Maybe He Didn’t Know…

Maybe the “Scholar” missed it; maybe he didn’t really know; maybe, his “Muslim police blotter” failed to pick it up. But, Robert Spencer seems to conveniently ignore exculpatory facts that strike at the heart of his relentless argument that Islam is violent, evil, etc. Just the latest case in point: his decrying the death threat against Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris. He writes, in part:

It should be front-page news in every newspaper in the country: Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris has given up her job, her home, and even her identity because of death threats for Islamic supremacists. That Islamic jihadists can force an American citizen into hiding for exercising her freedom of speech is bad enough; that her cause has aroused only indifference from the media and the nation’s leading officials is even worse.

Although I can’t believe I’m actually saying this, he is right: the threat against Molly Norris is nothing short of repugnant. Norris, if you will remember, started the “Everybody Draw Muhammad Day” on Facebook, which turned into a vile anti-Muhammad orgy. It was so bad, in fact, that Molly Norris backed away from it completely. Yet, Spencer’s “defense” of Norris is really a thinly veiled attack against President Obama:

Molly Norris’s cause should be taken up by all free people – not least the President of the United States. Obama could have explained that human beings control their own reactions to things. If Muslims chose yet again to riot and murder because of Terry Jones or Molly Norris, that would be a choice they would be making out of an unlimited array of other choices. Instead, Western authorities have fallen into the Islamic supremacists’ trap and are starting to behave in just the way they want them to: thinking that they must not do certain things, because if they do, there will be violence from Muslims. Yet that violence is in every case solely the responsibility of the perpetrator, not of anyone else.

Yet, Spencer seems to have ignored the fact that some of Molly Norris’ most passionate defenders are Muslims themselves. Soon after the news of Norris being forced to go into hiding became public, a group of Muslim journalists, academics, writers, and scholars issued a statement:

A DEFENSE OF FREE SPEECH BY AMERICAN AND CANADIAN MUSLIMS

We, the undersigned, unconditionally condemn any intimidation or threats of violence directed against any individual or group exercising the rights of freedom of religion and speech; even when that speech may be perceived as hurtful or reprehensible.

We are concerned and saddened by the recent wave of vitriolic anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic sentiment that is being expressed across our nation.

We are even more concerned and saddened by threats that have been made against individual writers, cartoonists, and others by a minority of Muslims. We see these as a greater offense against Islam than any cartoon, Qur’an burning, or other speech could ever be deemed.

We affirm the right of free speech for Molly Norris, Matt Stone, Trey Parker, and all others including ourselves.

As Muslims, we must set an example of justice, patience, tolerance, respect, and forgiveness.

The Qur’an enjoins Muslims to:
* bear witness to Islam through our good example (2:143);
* restrain anger and pardon people (3:133-134 and 24:22);
* remain patient in adversity (3186);
* stand firmly for justice (4:135);
* not let the hatred of others swerve us from justice (5:8);
* respect the sanctity of life (5:32);
* turn away from those who mock Islam (6:68 and 28:55);
* hold to forgiveness, command what is right, and turn away from the ignorant (7:199);
* restrain ourselves from rash responses (16:125-128);
* pass by worthless talk with dignity (25:72); and
* repel evil with what is better (41:34).

Islam calls for vigorous condemnation of both hateful speech and hateful acts, but always within the boundaries of the law. It is of the utmost importance that we react, not out of reflexive emotion, but with dignity and intelligence, in accordance with both our religious precepts and the laws of our country.

We uphold the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Both protect freedom of religion and speech, because both protections are fundamental to defending minorities from the whims of the majority.

We therefore call on all Muslims in the United States, Canada and abroad to refrain from violence. We should see the challenges we face today as an opportunity to sideline the voices of hate—not reward them with further attention—by engaging our communities in constructive dialogue about the true principles of Islam, and the true principles of democracy, both of which stress the importance of freedom of religion and tolerance.

The list of signatories keeps growing. There is no mention of this statement by Spencer on his website.  I wonder why? Is it because it debunks Spencer’s notions about Islam and Muslims?

Maybe Spencer didn’t know about the statement…or maybe, he chose to look the other way, because the truth is too inconvenient.

88 thoughts on “Maybe He Didn’t Know…

  1. LoL.

    Looks like the Islamo-fascists have managed to ban me from posting at Loonwatch.

    So much for freedom of speech.

    If you go against the grain too much, we’ll block your comments from being posted.

    That will really prove that we’re right.

    LoL.

          • It’s quite possibly the most brutal way to kill an animal. A single slice to the throat, which most of the time, is very painful and takes a very long time for the animal to bleed out and die.

            Muslims can’t even eat food without knowing that what they are eating suffered a painful, gory death. Painless, quick death? Nah. That would be un-Islamic.

            Barbarians.

          • Have you ever seen secret footage of what is going in Western “civilised” mass production of meat. No. I didn’t think so.

            http://www.halalfocus.com/artman2/uploads/1/Hanover_report_1978.pdf

            Do check that out. It’s a 1978 study comparing halal and kosher vs Western slaughter. It turns out that captive bolt stunning is far more painful than Dhabiha. And why are you not bothering the Jews when they do exactly what we do:

            http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29841

            By the way, fool, many Muslims have their meat electrically stunned as many Imams have said it is okay for the procedure to be done. The Halal Monitoring Comitee, for example, allows stunning before slaughter. And KFC had their meat stunned also which means there should have been no morons protesting outside it for going halal.

