, they bought property next to my cousins home in the country and have to hire armed guards for protection.
We have had Muslim friends since the 80’s, as their sons became of age, they were sent to Bosnia to fight, are back now, married with children and running a string of successful restaurants the parents started with just one dingy little place in a bad neighborhood, to busy to convert anyone.
Also had a Muslim family in our Cub Scout pack, their boys participated in everything, even the pledge.
There are bad people in every race and religion, personally, we’ve always found the good people far outnumber the bad and I believe that includes Muslims.
BTW, got any numbers for the Muslims that are rejecting the “conversions” and moving on to better the lives of their families?
I have had American Muslims attempt to convert me. I also know Americans who have converted [reverted] to Islam.
I’ve had Muslims attempt to convert me in Afghanistan, Kuwait, Egypt, Israel and Thailand as well.
It’s that type of religion. It’s similar to Christianity in that regard.
Quick name a Nation that converted to Islam peacefully or peaceably.
Can ya do it?
Name a nation that converted to Christianity peacefully or peaceably?
There are several.
Islam is not now and has never been a religion that converts the masses through evangelical processes as a primary means of conversion. Historically, conversion to Islam has been violent conquest.
Every country that is Islam is such due to Islamic Armies.
Chrisitanity did not develop that way. Now they became Militantly Messianic over time and gradually shifted away from that as well.
So for all of you Muslim Apologists who do not know your history, pls, read…study…then come back and we’ll speak.
Until then, you’re simply speaking out of ignorance.
Well now, Dawood Khan, you must be engaging in tagiyya – or perhaps posting from the afterlife – since I’ve have been assured here from above reproach infidel scholars that if you do not convert, you must be dead. /sarc
And what is this dogged determination to compare American Muslims to Muslims from other countries? That same school of thought then assumes that all Christians, from country to country, are alike… or all females, or …. Cultural differences, education, conditions vary greatly from America to the middle east countries. It’s an absurd attempt at fear mongering. Maybe those of you who insist that “all Muslims are alike” should read the various studies out, and save yourselves some further embarrassment. To name just a few, i.e.
1: Harvard Kennedy Schools March 2009 report, “Muslim Integration into Western Cultures: Between Origins and Destinations”
2: Pew Research’s May 2007 study, “Muslim Americans: Middle class and mostly mainstream”
3: Woodrow Wilson’s Int’l Ctr for Scholars June 2003 study, “Muslims in the United States; Demography, Beliefs, Institutions”
A Fine Bunch of Rubens, I know many people who have been in prison… not one of them came out a gang member, or a Muslim. But according to the sage scholarly infidels here, we could certainly take care of prison overpopulation by throwing in a few Muslims, who tell us they will kill any who don’t convert. That’ll sure drop the numbers, eh?
Are there some that attempt to convert here and there in the states? Of course…. There’s never a black/white nor absolute statement that can be made (except by all too many of you about Islam in general). But Muslim evangelism in the States is a drop in the bucket compared to Jehovah’s Witness. Then of course there’s that pesky detail about all the ex-Muslim organizations out there, walking around as apostates alive and well. What… no piles of dead ex US Muslims reported in the US news?? Must be a cover up, eh?
This parroted meme is simply beyond “the willing suspension of disbelief”, and a sad attempt to instill unneccesary fear. Global Islamic jihad is to be detested, fought and defeated. But that is not all Muslims.
But thanks to Cordoba House, now Muslims will be able to wander around the States, or even assign a political leaning, to those who have expressed such hate rhetoric to them in blanket religious class warfare. Nice goin’….
Missy… your corner store stories make me fear for you and your grandson’s life! I mean, who knows what could be in those little bags of chips, eh? LOL /sarc
I hope this site will publish excepts from this tape. But, in the mean time, I hope everyone will acquaint themselves with Imam Rauf–instead of the negativity about him which has been promoted on this site.
@MataHarley:
Emerson has been pretty reliable in the past. He has not been a sensationalist prior to this. The possibility that he is merely seeking his 15 minutes could be stated, but personally, I am betting against that. He made the statement that he is waiting to conclude his investigation prior to releasing the tapes, so let’s wait and see what he has. My popcorn is ready.
MataHarley, I have to ask. Where did I type that all Muslims were alike. I went back and looked and did not see it.
As such, I assume that you are speaking to some other person.