  2. Now if you’re done talking to yourself, when are you going to realize that your piss poor attempts at trolling is bound to get you banned from any website. Now go crawl back over to JW, where your fucked up worldview doesn’t illicit mucho lulz.

    • I find it funny when liberals lecture on freedom of speech, yet attack people for their…freedom of speech. Kind of like the Muslims who want an international law prosecuting people from criticizing suicide bombings.

  3. I don’t think anyone is demonising Muslims as a whole but radical Islamists who defy every legal system. Here in Australia there we have increasing radicals who defy our laws becaust they say they only answerable to Allah and noone else. Most Muslins are great law obeying citizens.

    • Increasing radicals? Sorry mate, but I have to call you out on that. Who are they here besides some media-hungry, increasingly irrelevant and sidelined ‘clerics’? I can think of two, perhaps three at most, and all of them are entirely irrelevant in the Australian Muslim scene, which you have demonstrated on numerous occasions that you know nothing about.

    • According to the Muslims and leftists at this site, Muslims have “already denounced terrorism and extremism”, so they don’t need to do anything else at this point. Yet, oddly enough, you don’t really see that here. To these people, the biggest threat is not the fact that millions of Muslims are out there defaming the “ordinarily peaceful religion of Islam©” with their extremist beliefs. The only issue that needs to be confronted is “Islamophobia.” It’s absolutely unheard of, to these people, that non-Muslims are actively examining Islam based on the sheer amount of fanaticism and violence that is perpetrated in its name on a daily basis, and any objection to the religion must be based on something else, like racism or bigotry.

      The arguments made on this site are some of the weakest on record. This post, in particular, should cause any sane minded person to roll their eyes. Right, Muslims are some of Molly Norris’ biggest supporters. All they need to support such a flimsy claim is some random petition from the internets, I guess. Let’s just conveniently leave out the part where Molly Norris has been threatened with death countless times by radical Muslims, has an ongoing fatwa on her head, and had to change her name and go into hiding because of the ongoing harassment by members of the religion of peace.

      So I guess if Muslims are the biggest defenders of Molly Norris, who are they defending her against? Oh, I bet it’s the Jews, right? They’re always a good scapegoat. Or how about some wacky fundamentalist Christians? They’re probably frothing at the mouth at the opportunity to take out Molly Norris. Or maybe, just maybe, it’s some Islamophobe who is trying to make Islam look bad. Yeah, that’s it. Couldn’t possibly be Muslims.

      • “Right, Muslims are some of Molly Norris’ biggest supporters. All they need to support such a flimsy claim is some random petition from the internets, I guess.”

        I don’t understand the flaw in using the Internet as a resource. The only problem is when people use Google to support their extremely one-sided opinions. What they do is Google stuff that will ONLY support their claim and nothing else. For instance, if you only Google “Islam is a violent religion” then your not gonna get any evidence or support to the contrary, which forms an extremely one-sided and biased opinion. I am currently reading a book called “A History of the Israeli and Palestine Conflict” and it is exceptionally balanced. I consider myself pro-Palestinan, but this book simply changed many of my views because I got evidence to the contrary of my position.

        “Although I can’t believe I’m actually saying this, he [Spencer] is right: the threat against Molly Norris is nothing short of repugnant.”

        There goes your argument of “let’s convieniently forget that extremist Muslims do this, do that.”

  4. “I don’t think anyone is demonising Muslims as a whole but radical Islamists who defy every legal system.”

    OK I know you’re trolling because anyone who spends five minutes at jihadwatch knows that this is simply not true.

  5. I disagree, Molly Norris did not start the facebook campaign. She herself said that. She said she drew it out of fun and not for it to be implemented.

  6. Ahni,

    You can’t even defend your own arguments, and here you are, saying the arguments made on this site are the weakest on record? Well, if you’re referring to your own, then that would be true.

    “Islamophobia” is by far, a bigger issue in Western countries than “Muslim extemists” or “Muslim terrorists” are, as non-Muslim on Muslim violence is by far more common than Muslim on non-Muslim violence in these countries.

    Most of the objection to Islam and Muslims is based on racism and bigotry, since if it were any other religion or group of people, it would be seen differently, and most of the sources a lot of these non-Muslims look to, are heavily biased ones with a vendetta against Muslims and Islam (Jihadwatch being one of them). That Muslims have to come out and condemn everything wrong that’s supposedly done by Muslims against non-Muslims (even though it has nothing to do with them), wreaks of that collectivist mentality. It’s also a double standard, since this isn’t applied to anyone else besides Muslims.

    No one asks Christians to come out and condemn every wrong a Christian has done, even when it’s done in the name of Christianity. No one asks Mexican Americans to come out and condemn all the wrongs done by Mexican pirates and drug lords. No one asks for a condemnation from any other group of people… besides Muslims. That anyone would, amounts to hypocrisy, bigotry and racism combined.

    It’s hypocrisy, because it’s a double standard, as it isn’t applied to anyone else, it’s bigotry, because it reflects a prejudice against Muslims and Islam, and it is racism, because it collectivizes the responsibility, based only on religious affiliation. That anyone who is Arab or even looks “Arab” because of it, underscores the “racism” element to it.

    • Uhhh, most Muslims are not Arab.

      I would oppose Islam if it was practiced by a blond haired, blue eyed Norwegian just as much as I would oppose it if it was practiced by a bearded Arab. The ideology is the problem, not the race who practices it.

      You want so desperately to use the race card because you have seen how successful other groups have been with it. It’s a sign of desperation. A hail Mary, last resort effort, and very dishonest.

      • In modern secular, PC western democracies nothing succeeds more than shouting the race card. Playing the victim is very much a propaganda tool for radical Islam.

      • Uhhh, most Muslims are not Arab.

        Tell that to the idiots who stab poor unsuspecting Sikhs.

        I would oppose Islam if it was practiced by a blond haired, blue eyed Norwegian just as much as I would oppose it if it was practiced by a bearded Arab.

        Good for you, you oppose something you have next to zero knowledge of. Ignorant bigot is ignorant.

        • Tell that to the idiots who stab poor unsuspecting Sikhs.

          Like when? I’m sure you can find one or two examples, and to you, that will someone balance out the thousands of Islamic terror attacks that happen around the world on a yearly basis.

          And Sikhs and Indians have to worry more about Muslims than non-Muslims. The level of violence against them in the Pakistan area is evidence of this.

          • My point isn’t to balance out anything. Good job putting words in my mouth.

            Too bad you couldn’t understand the interesting point that Awesome brought up. Because, if Islamophobia didn’t have a racist element to it, you wouldn’t see people attacking anybody who looks remotely “Muslim”, like Sikhs and other South Asians. And there have been tons of cases, but your head is way to deep up Spencer’s ass that you’ve never even heard of such cases.

      • Uhhh… I never said all or even most Muslims were Arabs, only that Arabs experience the bigotry directed at Muslims, regardless of whether they are actually Muslims or not.

        Why would such a thing happen, if no one associated Islam, or Muslims with that particular ethnic group?

        So yes, there is actual racism involved. I know you’d like to pretend it doesn’t exist, so you can practice it, but the fact is, it does exist, and it is directed at a certain demographic, due to religious affiliation. Denying it won’t make it go away.

        • So yes, there is actual racism involved. I know you’d like to pretend it doesn’t exist, so you can practice it, but the fact is, it does exist, and it is directed at a certain demographic, due to religious affiliation. Denying it won’t make it go away.

          Kind of like how denying the connection between Muslims committing violence and the Qur’an won’t make it go away? Something to think about.

          And nice try making the assumption that I am somehow practicing “racism” by opposing Islam. I see you don’t mind collectivism, after all.

          • “Kind of like how denying the connection between Muslims committing violence and the Qur’an won’t make it go away? Something to think about.”

            – There is no connection, since the Qur’an isn’t what inspires Muslims to commit acts of violence. The occasions where they do cite it are about as many as when Christians cite passages from the Bible to justify their acts of violence. There is nothing unique or different when Muslims do it than when non-Muslims do it, so it shouldn’t be regarded any differently.

            “And nice try making the assumption that I am somehow practicing “racism” by opposing Islam. I see you don’t mind collectivism, after all.”

            – Again you misrepresent what I said. I never made the assumption that you were practicing racism by opposing Islam, I simply made the assumption that you practice racism in general.

            As for collectivism, that’s your game, not mine, as you are the one who is eager to practice it against Muslims.

    • No one asks Christians to come out and condemn every wrong a Christian has done, even when it’s done in the name of Christianity.

      That’s because it hardly ever happens, whereas Muslims are blowing shit up on a daily basis. The fact that “moderates” don’t seem to care, yet they shut down the entire country of Pakistan when cartoons of Muhammad are drawn, suggest that they are in cahoots with the extremists. Therefore, they should not be trusted.

      • What hardly happens? Christians doing something wrong? Do you really want to go there? And yet, Muslims have to condemn every misstep taken by their co-religionists; otherwise they are “in cahoots with the extremists”. The fact that you conveniently turn a blind eye notwithstading, Muslims actually do denounce terrorism on a regular basis. But you wouldn’t know that because your “research” amounts to nothing more than Googling “Muslim violence”, and “Islamic Jihad”; along with the obligatory following of JW and AnsweringIslam. Good for you.

        http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php

          • Christians doing something wrong? Do you really want to go there?

            Are you suggesting that Christians are committing just as much, if not more, violence and other crimes in the name of their religion as Muslims are?

            The only way you can make this claim is if you consider most of America “Christian” and count every single crime that occurs and allocate that to Christianity. It doesn’t work that way. Where’s the religiously inspired crimes by Christians? I’m sure you can find a few isolated attacks on abortion doctors, a few crazy cult members here and there, but it will always pale to the sheer number of Muslim extremists that are alive today.

            Christianity doesn’t seem to cause its followers to snap and become terrorists as they get closer to the heart of the religion. That’s an Islamic phenomenon, by and large.

          • The fact that you put 3 paragraphs worth of words in my mouth notwithstanding, you said that Christians hardly ever do anything wrong. Excuse me for thinking that claim is a tad outlandish.

            and count every single crime that occurs and allocate that to Christianity.

            This has got to become the new definition of irony. Isn’t it that every single crime a Muslim commits has to do with Islam according to you people? Everything from public urination to robberies are motivated by Islam according to you. Sami Hassoun springs to mind as a recent example. And yet, when Christians are now in question it suddenly “doesn’t work that way”. Go figure.

          • Great 5th grade comeback dude.

            Red herrings aren’t your forte, so just stick to incoherent ignorant rambling k?

      • Now you’re going back to your unsubstantiated opinion that every crime a Muslim commits, is religiously motivated.

        Pointing out crimes committed by Muslims isn’t enough, as you also need to prove that they are religiously motivated. Otherwise, I can just easily point out the fact that Christians are proud murderers of 25% of the world’s population.

        You’ve also resorted to the same folly of expecting Muslims to denounce everything wrong that their co-religionists do, while excusing every other group in the world from this responsibility, without any justification.