I’ve lived amongst Muslims. I’ve worked with them. I’ve supervised them. I’ve befriended them. I’ve traveled with them. I’ve performed ablution, and knelt and prayed with them in their Mosques. I’ve ate with them. I’ve danced with them. I’ve attended weddings with them. I’ve been rocketed with them. I’ve hid behind shelter with them. I’ve shared dangers of many kinds with them. I’ve shared dreams and goals with them. I’ve worshipped with them. I’ve discussed religion, philosophy, politics and history and war with them. I’ve stood in a field beside a stream and pissed side by side with them while discussing the weather. I’ve done just about all that a man can do side by side working and living with Muslims. And I’ve done it all across the “Muslim World” from Central Asia to India to Southeast Asia, to the Middle East and Northern Africa.
I’ve met Sufis, Ismaelis, Twelvers, Shi’a, Followers of Ali, Sunni, Wahhabis, Deobandi, etc…
Not one of them were alike.
Just as no two people in the world are alike.
That said, religion is religion. The thing that all of these have in common is Muhhamad, the Qu’ran with it’s Pillars of Faith, the Hadith, Mekkah and her Ka’aba. Each had varying levels of belief and each viewed Islam in their own way. Each viewed the Great Islamic Schism differently. Some were firm believers and some were Muslims simply because they were born in lands wherein Muslim reigned Supreme at their birth. Some were lost from Islam, detached from the Sunna and knew nothing of their religion. Others knew of it and were repulsed by it. And some, like me, were both repulsed and drawn to it.
Now, if you want to discuss something rationally without attempting some odd twist on words that suit your purpose of vilifying others, get with me.
I find it fascinating that in the same breath you accuse someone in a backhanded manner of bigotry while expressing bigotry against that same one. Your superficial knowledge gleaned from reading a few studies is unimpressive. I’d be more impressed had you quoted the short stories of Yusuf Idris or the histories of Arabshah or even the books of Karen Armstrong.
Next time, try your silly immature slight with someone else. Your slant ways insult came out a bit odd when you are expressing disdainful bigotry yourself.
Now, if you wish to converse, I’m willing. If you wish to spout silly epithets and act a child, pls do that bullshit with someone else.
Thanks and DO have a nice day.
The greatest danger of Islam is that it is a religion GREATLY moved by peer pressure.
Read the story of how Shariah was included in the Afghan Constitution.
I have sat in a room full of Muslims. Twenty or so of them. All being irreverent. All carrying on and cursing and talking of drinking and carousing and picking up women. Some speaking about drugs. All discussing the taliban and how they hated the religious system in which they were forced to live.
In walks in one devout person. One “good, uncorrupted” Muslim. Suddenly, everyone in the room was as devout and good a Muslim as was he.
This happened more times than I can count.
Islam is a religion of the Mob.
In America, it should be different. As education levels are higher. That said, American Muslims have done their fair share of terrorism.
The founder of the Muslim Brotherhood al Qutb studied in America. His time in America pushed him towards a more deliberate observance of Islam and towards a more strict interpretation.
Islam , in it’s current form, can not peaceably co-exist with other cultures. With the notable exception of the Sufi and Ismaeli sects which are comparatively small and who al Qaeda, the Wahhabis and the Taliban have sworn to destroy.
Over time, there may develop a new Islam just as occurred with Sufism and the Shi’a and the Ismaeli developed.
The Ismaelis have lived in the West for a long time and have assimilated in fine manner. They seek education and they seek to improve the lot of their fellow Ismaeli. Read about Agha Khan and the Agha Khan Foundation. There is real power there.
The Ismaeli are Shi’a, though. The Shi’a, with the notable exception of Khomeinis Revolution, have historically been persecuted by the larger Sunni and have been more internally focused.
The problems stem mostly from within the Sunni house. Specifically, the followers of al Wahhab. The greatest danger being that Saudi Arabia is officially Wahhabist and are spreading their brand of violent Islam all over the globe. The rise of the Taliban can be traced straight back to Saudi funded Wahhabist Mosques, Madrassahs and other creations in the NWFP and the FATA.
The Ground Zero mosque is a gross error in judgment by this man and his wife. Their stubborn attitude in the face of opposition is distinctly unSufi.
That said, if the Mosque is not funded by Revolutionary Iran or Wahhabist Saudi Arabia, I have no problem with it.
If, however, it is funded by Revolutionary Iran or Wahhabist Saudi Arabia, I am against it.
@Mataharley…. What Dawood Khan said!
To the latter, I was including many others here on FA that have made such statements over the course of this debate since June. Most especially Donald Bly – who gave us a little rewrite of the 1st Amendment, and labeled Muslims exempt from the 1st Amendment because the religion was “clear and present danger”. So the fact he, in particular, tries to ride your higher road coattails is downright hilarious.
Perhaps you’ve missed the tone of the debate many have set here… including Donald Bly…as documented here only in part. To that, we can add a couple more in recent threads:
I trust you will find these over the top? But according to you, I have “slanted bigotry”. Okay… strange yardstick measure you got there, dude.
To your own comments that triggered my supposed “Muslim apologist, ignorant” response:
In one breath you say you’ve had Muslims trying to convert you… something I have to laugh at since all the infidel experts here say you should be dead for not doing so. You did not regale us with any specifics on those American Muslims you say tried to do so, or how they responded when you were unwilling. Then you leap to the other countries… where I try to point out that American Muslims are not the same as middle east Muslims.
But apparently you already know it all, yes?
Then you come back with a full comment on all your Muslim comrades, friends, etal… all of which seems to belie your last paragraphs to we “Muslim apologists”, as you hypersensitive victim types like to call us when we call you on class warfare, and say we’re simply ignorant of Islam.
Well you must be in fine company, because there are a lot of self professed infidel scholars here, telling us all about Muslims and the Qur’an with their every breath.
All those friends you told us about? They are Islamic or not? If what you say is true, you should be condemning the remarks by so many on these threads (as I’ve linked above) that sweep your friends up into the “all Islam is terrorism” nets. But instead you attack those of us who dare to suggest that not all Muslims are alike, nor terrorists – only for you to turn around and avow that the religion will demand they convert us via violence, and not evangelism?
So are your Muslim friends included in that? Or do they have a “get out of Gitmo and pass Mohammed free” card you issue? Which is it?
Now, if I misunderstood your “generic” comments about how violent and agressive Islam is – and you really only meant to say that violent Islam doesn’t include the friends you know (and whom we did not know about at your comment) – well geez. So sorry. But when you make blanket statements, we can’t know you’ve included your own little, undisclosed caveats.
Oh yes, Dawood… your @latest comment above #18 did nothing to dissuade the argument that you paint Islam with the big brush… i.e.
There is a great reform effort taking place with Muslims… they, however, are not enjoying the support of all too many Americans, as I’ve pointed out here. Instead, if they are reformers, they are engaging in tagiyya. Muslims can’t win with some in this crowd, sez the “Muslim apologist”.
INRE your comments here:
Hate to break it to you, and perhaps it’s because you are entering this conversation so late in it’s length, but that places you squarely in the opinion camp with me, Wordsmith, Aye Chi, Skook, Old Trooper, Curt and a few other of we “muslim apologists”. But I welcome both your clarification and statement. And yes, that grudging support still includes we think it’s a piss poor idea. But if done within the scope of our laws, we are not willing to discriminate because the very development is offensive to us.
ADDED: You can catch up on the very long running debate by reading thru the 29 posts involved on this discussion.
Now, INRE the funding… there is no funding at this time. Which, of course, makes all the accusations and demands for investigations more humorous. In fact, Cordoba House has a long way to go, and funding will not be embarked upon until after their non-profit is set up. That, alone (if it’s not rejected) can take months. Then followed by plans… all before the fundraising is begun in earnest.
Class Warfare?
What Class are Muslims?
What race are Muslims?
Get it straight. I’m getting confused.
Do I hate them because they’re all poor or because they’re all some other race?
Get it right, so I’ll know what I am. Please. I’m so tired of being confused.
There are millions of Muslims out there who don’t care about any of this.
They care only that they can feed and shelter their children or that they can have a family and raise them and keep them secure.
That’s life.
You seem to be sayiing that there is no threat from Islam.
I beg to differ.
Islam itself is not the threat. No more so than Christianity is or was a threat now or in the past. Religions are religions. The people of these two religions are quite diverse.
A threat does come from Islam, though. It is an interpretation of Islam that endangers many on this planet.
Failure to realise that is a mistake.
Wahhabism and it’s relative movements and Revolutionary Iranian Shi’a Islam.
Most Muslim apologist downplay these threats.
The Eastern Roman Empire downplayed the threat from Arabia once. It no longer exists.
The Soviet Union downplayed the threat of Islam and it’s fighters. They no longer exist.
You’ve apparently not befriended a Muslim if you have never had a Muslim attempt to convert you. Every Muslim with whom I have ever developed a relationship, no matter his geographical proximity or location to me, has attempted on some level to convert me. If they believe, they believe it is the right thing to attempt to bring you over. Most will do it for the same reason that Christians attempt to convert me. They do it out of love for a friend and a passion for their faith.
Religion is simply not for me.
I could really care less what any other has said on here. I know what I know, I know what I have experienced. I know what I have seen and felt and breathed.
I’ll ask you the same thing that I asked Bob Merkin.
From whence did Islam spring? How did it grow? How did it come to possess the lands in which it now resides? How did Islam spread? What is the jizya? Who paid it and why? On what side did the Ottomans fight during World War I? On what side did the majority of Muslim tribes and countries fight during World War II? Who attempted to import Hitler’s Final Solution to Jerusalem?