        Do you apply this same standard to others? If not, then that makes you a hypocrite.

        • The 9/11 hijackers were religiously motivated. View their video wills for proof. The Times Square bomber was religiously motivated. Again, there is video of this as proof. The underwear bomber was religiously motivated. The Fort Hood shooter was religiously motivated. The Beltway Snipers were religiously motivated. The Madrid train bombers were religiously motivated. The Beslan massacre jihadists were religiously motivated. Every single member of an Islamic terrorist organization today is religiously motivated. The list goes on and on, and there is more often than not, proof that they are acting out of religious fervor.

          Contrast this with your method. “Well, 80% of America is Christian, so 80% of all crime must be committed by Christians. 80% of the deaths caused by the US Military is attributable to Christianity.” It’s baseless.

          Otherwise, I can just easily point out the fact that Christians are proud murderers of 25% of the world’s population.

          Otherwise? No, you’ve already made that claim, without any evidence, of course. Aside from a few isolated abortion cases, you’ll just grasp at straws by bringing up the KKK, the Crusades, etc. Sounds like you are the one who has to substantiate something, not me.

          • “The 9/11 hijackers were religiously motivated. View their video wills for proof. The Times Square bomber was religiously motivated. Again, there is video of this as proof. The underwear bomber was religiously motivated. The Fort Hood shooter was religiously motivated. The Beltway Snipers were religiously motivated. The Madrid train bombers were religiously motivated. The Beslan massacre jihadists were religiously motivated. Every single member of an Islamic terrorist organization today is religiously motivated. The list goes on and on, and there is more often than not, proof that they are acting out of religious fervor.”

            – In fact, every single one of those was motivated by politics and/or current events. You are confusing the means to an end with the primary motive itself.

            “Contrast this with your method. “Well, 80% of America is Christian, so 80% of all crime must be committed by Christians. 80% of the deaths caused by the US Military is attributable to Christianity.” It’s baseless. ”

            – That’s funny, because I never actually said that.

            “Otherwise? No, you’ve already made that claim, without any evidence, of course. Aside from a few isolated abortion cases, you’ll just grasp at straws by bringing up the KKK, the Crusades, etc. Sounds like you are the one who has to substantiate something, not me”

            The crusades do not qualify as “grasping at straws”, since that killed scores of people and was entirely motivated by a religious fervor.

            However, I’m not talking about Christians who do it for religious reasons, I’m talking about Christians who do it in general. Virtually every place they went outside of Europe, they massacred innocent people.

  7. @inconnu : I find it interesting that this initiative on the part of these muslim journalists begins: ‘ we are concerned and saddened by the recent wave of vitriolic anti-muslim and anti-islam sentiment…’

    But they seem unable to comprehend this might have something to do with death threats against Molly Norris, Geert Wilders, and many others. What did Molly do ? Suggest people might draw a cartoon of mohammed. DRAW A CARTOON – and she is threatened with DEATH !

    What did Geert Wilders do ? Produce a film showing film and photos of actual islamist terrorist acts, prefaced with passages from koran and hadiths giving them permission to carry out these acts. Yet HE is the one on trial, with police protection because of death threats, whilst the people who have threatened him are totally free, and have been charged with NOTHING ??? In passing, I note that any posting on any left website is subject to at least 10/15 minutes wait, while it is ‘moderated’, yet I can post on any number of freedom sites, and the post goes up STRAIGHT AWAY – so what are you frightened of ? Definition of a racist – anyone who is winning an argument with a leftist/liberal.

  8. The term “islamophobia” seems to the new kitsch phrase that people throw out every time one makes any criticism of Islam. Yet, Muslims are free to throw out any bigoted remark they like about non-Muslims and it’s fine. Muslims are the most bigoted and intolerant people of any religion. If one mosque gets denied permission to be built, they scream “islamophobia” even when there is good reason for its refusal. Buildings get denied council permission every day. Why should there be more mosques than churches in any western country?

    • Do you have an irrational fear that Muslims are planning to spread shariah law around the world, thereby effectively “taking over the world? If so you exhibit Islamophobia. Most “critics” of Islam believe that to be the case, and it follows that they’re Islamophobic. I have yet to see honest criticisms of Islam.

      Why should there be more mosques than churches in any western country?

      There is a lot wrong with this statement. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but western countries are not Christian by default. It amazes me that you actually think that.

      • Do you have an irrational fear that Muslims are planning to spread shariah law around the world, thereby effectively “taking over the world?

        You mean the same irrational fear that many Islamists cite about the Jews taking over and controlling the world?

          • Oh, so you aren’t a fan of tu quoque? Then I guess you aren’t a fan of Danios, or any of the other red herring merchants at Loonwatch and this site.

            Marty made a great point. You should answer it instead of doing your usual dodge and dance routine.

            And I can find dozens of videos on Youtube, right now, that show Islamic extremists saying that they plan on establishing Sharia by moving into Western countries, outbreeding the native populations, and pressuring non-Muslim governments into giving them what they want. Many Muslims are participating in what they consider global conquest. Noticing this is not Islamophobic, unless you consider the Muslims who believe this to be Islamophobic as well.

          • It wasn’t a great point. It was effectively dodging a question by pointing a finger at somebody else. Otherwise known as the logical fallacy ad hominem tu quoque. You see, unlike you, I can prove when somebody is using tu quoque. All you do is call tu quoque without any evidence to back it up…in a pathetic attempt to discredit an argument. I think it’s quite reflective of your piss poor arguments that you think he made a great point.