Islam has been a violent religion. As has Christianity. Islam was born of the sword and spread far and wide by the sword. Compare that to early Christianity which spread through faith. Christianity did not become an instrument of State until Constantine hi-jacked it in his bid to become Emperor. Islam began by conquering Mekkah and converting it into a holy city and turning out all of the pagan religions and co-opting the Ka’aba into the Shrine of Allah. Islam then spread by the sword reaching and overtaking Europe, Asia, India, parts of China, Northern Africa, Central Asia and parts of Southeast Asia.
If Islam is not a violent religion then why was it spread exclusively by the sword from 632 CE to the Ottoman Empire.
The State is an Istrument of Islam.
That is a great difference between Islam and the West. Not between Islam and Christianity for if the Roman Catholic Church had their way, all States would be an instrument of their bloody and violent religion as well.
I am no apologist for Christianity as I am no Christian. I claim no religion, though, I attempt to study Buddhism.
My home is the West. Our way of life is superior in many ways. Islam is a drain on the world just as Christianity was for a 1,000 years or so.
Even so, there are good points to Islam.
And Muslims are not exclusively Muslims. That is not the only part of their humanity or their self. There is much more to the Arab than that he is a Muslim. There is much more to an Iranian than that he or she is a Shi’a Muslim. There is much more to an Afghan than that he or she is a Muslim.
That said, when they get to the point of becoming what is known by us in the West as the Taliban, they are no longer any thing more than a monster and the source of their motivation is Islam and strictly Islam.
How can something that was born of the Sword and spread by the sword in a river of blood be anything but violent?
This is something that no apologist has even been able to explain to me.
How can a religion that developed while it’s adherents were at war be anything other than violent. Every conquest that was made during the development of the religion of Islam and the writing of the Hadith was done on horseback on the road to battle, aimed at the conquest of Nations and peoples. Yet, this is not violent.
Explain to me how this religion is not violent.
It’s tantamount to denying the Judaism and it’s Books are not violent. Even though they tell of conquest and battles and massacres.
How is the Old Testament not violent?
If it’s book is not soaked in blood, then no book is soaked in blood.
Born in conquest. Spread in conquest. Not violent. Someone please explain that to me.
Fought the West until the Fall of the Ottoman Empire. We had about a 50 year gap wherein Muslims were so down that they could attack no one of consequence. So they started picking on the Jews in Palastine. And they fought with the Hindus in India.
Starting in the 70s….BOOM! Islam explodes out of the starting gate with Global Terrorism.
The Cold War ends. BOOM! Islam explodes again. Bringing terrorism to new heights.
But Islam is not violent.
It’s just a few of them.
It’s just the few that are in any way in touch with any other culture. lol
Muslim dissidents in the Phillipines, Thailand, Russia, Eastern Europe, Europe, America, China. Muslim wars and genocide in Africa.
But no…Islam is peaceful.
This shit cracks me up. It’s like saying that Christianity was peaceful while the Popes were fighting with the Monarchs of Europe for control of the Continent.
A religion is a reflection primarily of it’s leaders.
Nearly every Muslim country on the planet is “lead” by a Muslim Despot.
But Islam is not violent.
And the Soviets weren’t communist sons of bitches…
Personally, I think it will never be funded.
And if funded, they’ll never get a Union which will have the workers to build it.
____________________________________________________________________
I can go into the whole history of Islam if you wish. I’ve done practically nothing but read about and study it for the past 7 or 8 years. it’s a fascinating history.
And when I say that Islam is a violent religion, I do not necessarily mean that it is a bad thing in my conception. I have a grudging respect and admiration for it.
Though, I would be no part of any religion and especially not one that expects me to submit to some imaginary God creature so that I may become the slave of a mere mortal.
Some of my heroes are Timur the Lame, Saladin, Richard the Lion Hearted, Babur Khan, Genghis Khan and his grandson Kubilai. Those are heroes of the old history. Timur has a special place in my heart as does Genghis as I wish that we would wage war after their manner.
Democracy is of the Mob. Islam is of the Mob. Christianity is of the Mob.
Witness Evangelism.
Witness Plato, Socrates and Aristotle.
Witness the streets of the Islamic World when someone draws a cartoon of Mohammad.
I witnessed that with my own eyes. No trick of Fox News.
Witness Ashura when Shi’a celebrants meet up with Sunni crowds.
There is much to be admired in the writings of the Qu’ran. The same can be said of the words of Jeshua of Nazareth as well as Siddhartha, Confucius and many other men of wisdom.
That said, there is nothing in any of them that compels me to worship them exclusively.
@Dawood Khan, this isn’t all about you… so sorry. You make generic Islam statements that elicted praise from one of our in house “all Islam is bad” commenters. Obviously, you… like the the rest of us and even the Muslims seeking reform… recognize that extreme interpretations of Islam is not a good thing.
The odd thing is your opinion differs little from my own… that Cordoba, if within the scope of our laws and not funded by terrorists… should be built despite our dislike of the idea. And that not all Muslims are “Islam” terrorists, as suggested by all too many here.
Like I said, much of this is your late entry into the discussion, without some background on the extreme tangents against all Muslims taken here.
But I find it interesting you choose to assault me, and I hear no tut tut from you on the linked comments I provided above. These get a pass from you, but you find a “Muslim apologist” just irresistable? Why is that, Dawood?
An interesting source:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/AbulKasem50623p2.htm
@Dawood Khan… clarification welcomed. And agreed to. Personally, I wouldn’t go near the religion as a choice. No more than I would Mormon or Amish. Nor will I choose to judge those that do select it, as long as they are participating in America and following our laws.
BTW, I agree about the likelihood of funding. It’s a hot potato, and when done thru a non-profit (combined with the debate raging), the contributions will be closely monitored. Terrorist funds are harder to move around in int’l banking since the Bush years, and ordinary businesses may not wish to deal with the repercussions of donations associated.
Because I conceived you to be blindly defending a religion about which you seem to know very little. Admittedly, I could well be wrong on that point.
And if a poster seems not so intelligent, I find no interest in discussing much with them. You seemed intelligent, if apologetic, in the discussion.
I responded initially to this. Didn’t pay attention to whom I was responding.
It seemed to say that Muslims do not attempt to convert [revert] folks to their belief. I was simply saying that they do. They believe in this act just as do Christians. It is part and parcel of being Muslim to spread the religion. Both peaceably and violently.
You posted afterward as if you were denying that this was the case. Seemed to me your general vibe.
Then you seemed to be calling me a bigot or at the least lumping me in with folks who hate Muslims.
I do not hate Muslims. Nor do I hate Christians. I simply think that their religions are full of shit and baseless mythology based upon the ramblings of the insane. Ever actually read Revelations???
I don’t really hate anyone. I do hate institutions which have enslaved men and women for centuries. Islam is one of these. Christianity was one of these. For the most part, it has been reformed. Even though, they find a new and stupid cause every so often such as the “Sanctity of Marriage” Amendment which I find laughable.
@Dawood Khan, considering the months we’ve gone at this, it gets tiresome having to repeat the same things over and over. Frankly, three of we authors… myself, Wordsmith and Aye Chi… jumped in at the onset since the entire wave of “all Islam is bad”, “all mosques should be prohibited” was becoming the sing song of the commentary.
If you go thru the thread category link I provided above (starting at the last/oldest and working to the most recent), you’ll get the gist of how it’s all deteriorated. Ultimately, the anti-Cordoba House began their own Alinsky narrative, saying that if we grudgingly supported it’s construction, we were “muzzie teamsters”, and if we called out those (like those comments I linked) as dangerous ‘phobes, we were saying everyone who opposed were ‘phobes. Personally, I think the ‘phobes are relatively overt over the span of all the threads.
Way back on July 30th, after a month and a half of heated extreme accusations and commentary, I noted that people loosely fell into certain attitudes:
1: Those who outright support it, with no caveats. No one on this site, ever….
2: Those who don’t like the development, but have accepted that the legal process has been determined by local authorities and community and aren’t willing to do law changes based on discrimination.
3a: Those who have decided that Rauf is a radical without any evidence, and Cordoba House should be stopped at any cost… including altering laws to reverse the current legal decision. Will Emerson have that “evidence”? I don’t know. Supporting a one nation state isn’t exactly unusual, and is shared by more than a few at the UN (she spits….). And I’m waiting to hear what proof in transcripts there is for Emerson’s statement that Rauf, a Sufi, supports the Wahhabism of Saudi Arabia.
3b: Those on record that Cordoba House should be stopped even if Rauf is a “moderate”… whatever that guideline is. The above group sometimes say they are just fine if the mosque is “built elsewhere”… but they are also silent when the more extreme movements are shutting down mosque developement, located no where near Ground Zero, all over the country.
4: Those who believe that Muslims and Islam have no place in the US, that there are “enough” mosques in NYC or other places, and should be returned to “their nation of origin”.
I, myself, fall into the second range of attitudes. We have a very high percentage of the 3b’s and 4’s here tho. From your first comments, it seemed you were engaging in the rah rah Islam is all bad dance. In your subsequent comments, you have made yourself more abundantly clear. That, in itself, is appreciated… but even more so that it didn’t take four or five more threads on this never ending subject to come to light.