  9. A couple of years ago, there was a street protest in Melbourne, Australia over Israel’s retaliation attacks in Gaza. Now, we have religious vilification laws in Australia and yet nothing was done to those protesters holding placards that read “Kill all Jews”, “Hitler was right”, “Bring back the gas chambers.” One poor 8 year-old Muslim girl was seen holding one such sign. I saw these sign myself in person and yet the media did not even question any of them. There were many more similar ones in the crowd and yet the police did nothing. Imagine the uproar if people were holding “Kill all Muslims” signs?

  10. In a recent TV panel discussion on Muslims in Australia, a proud Muslim, Amir Dedic had this to say:

    “Well, to be honest, I mean, there’s this constant issue of Muslims being discriminated against in this country but being Muslim myself I’ve never really felt like that but you constantly, in the media hear, you know, how there is discrimination happening but I really can’t sense it in every day, day to day life and I just think it’s something that’s hyped up more than what it really is.”

    • The victim business is a big deal for Muslims. It allows them to have a pass for all the chaos and violence they are committing in order to spread their religion by force around the world. Just like Muhammad did.

      • to have a pass for all the chaos and violence they are committing in order to spread their religion by force around the world.

        And you say you’re not Islamophobic. Pfft!

        • Islamophobia is a bullshit term. It’s holds absolutely no weight. It’s a word that is designed to dismiss any criticism of Islam as bigoted.

          Besides, it’s not an irrational fear, which is the crux of the word “phobia.” Muslims are demonstrating every day why people should be worried about this religion. Islam is an oppressive form of fascism that is contrary to Western freedoms and liberty. It’s more of a political system than it is a personal religion.

          • You have an irrational fear that a monolithic entity known as Muslims, are engaging in a war to take over the world by spreading their religion by force. Apart from being a pussy, you are also very Islamophobic by definition. Deal with it.

            Islam is an oppressive form of fascism that is contrary to Western freedoms and liberty. It’s more of a political system than it is a personal religion.

            Says the guy who hasn’t objectively studied Islam. Yeah, I’d say this statement holds no water.

      • If it’s a big business for Muslims, then why are non-Muslims so willing to support it, by victimizing Muslims?

        Plus, there is no evidence that Muslims are trying to spread Islam by force around the world through chaos and violence. You’ve been challenged to substantiate this point in the past, and have failed to do so. I take it then, that this claim was the sales point you bought without bothering to verify it?

        • Plus, there is no evidence that Muslims are trying to spread Islam by force around the world through chaos and violence.

          Right

          I’m sure flooding into Europe and pumping out 6-8 babies per couple has nothing to do with trying to spread Islam, either.

          • That incident of coerced conversion was not because of “chaos and violence” as you say, but, as the article basically said, was because of peer pressure. It’s also a very localized and isolated incident, and not “around the world”. Anyone can find incidents like these involving any group of people. It still doesn’t prove your point.

            “I’m sure flooding into Europe and pumping out 6-8 babies per couple has nothing to do with trying to spread Islam, either.”

            – That is an absurd exaggeration, as not every couple has 6-8 babies, and I’m fairly confident most of them do not. Furthermore, large families among Muslims are not necessarily for the purpose of “spreading Islam”. People from rural areas tend to have large families, regardless of religion.

            Furthermore, this claim does nothing to substantiate your point that Muslim are trying to spread Islam “by force”, through “chaos and violence”. You’re just taking cheap pot shots at immigrant families from 3rd world countries. It’s such a juvenile argument.

  11. You have an irrational fear that a monolithic entity known as Muslims, are engaging in a war to take over the world by spreading their religion by force. Apart from being a pussy, you are also very Islamophobic by definition. Deal with it.

    Name calling really helps your case [/sarc]

    Take a look at Islamic history. Within 150 years of Muhammad’s death, Muslim armies took over all of Arabia and North Africa, and eventually took over 2/3 of modern day Europe. If they were not defeated at the gates of Vienna, they could have taken over the entire continent.

    Says the guy who hasn’t objectively studied Islam. Yeah, I’d say this statement holds no water.

    And you have? I doubt it. You were probably born to a Muslim family and grew up as a Muslim. And, if you happened to be in an Islamic land at the time or you had super devout parents, you couldn’t leave the religion without getting killed for it. No objectivity.

    I have studied Islam, but it is not possible to be objective about it. It is hard to be objective when the founder of the religion was a pedophile and mass murderer. It’s hard to glance over the major waves of jihad warfare that have taken place over the past 1400 years. It’s hard to be objective when the religion was a strong motivator for attacks like 9/11 and many others.

    • “Take a look at Islamic history. Within 150 years of Muhammad’s death, Muslim armies took over all of Arabia and North Africa, and eventually took over 2/3 of modern day Europe. If they were not defeated at the gates of Vienna, they could have taken over the entire continent.”

      – That of course, proves nothing, since such conquests were typical in that time period for empires. That’s like saying Muslims, historically, rode on horseback; it means nothing, and has no relevance to today.

      “I have studied Islam, but it is not possible to be objective about it. It is hard to be objective when the founder of the religion was a pedophile and mass murderer.”

      – You’re studying of Islam probably amounts to “Robert Spencer” and not much else. Your claims about its “founder” are non-factual, as they come from a biased spin on documented events. In reality, he was neither a “pedophile”, nor a “mass murderer”.

      “It’s hard to glance over the major waves of jihad warfare that have taken place over the past 1400 years. ”

      – Really? You can glance over all the imperial wars, and conquests of every other group of people, but when it’s Muslims, it’s somehow a different story? Do you have any justification for this double standard, or is it just irrationality on your part?