INRE the question about American Muslims, engaging in evangelism… this is, again, after months of being told by our self-professed infidel scholars that they are under orders to convert or kill any infidel. I’ve asked this question before – who’s ever had any Muslim them approach them personally for conversion – and no one has responded with an actual event. You are the first. It was, in some ways, almost a trick question since they spent so much time saying you’d be dead if you refused.
I don’t believe in absolute extremes. Therefore I’d never say *never* does a Muslim attempt to convert, but I did find it interesting that this mandate has not yet occurred in anyone’s daily life (except yours) after all their lecturing to the contrary. Dang… millions of Muslims in this country for decades/centuries, and no dead from failing to convert? I would also assume this happens less in modernized western nations, than in the tribal villages of Afghanistan.
And your last paragraph INRE enslaving type institutions? Couldn’t agree more. But then, some people genuinely seem to need a support system, and remain blind to it’s flaws or illogic. Don’t know what to do about that one… except hopefully have minimal humans, well educated so they don’t feel the need to flock to Jim Jones type cults.
I forgot to add… when you said this:
… I’ve made the same point. I was only met with “but they don’t kill you”, or “Christians don’t fly planes into buildings” type retorts.
In other words, they were saying Christian evangelism was acceptable. Islamic evangelism was nefarious in intent. No exceptions.
For all you useful idiots and pseudo intellectuals who believe Islam is the religion of piece, you might want to check out toays Yid With Lid blog. Read “Aug 23 1929. The Arabs Massacred the Jews of Hebron While the British Watched.” Aug 23 might be a suitable day for the IDF to unleash the dogs of war on those threatening their nation.
Let me tell you where my focus of reading has been since 911… not on how Muslims in general view Qur’an interpretations in their myriad of denominations, but on how, specifically, the global Islamic jihad movements choose to interpret that text. Just as Christianity has their various arms of Espicopalian, Methodist, Baptist, Catholic, so too do Muslims. And much of their religious practices are influenced by the cultural society and engagement in the nations where they live.
What I found fascinating was the interplay, and power rifts, between the jihad movements… most especially how they worked in tandum to defeat a common enemy, only to return to internal battles to jockey for battle.
For example I was heartened by the power rift in the Old Taliban, under Bhutto’s created Mullah Omar’s Afghan group during Pakistan drought days, with the New Taliban in later years. She may have been a moderate reformer in some’s eyes, but she packed her admin who created and funded the bad guys for a protection racket. Like most leaders in Muslim nations, the blind eye is often given in return for favors. Then came Pakistan’s Taliban under Mehsud (now deceased), and rivaled the Old Taliban for power in Af/PAK. The same occurred with Saddam’s mutually beneficial alliances with jihad groups in order to use their contacts and routes for bypassing sanctions and the OFF (Oil for Food) UN scandal. And the dances done between Hezbollah and the Wahabbist AQ affiliates.
There was no doubt to me that bad guys have their disagreements, all outside of normal Muslims with their own reform issues. And that we’d find instances of Sunni types doing business with Shia when the end goal was mutually desired.
Of particular interest (and still stored on my desktop) is Zawahiri’s “open meeting” with the press and his responses to selected questions back in 2008. It was labeled Part One, and I have never found a Laura Mansfield translated Part Two available. Too bad. But the views of their extreme interpretation of the Qur’an are obvious… and I do not construe them to be a common scholarly interpretation for Muslims in general.
Another struggle that captured my attention was between al Sadr and Zarqawi (prior to his death, of course). al Sadr was higher on the scholarly food chain both in blood line and education, and his resentment for Zarqawi’s popularity as a down and dirty rebel leader played much into the Iraq theatre strategy.
Of late, the eyes should be on the increasing chasm between Ahmadinejad, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, and a very disgruntled more modern Muslim youth population, increasingly rebelling against both. In the long run, I’m betting on the sheer numbers of youth making changes in Iran internally…. if for no other reason than the youth overtaking the older fundamentalist ruling class. Just depends upon how much damage the existing religious and elected powers do in the interim.
So on Islam studies in general, nope… never been my focus. But I am not uncomfortable in the realm of Islam, as viewed thru the eyes of the global Islamic jihad movements, and the despots that take advantage of their services to maintain power.
@minuteman 26, if Bebe and the IDF are to stand on date significance, they will be two days too late.
According to news reports, and following on the heels of John Bolton’s talking head appearances days ago, it will be too late. Russia is slated to fuel and fire up Bushehr plant today.
Too late to strike post fueling the reactor for repercussions of fallout.
And, as ever, always grateful for your fertile fodder in the #4 category….