      “It’s hard to be objective when the religion was a strong motivator for attacks like 9/11 and many others.”

      – Except Islam wasn’t a strong motivator for the 9/11 attacks. Politics and current events were. Anyone who knows anything about the world, knows that politics and current events are always the prime motivators. It’s about time you got around to realizing this reality and stopped trying to scapegoat Islam and Muslims for the world’s problems.

      • – That of course, proves nothing, since such conquests were typical in that time period for empires. That’s like saying Muslims, historically, rode on horseback; it means nothing, and has no relevance to today.

        It is relevant to the “psshh, Muslims aren’t trying to take over” idea that is commonly thrown around by “liberal, moderate, Muslims.” The idea is firmly rooted in the Qur’an, and it is not hard to believe that Muslims throughout the generations have yearned to see the dar al harb turn into the dar al Islam.

        – You’re studying of Islam probably amounts to “Robert Spencer” and not much else. Your claims about its “founder” are non-factual, as they come from a biased spin on documented events. In reality, he was neither a “pedophile”, nor a “mass murderer”.

        See, the problem with your accusation that this is non-factual is that I can come right back with quotes from the Qur’an and other Islamic texts.

        Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
        “The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

        Perhaps you will argue that marrying 6 year olds was standard for that era. It wasn’t. If you look at the average age of brides throughout the centuries, rarely has the number gone below 12-13. 6 was unheard of, even in the 7th century. Besides, what kind of perfect man and messenger of God would marry a 6 year old? That’s just wrong, no matter what the time period. Do you find it acceptable? No? Why was it acceptable for Muhammad, who you would consider to be the perfect man?

        And as for being a mass murderer, there are many examples, but this one is my favorite.

        Banu Qurayza
        Then they surrendered, and the apostle confined them in Medina in the quarter of d. al-Harith, a woman of B. al-Najjar. Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy b. Akhtab and Ka`b b. Asad their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900. As they were being taken out in batches to the apostle they asked Ka`b what he thought would be done with them. He replied, ‘Will you never understand? Don’t you see that the summoner never stops and those who are taken away do not return? By Allah it is death!’ This went on until the apostle made an end of them.

        Are you proud of your prophet? Beheading 600-900 young men and boys after they surrendered. Wow. That would be more than enough for me to not want to follow Islam and Muhammad.

        – Except Islam wasn’t a strong motivator for the 9/11 attacks. Politics and current events were

        Really? The 9/11 hijackers and Osama bin Laden definitely seem to think that Islam has something to do with it. Watch the video wills and listen to how many times they refer to Allah, Muhammad, and Islam.

        • “It is relevant to the “psshh, Muslims aren’t trying to take over” idea that is commonly thrown around by “liberal, moderate, Muslims.” The idea is firmly rooted in the Qur’an, and it is not hard to believe that Muslims throughout the generations have yearned to see the dar al harb turn into the dar al Islam.”

          – It is not relevant, since it was a different time period with different prevailing circumstances. It is also not “firmly rooted in the Qur’an”. That Islam is a convert-seeking religion like Christianity, is a given, but has nothing to do with wanting to take over the world.

          “See, the problem with your accusation that this is non-factual is that I can come right back with quotes from the Qur’an and other Islamic texts.”

          Yes, and with the already-debunked arguments by anti-Islam polemicists to go with them.

          “Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
          “The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

          Perhaps you will argue that marrying 6 year olds was standard for that era. It wasn’t. If you look at the average age of brides throughout the centuries, rarely has the number gone below 12-13. 6 was unheard of, even in the 7th century. Besides, what kind of perfect man and messenger of God would marry a 6 year old? That’s just wrong, no matter what the time period. Do you find it acceptable? No? Why was it acceptable for Muhammad, who you would consider to be the perfect man?”

          First of all, even if we are to accept that age as correct, it would not be “unheard of”, especially given that she was already engaged to someone else beforehand. For marriages to be arranged for people at such young ages is certainly not uncommon, even today.

          Marriages may have, on average, been consummated at 12-13 back then since that’s, on average, when people reach puberty (which they associated with adulthood back then). However, they were generally arranged much earlier. And it is, ultimately, irrelevant, because different societies have different cultural standards and prevailing circumstances. The age of ‘Aisha at the time of marriage or consummation is as much of an issue with religion, or character of Prophet Muhammad, as the fact that they rode on horseback, and used swords; it was done then, and isn’t done now.

          “And as for being a mass murderer, there are many examples, but this one is my favorite.

          Banu Qurayza
          Then they surrendered, and the apostle confined them in Medina in the quarter of d. al-Harith, a woman of B. al-Najjar. Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy b. Akhtab and Ka`b b. Asad their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900. As they were being taken out in batches to the apostle they asked Ka`b what he thought would be done with them. He replied, ‘Will you never understand? Don’t you see that the summoner never stops and those who are taken away do not return? By Allah it is death!’ This went on until the apostle made an end of them.

          Are you proud of your prophet? Beheading 600-900 young men and boys after they surrendered. Wow. That would be more than enough for me to not want to follow Islam and Muhammad. ”

          – The state’s execution of criminals guilty of high treason against the state is not “murder”, and that is exactly what Banu Qurayza was; criminals guilty of high treason against the state. That they eventually surrendered doesn’t change that fact.

          Furthermore, the 600-900 figure is exaggerated. You, and various other anti-Islam polemicists, put more credence on this story from Ibn Ishaq than Muslims do.

          “Really? The 9/11 hijackers and Osama bin Laden definitely seem to think that Islam has something to do with it. Watch the video wills and listen to how many times they refer to Allah, Muhammad, and Islam.”

          Even if we are to believe the fable of the hijackers and bin Laden cooking up the 9/11 attacks, the inspiration would not have been Islam, but politics and current events. Islam would’ve only been a means of justification, not the real reason itself.

          • The fact that nobody had any issues with the Prophet marrying Aisha at whatever age, including her father quite simply shows that it was commonplace. When I say nobody, that includes the original Islamophobes, who include such hardcore anti-Islamics as Abu Jahl, and Abu Lahab. The fact that they were silent on the issue, yet whined about every little thing the Prophet does speaks volumes.

          • Yes. A Good example of why 9/11 was because of a political event is given by the big dawg himself, Osama:

            “Allah knows it did not cross our minds to attack the towers but after the situation became unbearable and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed – when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the U.S. Sixth Fleet. As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me punish the unjust the same way (and) to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we are tasting and to stop killing our children and women.”

          • Good point Mosizzle. All of the terrorists of today point to the injustices of American invasions, killing scores of Muslims. All they ever talk about is retaliating. Yet, you never hear them saying, that they do what they do to spread Shariah law. Only the conspiracy theorists who permeate far-right politics can cook something as stupid as that.

          • And so, debunked for the umpteenth time, Ahni lurks and waits for the next article to be posted to take another shot.

          • Right. And then, when someone points out that he retreated with his tail in between his legs, he says that he couldn’t respond to every post b because there are too many. That didn’t seem to be a problem 2 days ago lol.

            I’ve asked him like 4 times already to substantiate his claims about taqiyya and terrorism using the Qur’an, so I think it’s safe to say that he’s aware of that. I mean, he did respond to the rest of my comments. Come on Ahni, I’m still waiting for you to prove that every non-violent Muslim is practicing taqiyya using verses from the Qur’an. Something tells me that isn’t going to happen.

          • Actually, I responded under the name “Moharebeh” to this post from my other computer, and oddly enough, the moderators did not allow it to be posted.

            Too much truth, mods?

          • First of all, even if we are to accept that age as correct, it would not be “unheard of”, especially given that she was already engaged to someone else beforehand. For marriages to be arranged for people at such young ages is certainly not uncommon, even today.

            It’s common in the Islamic world, where Muslims are actively emulating Muhammad’s example. In the civilized non-Muslim world, this is not common, nor tolerated. Afghanistan child brides

            – The state’s execution of criminals guilty of high treason against the state is not “murder”, and that is exactly what Banu Qurayza was; criminals guilty of high treason against the state. That they eventually surrendered doesn’t change that fact.

            It still reflects very poorly on Muhammad that he would behead 600-900 Jews after they surrendered. It shows that he really was a brutal, 7th century warlord. It is absolutely no wonder at all why those who follow Muhammad’s example end up being violent terrorists.

            Even if we are to believe the fable of the hijackers and bin Laden cooking up the 9/11 attacks,

            So you’re a truther? Wow, you’re an even bigger idiot than I thought.

            The Magnificent 19 are considered heroes in the Islamic world. Why would they be heroes if they did not commit the attacks? Your buddy Osama isn’t denying that he is responsible.

          • Actually, I responded under the name “Moharebeh” to this post from my other computer, and oddly enough, the moderators did not allow it to be posted.

            Too much truth, mods?

            Sorry, but that excuse isn’t going to fly. That’s the deal with all new posters. I know because I posted a comment under the name “Anthrax” on my laptop, and “it’s still being moderated”. The same thing happens when you post more than 1 link, it doesn’t help that the mods don’t seem to be around. It has nothing to do with content, so you can drop it.

            You could still post your truthful post under the name Ahni. All you have to do is copy and paste. What’s keeping you from doing so? My guess is that there isn’t a single truth to be found in it (that is, if it even exists).

          • It is absolutely no wonder at all why those who follow Muhammad’s example end up being violent terrorists.

            How much can you generalize? Do you have any idea why some Muslims become terrorists? Have you ever done any objective research on that?

            http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/dsb/commun.pdf

            Or do you just assume that they’re all following an example that you don’t understand all too well? How can you dare to try and rationalize something as serious as this when all of your information comes from heavily biased sources? And you have the audacity to object to the claim that you’re a bigot. Are you not willfuly ignorant of Muslims and Islam? Ask yourself why that would be the next time you wonder whether or not you are bigotted.

          • “It’s common in the Islamic world, where Muslims are actively emulating Muhammad’s example. In the civilized non-Muslim world, this is not common, nor tolerated. Afghanistan child brides”

            – You think it’s more common than it actually is. Of course, your examples proabably amount to the most rural, backwater areas of those regions where puberty is still seen as indicating adulthood, and thus marriage. You’d be harder-pressed to find such examples in the more industrialized areas. In fact, before the institutionalization of education, the age of consent in the US was as low as 10.

            “It still reflects very poorly on Muhammad that he would behead 600-900 Jews after they surrendered. It shows that he really was a brutal, 7th century warlord. It is absolutely no wonder at all why those who follow Muhammad’s example end up being violent terrorists.”

            – Not really, since high treason against the state is punishable by death, even in today’s first-world countries. You obviously don’t understand what the responsibility of a being a statesman entails.

            There is no reason to let traitors off the hook after they conspired against those they swore by treaty to help and defend, just because they “surrendered”. That’s like saying murderers should be spared the death penalty because they “surrendered”. It’s stupid to think so.