… signed, a better informed “useful idiot” than you
Another worthwhile article. It’s a presentation given in 2004, and discusses “islamism” as opposed to islam.
http://www.danielpipes.org/2196/the-challenge-of-islamism-in-europe-the-middle-east
@MataHarley
As Dawood so aptly pointed out your propensity to twist words… I won’t delve into too much further.
My “re-write” of the 1st amendment NEVER SINGLED OUT ISLAM
In my 1st post on this thread in regards to “clear and present danger”… do you see the word Muslim anywhere in post #7? However… if the shoe fits… wear it… you Mata are just as Dawood describes… quite quick to twist words.
In past posts you have given the impression that Freedom of Religion is sacrosanct… I contend that it is no more sacrosanct than Freedom of Speech which the Supreme Court applies the test of “clear and present danger”.
I will leave the arguing of what Islam represents to Dawood… he’s got you outgunned in his knowledge of Islam. You are way outmatched.
@MataHarley
You further distort facts by attempting to attribute comments to me that I never made…
Not a single one of those comments was made by me… not the ones you included in the blockquote of the post or the comments to which you linked.
Actually, Donald, had you taken a trip to the link I put in my comment #20, you’d see right after I included those blockquotes, I addressed your rewrite, saying it fit right in there.
Now you’ve tried to play the “meaning of ‘is’… is” game several times with your Amendment rewrite. Unfortunately, your supporting commentary makes it quite plain you were addressing Islam in your intent.
So I guess what you want is a little blockquote of your own comments that makes it quite obvious how you feel about Islam, and how busy your mind stays on figuring out acceptable ways to exempt practicing Muslims from Constitutional rights. And, of course, it becomes obvious that you insist that any one who practices Islam must be bent on overthrowing the United States.
There ya go… happy now? I misrepresent nothing. I simply allow your own commentary to dictate my final assumptions.
@Donald Bly #19:
Really, Bly?! Seriously?
Dawood speaks for you when he writes this:
Interesting to know you, Donald Bly, have no problems with “the mosque” should it turn out not to be funded by Khomeinites and wahhabists. 😛
BTW, Donald: in reference to your “rewrite” of the Constitution…
…. two points:
1: You did not address mandatory conversion on pain of death, as you morphed in your later explanations. It said “advocates for the overthrow of the US Government and the Constitution of the USA”.
2: So, in the same vein, how about exempting political realms of thought and parties that also advocate for the overthrow of the US Government and Constitution… ala the Communist Party, even the progressive wings of Democrats. They are, after all, busy chewing off the legs of that document as we speak endlessly about this dang building. Can’t even leave out the extreme right, busy clamoring for rebellion, and dryin’ out their powder.
So you want to ban written doctrine of religions for overthrow, but want to leave political party platforms out of it? Why? Because they aren’t Muslim?
And just how do you square either exemption as being part of the founding of this country’s principles?
@wordsmith, I think Donald Bly was so happy thinking I was “outmatched” by someone who actually shares my opinion that he totally missed the ensuing conversations.
@Mata… yes, I’m happy now… and I’ll stand by each and every one of those statements. Each is written with a view of 1400 years of violent Islamic history, which Dawood quite eloquently expressed in a previous post on this thread.
However, your previous post WAS misrepresenting my position and attempting to attribute to me comments that I have not made. You simply got called out on your misrepresentation, but misrepresent you did.
I don’t have any problem with people as individuals, no matter what faith they have. I first make my judgments based on what I see, and how they interact but I WILL NOT simply dismiss the written doctrine of a religion simply because some of the adherents are nice at the moment. Especially when 1400 years of history has proven that their doctrine AS WRITTEN is one that is not compatible with modern society (read that western civilization) It has always been my philosophy that no two individuals can possibly have the same religious beliefs because every individual has a unique perspective. Kinda like … is the blue I see, the same as the blue you see!
No misrepresentation, Donald Bly… you just thought no one kept any list of the weird commentary coming from what I used to think were Constitutional conservatives.
Therefore, to show I was not misrepresenting your intents, I had to do your homework and provide the specifics that lent support to your own misrepresentation that you intended to exclude only Islam…. not political parties… from Constitutional rights because you believe everyone in that religion wants to overthrown the US.
pathetic…
@Wordsmith… I absolutely support Dawood’s position…. I have never, not one single time… taken a stand on the Ground Zero Mosque either way. Have at it trying to find any post where I did.
@Mata… it appears that once you got your ass handed to you … you now claim that Dawood and you share the same opinions… Not from the way I read it.
@Mata….
Another fine example of twisting words…
Since I haven’t addressed the issue of the Communist Party at all… it means only that… I haven’t addressed the issue and no inference can be made concerning what I have not addressed. Nice Strawman there.
pathetic….
@Donald Bly:
Really?! Well, that’s interesting. Wonder what it was that gave me that impression then? I’m not up for sifting back through comments at the moment, but will just have to take your word on it.
So I guess if Cordoba House isn’t financed by wahhabis or by Tehran, then you are now on record as standing unopposed to its presence near Ground Zero.
I think that just may put you to the “left” of Mata, Aye, or myself. 😮
If you’d stop reveling in what you perceived as personal and satisfactory revenge, you might reread @Dawood’s comment above and you’ll find he doesn’t have the blanket negative disdain for Islam that you possess…. only in the way some interpret and act upon that interpretation.
Need some excerpt help? Here ya go…
Here’s a bit more insight to a more rational mind than yours.
There’s another thing you have missed from Dawood:
Iman Feisal Rauf is a Sufi…. one of those at odds with Wahhabis. Now what would remain to be proven by Emerson with his claims is if Rauf’s Sufi’ism is just a lifelong front to hide a closet Wahhabist.
So what was that you were saying again?
Yes, Donald… I asked you that question in the original thread to you I linked above, and just like now, you dodged the same then. Probably because you can’t be a supporter of Constitutional rights, and say what you’d like, eh?
There is no strawman save in your attempt to skirt answers to incriminating questions. If you want to ban “religions” that have written agendas to “overthrow the US government”, how can you ignore political party platforms that do the same?
@wordsmith, Donald Bly has before said he has not taken a stand on Cordoba House. As much as I can tolerate sifting thru past threads, and I’ve already archived most of those that I think have pertinent interest, this is true. He pretty much confines all his commentary to Islam at large, and never addresses Cordoba House specifically.
Sounds like a personal reading problem then, Donald Bly. Actually, Wordsmith is correct that objections generally remained confined to the method used to stop Cordoba House, and whether it’s changing laws to discriminate against Muslims. And all of us have stated that Rauf accepting terrorist funding was unacceptable in anyway. Therefore since the beginning, all of us have shared one common bond – we all find the choice of Cordoba House extremely offensive. Dawood stated it wasn’t a good choice, but supported it if there was no terrorist funding. I guess that means we all have weighed in….
…. except for you, I guess, who has chosen not to “take a stand” on anything but all of Islam as an enemy of the United States of America.
@Donald Bly:
Ahem:
Seems rather clear what your position on the GZM is, eh?
Oh yes… forgot that was his lead in to his 1st Amendment rewrite, Aye Chi… 🙄
@Wordsmith…. I will continue to NOT take a stand in regards to the Mosque… I do think it isn’t what one could consider a real seeking of dialog and healing and I’m wary of the motivation. However, if it isn’t stopped through some constitutional mechanism… I would not want its construction stopped in violation of the constitution. What I do agree with in regard to Dawood’s position is the history of Islam and the way in which it has been spread throughout the world via the sword.
@Mata
You are the big believer in the wisdom of the Supreme Court… it they deem the communist party a “clear and present danger”… then I guess they can do any damn thing they want. It is not necessary for me to comment on anything simply because you want me to comment. The communist party does advocate for violent overthrow, which sets it apart from the progressive movement’s goal of overthrow from within. If the people of this nation are stupid enough to adopt socialism and whatever that leads to as our form of government then Ben Franklin will have been prophetic… “We have a Republic, If we can keep it”
SCOTUS never ruled on the Socialist Party as a political party or organization being a “clear and present danger”. That ruling was confined to the upheld conviction of Charles Schenck…. not the party at large.
Nor can you claim your 1st Amendment rewrite is confined to the “violent” overthrow, since you only used the word “advocates”. But we finally have something we can again agree upon. “We have a Republic, if we can keep it.” Waste much more bandwidth and campaign talking points on Cordoba House, and the more likely we can indeed find ourselves losing it.
@Aye… Touche
I guess that could be considered as a position on the GZM. It was meant as was an indictment of the intolerance of Islam towards other faiths. A what’s good for the gander is good for the goose proposition and not an endorsement one way or the other although I can see how you might think it is.
My position is and always will be…. Islam is an institution that western civilization should never turn their backs on thinking that they will be as peaceful tomorrow as they “might” be today. Their history proves that one should be extremely wary regardless of the pleasantness of some.
Now… I’d much rather discuss other issues, but I got sucked much further into this thread than I really wanted to get sucked in, since Mata choose to infer that comments not made by me were mine and make me the whipping boy of bigotry.
Gotta go… I’m meeting Skookum for dinner shortly.
@Donald Bly #52:
I just don’t understand this “tit for tat” line that so many have been using about “they can build a mosque there as soon as we can build a Christian church at Mecca”, or some similar phrasing.
So, we should become more like the Saudis? 🙄
That’s a real head scratcher….