            It also wasn’t 600-900, as most scholars agree the executed traitors from the Qurayza tribe numbered no more than 200-250.

            “So you’re a truther? Wow, you’re an even bigger idiot than I thought.”

            – No, I’m not a “truther”, and the only idiots here are you and JihadBob. I call it a fable, because the story has little in the way of actual evidence to back it up with, just the fable of the 600-900 figure in regards to the number of traitors executed.

            “The Magnificent 19 are considered heroes in the Islamic world. Why would they be heroes if they did not commit the attacks?”

            – Are you sure they are considered heroes? Is that anything like the claim that “Muslim Revolution” are supposed to somehow speak for all Muslims, when they really only speak for themselves?

            Where’s the evidence? Or is it just another media fable?

            That some may regard them as heroes doesn’t prove that they did or didn’t do anything, only that those who regard them as heroes THINK they did something.

            “Your buddy Osama isn’t denying that he is responsible.”

            – Osama bin Laden is the Muslim version of Jerry Falwell and just as unpopular. And for the record, Osama did originally deny responsibility. Therefore, either he was lying then, he’s lying now, or the claims from then and now are not all from him.

      • Take a look at Islamic history.

        Great argument, because the medieval history of a group of people shows the innermost desires of their modern-day counterparts. I guess that by that token, all Christians want to convert the entire world, or burn them alive. Something tells me that’s not the case.

        And you have? I doubt it. You were probably born to a Muslim family and grew up as a Muslim. And, if you happened to be in an Islamic land at the time or you had super devout parents, you couldn’t leave the religion without getting killed for it. No objectivity.

        Ok, apart from speculating a paragraph’s worth of bullshit, and postulating it as fact, under the laughably see-through smokescreen of your red herring, you seem to be admitting that you have never done any objective research on Islam. Which makes all of your arguments (not that you really had any) terribly biased.

        I wouldn’t be far off in stating you haven’t “studied” Islam before 2001. And what “studies” you’ve done was nothing more than googling specific topics (ZOMG, what do I Google right?); which no doubt eventually led to Spencer and JW. Who btw is also a Google scholar est. 2001. Go figure.

  12. Christians= Child Rape. Jews= Illegal Occupation (Israel) And they never do anything bad! But unlike YOU, Anhi, I don’t hold any generalizing opinions.

    • True. Everyone here in the UK is angry about the widespread raping and molestation of Children by Catholic Priests, yet no one is blaming all Catholics for it and only a few are identifying the Church’s policy on Celibacy as the cause.

      It is simply moronic to insists that Jews and Christians are angels and Muslims do everything bad.

      • Exactly. And I really think it’s because of the minority status of Muslims in western countries and the fact that America is at war with Muslim majority countries with idiotic dumb policies.

  13. Why does Anhi keep on blabbering about the “Dar al-Harb” and “Dar al-Islam”?

    Those two terms arose as a result of the Mongol invasions. They don’t exist in the Koran or the Hadiths.

    Perhaps Anhi should do some simple research; maybe then he would know there exists a “Dar al-‘Ahd” (House of Truce), and “Dal al-Hudna” (House of Calm)

  14. “It’s hard to glance over the major waves of jihad warfare that have taken place over the past 1400 years. ”

    When was the last time a Muslim-majority country invade a non-Muslim country?

    When was the last time a non-Muslim country invaded a Muslim-majority country?

    In our modern world, what happened many more times?

  15. I know because I posted a comment under the name “Anthrax” on my laptop,

    Oh, is that the form of jihad you favor? Chemical warfare? Nice choice.

    Do you have any idea why some Muslims become terrorists? Have you ever done any objective research on that?

    You obviously seem sympathetic to the poor, poor Muslims who are being victimized by the evil American army. What’s to stop you from joining the jihad? Serious question. There’s no Qur’anic principle that you can cling to to stay neutral… you are obligated as a Muslim to fight for your fellow Muslims who are being attacked by “crusaders.” Isn’t that right? Even Yusuf Estes said that Muslims can fight against those who are fighting against them, so what are you waiting for? Are you more dedicated to the stealth jihad? Sending some money to some Islamic charities who fundraiser for Hamas and Al Qaeda behind closed doors?

    • You obviously seem sympathetic to the poor, poor Muslims who are being victimized by the evil American army. What’s to stop you from joining the jihad? Serious question. There’s no Qur’anic principle that you can cling to to stay neutral… you are obligated as a Muslim to fight for your fellow Muslims who are being attacked by “crusaders.” Isn’t that right? Even Yusuf Estes said that Muslims can fight against those who are fighting against them, so what are you waiting for? Are you more dedicated to the stealth jihad? Sending some money to some Islamic charities who fundraiser for Hamas and Al Qaeda behind closed doors?

      You’re not serious are you Ahni? I’ll wait for you to confirm that, while I try to stop myself from laughing. Cool response to an onslaught of facts though lmfao.

  16. Oh, is that the form of jihad you favor? Chemical warfare? Nice choice.

    No, it’s the name of my favourite thrash metal band. Now try and guess what Cynic means, since you’re so good at 5 year old comebacks comprising of nothing but conjecture.

  17. Just because someone posts under the name Anthrax does not mean they support chemical warfare, a field by the way in which America leads the way with the recent revelation that it infected mentally ill Guatemalans with Syphilis.

  18. Pingback: Leading rabbi encourages IDF soldiers to use Palestinian human shields; what if he were Muslim? | WhatIfTheyWereMuslim.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *