Racist David Horowitz Says ‘There Is No Community More Racist In America Than The Black Community’

RightWingWatch

Discussing the protests in Ferguson, Missouri, on Phyllis Schlafly’s “Eagle Forum Live” radio program this week, conservative commentator David Horowitz argued that liberals are overly eager to brand conservatives as racist and, in doing so, have wrongfully maligned the police officer accused of shooting unarmed black teenager Michael Brown.

“[Protesters] destroyed a city to get a cop who was defending himself. Look at the picture of him in the hospital with his eye socket practically blown out,” he said of Officer Darren Wilson, in reference to a bogus photograph that is confirmed to be of a completely unrelated person.

Insisting that Brown was “just a thug” who suffered the consequences of his actions, Horowitz complained that white people have been vilified in matters of law enforcement and criminal justice. “They’re not interested in waiting for a trial and its result. If you’re white, you’re guilty; that’s the attitude,” he said of the Ferguson protesters. “They’re racist, for crying out tears. There’s no community that’s more racist in America than the black community. And everybody knows it, but nobody will say it.”

Discussing the protests in Ferguson, Missouri, on Phyllis Schlafly’s “Eagle Forum Live” radio program this week, conservative commentator David Horowitz argued that liberals are overly eager to brand conservatives as racist and, in doing so, have wrongfully maligned the police officer accused of shooting unarmed black teenager Michael Brown.

“[Protesters] destroyed a city to get a cop who was defending himself. Look at the picture of him in the hospital with his eye socket practically blown out,” he said of Officer Darren Wilson, in reference to a bogus photograph that is confirmed to be of a completely unrelated person.

Insisting that Brown was “just a thug” who suffered the consequences of his actions, Horowitz complained that white people have been vilified in matters of law enforcement and criminal justice. “They’re not interested in waiting for a trial and its result. If you’re white, you’re guilty; that’s the attitude,” he said of the Ferguson protesters. “They’re racist, for crying out tears. There’s no community that’s more racist in America than the black community. And everybody knows it, but nobody will say it.”

[soundcloud url="https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/172307470" params="color=ff5500" width="100%" height="166" iframe="true" /]

Hate Group Leader Robert Spencer and JihadWatch Zombies Harass Muslim Academic Anne Aly

What else can be said about how despicable and gutter the disgraced blogger Robert Spencer is that hasn’t already been said?

As he continues to dwindle into irrelevance and insignificance he continues his worn-out tactic of trying to gain notoriety by attacking dignified academics, who unlike him, are well versed in Islam.

Muslim academic draws hate fire

As a proud and outspoken Muslim, Anne Aly has also become a target for anti-Islamic hate groups.

The Curtin University lecturer – who chooses not to wear a hijab and denounces Muslim extremists – has been bombarded with hate mail after a recent interview in which she defended Islam as a religion of peace.

Her quotes were republished on a right-wing website called Jihad Watch, along with her work email address.

“I was just really speaking out against some of the false assumptions about my religion,” Dr Aly said. “But what they (the hate groups) really want is for me to denounce my religion.

“By saying that Islam is not about terrorism and Islam is not about beheadings or female genital mutilation, they can’t cope with that because it shatters the basis for their arguments.”

Dr Aly said some of the messages she had received had been unnerving, while others had sought to “educate” her about her own religion.

“It is upsetting and, yeah, it is worrying, but in some ways I get where they are coming from because a lot of these people just assume what they see on the news is typical of all Muslims,” she said.

Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer Thinks Garibaldi is Nathan Lean

Spencer resembles someone here.

by Garibaldi

Hate group leader, Far-right Catholic fanatic and anti-Muslim Crusader/terrorist-inspirer, Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer of Our Lady of the Cedars Church, a full-time paid shill for racist David Horowitz has been pretty sore that I exposed the fact he is an ordained deacon. The only person that he should be upset at however is himself, he’s the one who irresponsibly left an internet trail that could easily be found by anyone with basic google searching abilities.

It is understandable why Rev. Deacon Spencer, who claims to be an objective “reporter” on so-called “Islamic violence” was so upset, any remaining veneer of “objectivity” and feigned concern for “freedom” was permanently abolished; once again Robert Spencer’s sectarianism was exposed through his own words and deeds.

This point is buttressed in a post yesterday by Rev. Deacon Spencer in FrontPageMagRag, it is the first post by Rev. Spencer on new Pope Francis I. What does the good Deacon have to say? Well, he slams the Second Vatican council’s positive statements regarding Islam as reflecting “the outlook of a vanished age,” equal in its irrelevance as statements by the likes of Pope Benedict XIV of the 18th century and Pope Callixtus III of the 15th century. (By the way, Rev. Spencer is opposed to Vatican II for more reasons than just statements regarding Islam).

Bizarrely, Spencer still cites the two Popes quite approvingly, the hostility they had towards Islam and Muslims is strikingly evident in two quotes Spencer reproduces,

…Pope Benedict XIV, in 1754, reaffirmed an earlier prohibition on Albanian Catholics giving their children “Turkish or Mohammedan names” in baptism by pointing out that not even Protestants or Orthodox were stooping so low: “None of the schismatics and heretics has been rash enough to take a Mohammedan name, and unless your justice abounds more than theirs, you shall not enter the kingdom of God.” Pope Callixtus III, in a somewhat similar spirit, in 1455 vowed to “exalt the true Faith, and to extirpate the diabolical sect of the reprobate and faithless Mahomet in the East.”

Spencer absurdly believes the Vatican II reforms are in parity with quotes about “extirpating” Islam. Look up “Extirpate” in the dictionary, it still means “to root out and destroy completely.”

It appears Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer is setting himself up for a lifetime of disappointment. Pope Francis I will not be the kind of fanatical anti-Islam/Muslims-rolling-back-Vatican-II-type-pope that Spencer wants him to be. After all, the new pope is named after St. Francis of Assisi whose two chief concerns were to convert people to Christianity and to help the poor.

In fact, St. Francis came to oppose the Crusades (read: The Saint and the Sultan by Paul Moses) which Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer falls all over himself to defend, as he loves to remind us of the Crusader slogan, God wills it!

The story goes that St. Francis’ parents wanted him to go out on the Crusade so that he could be knighted.

He later set out for the Crusades in Northern Africa, but while on his way to join up with his batallion he heard a voice that asked him where he was going.

Francis responded “to the Crusades” and the voice asked him “why he served the squire instead of the Master.” The voice told him to return to Assisi where he would be told what to do. Later, after much prayer and penance, Francis was praying at a small chapel outside of Assisi, San Damiano and he thought he heard a voice that came from the crucifix. The voice said, “Francis, go repair my Church, can’t you see that it’s falling into ruins.”

The new Pope Francis I will focus on repairing the Catholic Church which is struggling in many ways and will not focus on breeding Crusader-esque civilizational conflict.

Rev. Deacon Spencer thinks I am Aslan Media editor Nathan Lean, I reveal my true identity

Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer’s irrelevance both to Catholicism and scholarship on Islam is only matched by his delusional indulgence in conspiracy theory. Unable and unwilling to respond to numerous Loonwatch rebuttals of his faulty pseudo-scholarship and “police blotter reporting,” and a very long outstanding fear to debate Danios has now given way to Spencer claiming to have uncovered my identity–unbeknownst to me I am actually supposed to be Aslan Media editor Nathan Lean!

What is Rev. Spencer’s smoking gun? A cross-post from the hate site Logan’s Warning claiming “evidence” that I, Garibaldi, am Nathan Lean. Recall the only time we’ve mentioned Logan’s Warning, a post titled, Amusing Islamophobia Blog Wars: Logan’s Warning vs. Brigitte Gabriel, in which Christopher Logan attacked Brigitte Gabriel for even hinting that there might be such a thing as a “moderate Muslim.” The heresy! Logan’s website is replete with an abundance of commenters who call for Crusading violence against Muslims and racism against Arabs, as was shown in screenshots in my post.

So it’s no surprise that Spencer would cross-post from Logan’s Warning, as we know “birds of a feather flock together.” It is also unsurprising that Spencer, with a track record for weak scholarship would be so gullibly convinced by Christopher Logan’s “evidence.”

Logan’s “evidence”:

Evidence 1:
Recently in writing about Mr. Spencer, Garibaldi wrote this in a comment on his own article about Spencer’s private life: 

GaribaldiOfLoonwatch Mod Leftwing_Muslim_Alliance • 13 days ago

He is not celibate, he’s married. In the course of digging on the internet, I also learned the name of his wife and children, though that isn’t really germane to the discussion so I won’t advertise it.

Who else has dug on the Internet and found the names of Mr. Spencer’s wife and children? Nathan Lean. Spencer has written of Lean: Nigeria Jihadists threaten country’s top spies by publishing their home addresses and names of family 

Four months after that, he sent Mr. Spencer an email calling him a “dumb fuck” and adding “But, having a look at this, I kind of pity you,” which was followed by a link containing a photo of a woman in the same city. The woman has the same surname Spencer; apparently Lean thought she was his wife.

Spencer apparently thinks this is evidence. Anyone who has access to google can find out the names of Rev. Deacon Spencer’s family, it’s all over the internet. I thought Spencer was supposed to be in mortal fear for his life? If so he’s doing a poor job of covering up the identities of his family and place of residence. The fact is we have had people who’ve wanted to share information regarding his personal life and whereabouts since 2010.

One commenter on Spencerwatch named “Abdullah” wrote on the site in 2010 saying:

Abdullah says:

I have all the information on Spencer, his address, real date of birth, and information on his family. I want nothing more than to share it, please e-mail me.

We responded to Abdullah by letting him know that we were not interested in Spencer’s personal information:

admin says:

Abdullah,

That will be unnecessary. We have no interest in Spencer’s private life. We are only interested in exposing the shallow, deceptive, and bigoted nature of his anti-Muslim work.

- SW Admin

My comment is consistent with our long-held position that our only interest is rebutting and exposing Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer’s faulty arguments, lies, hate, deception and distortions, we can care less about Spencer’s family.

Evidence 2:
Garibaldi wrote of Mr. Spencer in a comment:

But the shaggy walrus beard and so forth indicates its him.

Reza Aslan said to Mr. Spencer: The Incredilbe Reza Aslan automated insult generator

I told you. I’m into women not walruses.

Nathan Lean works for Aslan.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. I freely admit here and now that I actually picked up the walrus reference from my interview with Reza Aslan, it still gives me a chuckle!

Evidence 3:
Garibaldi interviewed Aslan for Loonwatch. Most of the interview was made up of nasty ad hominem attacks on Mr. Spencer: http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/11/exclusive-loonwatch-interview-with-reza-aslan/

I’ve also interviewed Haroon Moghul. Does that mean I’am Haroon Moghul as well? And why am I Nathan Lean and not Reza Aslan? Or maybe I am all three-in-one, like a super stealth Islamist-Leftist trinity?

Evidence 4:
Jonathan Schanzer wrote a scathing review of Lean’s book for the Wall Street Journal. Loonwatch published a petulant and defensive response piece viciously attacking Schanzer. Who wrote it? Garibaldi.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2013/01/bush-era-neo-con-schmuck-jonathan-schanzer-shills-for-nasty-islamophobia-movement/

Yes, Schanzer did get the vicious Garibaldi treatment, but that was more so because he’s a Bush era, warmongering neo-Con schmuck who wrote an Islamophobia-denial piece in the mainstream Wall Street Journal that sought to exonerate war criminals like his former boss George W. Bush and Islamophobe pals such as Daniel Pipes and the useful idiot Zuhdi Jasser. I fail to see how this can be described as evidence and not more appropriately as “worthless conjecture 4.”

Evidence 5:
Nathan Lean has frequently called for opponents of jihad terror to be denied free speech rights:

Editor-in-Chief of moderate Aslan media endorses cyber terrorism

Nathan Lean is a Thug

Garibaldi wrote a piece at Loonwatch celebrating the vandalism of AFDI’s anti-jihad ads:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/09/mona-el-tahawy-and-spray-painting-pamela-gellers-hate-ads/

Reza Aslan also called for that vandalism: Reza Aslan Calls for fascist vandalism of AFDI pro-freedom ads 

Loonwatch is actually consistent in its opposition to hacking, we ourselves have been victim to vile hatemongering “counterjihad” hackers. As for my article it actually did not celebrate Mona Eltahawy’s protest of the racist AFDI/SIOA hate ads. In fact I was critical of her, writing,

Mona’s method of protest was therefore ineffective, aesthetically unappealing and not the best expression of street art. It is unclear if Mona was going to spraypaint a message before her confrontation with Hall, but using a hot pink spraypaint can to completely erase or cover the hate ad, which is what she was doing, is a bad way to register such a protest. It is poorly planned, poorly executed and at the end of the day strays from the goal of highlighting the most important aspect of such a protest: the message.

I happily admit however that I am not really moved to condemn any protest against the racist AFDI/SIOA hate ads. Just as I wouldn’t condemn protests against ads describing Native Americans as “savages,” or Blacks as “N—–s.”

Interestingly, this most recent foray into conspiracy theory by Rev. Deacon Spencer wasn’t even convincing to Spencer’s most ardent fans. Kinana of Khaybar, in what could be the most understated comment on JihadWatch ever wrote,

This is entertaining, but to me does not add up to sufficient evidence that Nathan Lean is Garibaldi.

One also has to wonder if Logan and Spencer even thought about asking themselves why Nathan Lean, who has been speaking, writing and publishing publicly for quite some time would decide he needed to be anonymous? He is already calling out Spencer, Geller and other Islamophobes under his own name.

As for my real identity…

I am actually….

<drum roll>….

the second love child of Malcolm X and Stanley Ann Dunham, and my name is Barack Hasan Shabazz!

There you go, the secret is finally out! Thanks a lot Spencer!

JihadWatch Zombie Eric Allen Bell Returns and Adds Antisemitism to the Islamophobia

Eric_Allen_Bell_Jamie_Glazov

The “Glazov gangbangers”

by Garibaldi

Eric Allen Bell (aka Eric Edborg), who has been mostly silent over the past few months, (no doubt taking a “sabbatical” from his self-proclaimed “jihad against jihad” again), returned to the looniverse of hatemongering and kooky conspiracy theories.

This time Bell is relishing in antisemitism and putting forward ideas picked straight out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Bell got into it with some of his assumedly now “former” Facebook followers. Bell tells “Clark Banner” that he is just speaking truth to power, exposing the social taboo surrounding “Jewish control of banking and media,”

EAB jew conspiracy #1

Bell clearly doesn’t know what conspiracy theories are either, they are not simply “theories without evidence.” What he is referring to is just one category of the obvious phony and fake conspiracies that exist. Usually conspiracy theories are based on some evidence, though such evidence varies in degree of reliability, factualness and the way it is framed and contextualized to create a narrative.

Bell also believes the Oscars are part of a Jewish supremacist conspiracy,

EAB jew conspiracy #3

“Erick Morgan” used to “look up to” the old bigot Eric Allen Bell when he railed against Muslims being intellectually and genetically inferior and called for the nuking of Muslim holy places but now he finds Bell repulsive:

EAB jew conspiracy #4

This protege of Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer has exposed himself to have some very kooky and racist beliefs not only about people of Muslim background and the religion of Islam but also about Jews and Judaism. Will we hear swift condemnations from Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller who hailed Bell as a former “liberal” who saw the light of “Counterjihad?” Aren’t they embarrassed and ashamed of supporting and allying with someone who supports this vile antisemitic nonsense?

Don’t hold your breathe. They will likely continue their strategy of pretending such views aren’t held by their friend.

Related:

-Eric Allen Bell discovers that ‘Jewish supremacists’ control the media and the banks

Pamela Geller’s False Claim that Muslims Curse Christians and Jews in Their Daily Prayers

Pamela Geller’s False Claim that Muslims Curse Christians and Jews in Their Daily Prayers

by Sheila Musaji
Pamela Geller said Now I also believe that a true translation, an accurate translation of the Koran, is really not available in English, according to many of the Islamic scholars that I’ve spoken to.  That’s deeply troubling.  And I don’t think that many westernized Muslims know when they pray five times a day that they’re cursing Christians and Jews five times a day.  I don’t think they know that. in a 10/8/2010 article in the New York Times.

Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic wondered about the accuracy of this statement and did a little research:

I sent some of Geller’s quotes to my friend Reuel Gerecht, a genuine expert on Islam, to see what he thought of them. Reuel, as many of you know, is no apologist for radical Islamism; quite the opposite. He believes we are at war with a dangerous ideology. But he also has respect for Islam, and a great deal of knowledge of it. Here is what he says about Geller’s assertions:

I have to plead an embarrassing ignorance about Pamela Geller.  I was well aware of the Internet-driven opposition to Feisal Abd ar-Rauf’s Ground Zero/Park 51 mosque, but had not entered her name into my memory.  I don’t read blogs much—except Goldblog and those that publish me—and I was more than a little taken back when Jeffrey sent me a note containing comments by Ms. Geller about English translations of the Qur’an.  The intersection of politics, public policy, and scholarship isn’t always pretty, and we are most often fortunate that scholars don’t write our domestic and foreign policies.   However, there is a certain deference that activists must give to scholars when they tread on what is clearly academic terrain.  A good cause—and Ms. Geller’s general concern about the harm that violent Islamic militants can do is an estimable fight—is no excuse for agitprop and what amounts to a slur against some of the greatest scholars of the twentieth century.  According to the New York Times, Ms. Geller has stated:

Now I also believe that a true translation, an accurate translation of the Koran, is really not available in English, according to many of the Islamic scholars that I’ve spoken to.  That’s deeply troubling.  And I don’t think that many westernized Muslims know when they pray five times a day that they’re cursing Christians and Jews five times a day.  I don’t think they know that.

Let’s take the Qur’an first, Muslim prayers second.  Concerning the translation of the Muslim Holy Book, who might these Islamic scholars be?  Since Ms. Geller is without Arabic, it’s impossible for her to compare the original to a translation.  She must depend upon others, who, if I follow Ms. Geller, are involved in a conspiracy to hide the ugly truth about Islam.  If the translations were more “accurate,” we would all see what’s apparent to Ms. Geller, who ascertained the truth despite the blinding scholarly conspiracy.  One has to ask whether Ms. Geller has perused the translation masterpiece by Cambridge’s late great A.J. Arberry or my personal favorite, the awesomely erudite, more literal translation and commentary by Edinburgh’s late great Richard Bell?  Both gentlemen are flag-waving members of Edward Said’s most detested species—Orientalists.  Now if you look at these translations—especially if you look at Bell’s, which is blessed with exhaustive notes in a somewhat complicated formatting—even the uninitiated can get an idea that Muhammad had trouble with Christians and especially Jews during his life.  If you look at the Qur’anic commentary by Edinburgh’s late great William Montgomery Watt (another Orientalist), who was always attentive to Muslim sensibilities in his writings, you can also find in clear English Muhammad’s unpleasant ruminations about Christians and Jews.

Now what all of this means to contemporary Islamic militancy is a very long discussion, for which I suspect that Ms. Geller doesn’t have abundant patience.  Islam has been having awful problems absorbing modernity; its travails so far—let us underscore—have been less bloody than what we witnessed as Christianity modernized.  Any non-Muslim certainly has the right to study, question, and criticize the Islamic faith, as Muslims have the (well-exercised) right to let loose against what they see as the imperfections of Christianity, Judaism, and humanist secularism (the West’s dominant faith).   As Iran’s robust, astonishing intellectual wars over the last twenty years have shown, it’s good for Muslims and non-Muslims not to pull their punches.  Muslims should never be treated as children, which is a debilitating disposition found widely now on the American Left.  (President Obama has not helped.)   But the great Islamic scholars of the past did not lie.  There is no conspiracy.  We are blessed with illuminating English translations of the Muslim Holy Book.  Ms. Geller might consider blogging less, and reading more.

And about Muslim prayer:  I certainly have no perfect way of knowing what Muslims think when they pray, but I really do think they know what they’re doing.  If westernized Muslims are facing the Almighty, they know what’s in their hearts.  Devout Muslims need not hate Jews and Christians to worship the Creator.  Christians have slaughtered Jews through the centuries.  But it would be theologically atrocious to believe that the Christian message requires Jewish blood. (Christians’ killing Jews so often did provoke some Christians to question the foundation of their faith—a theologically estimable exercise.)  The Prophet Muhammad is certainly a different kind of historical figure than Jesus, but it should not be startling to discover that Muslims through the centuries have not seen the prophet’s slaughter of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe in Medina as a mainstay of their creed.  In my experience—and I’m intuiting here—most Muslims do not think about Jews and Christians at all when they pray.  Suffering, in all its merciless variety, takes center stage, I suspect.   When I’ve watched Muslim pilgrims come to Sunni and Shiite tombs and sacred sites in Egypt,  Turkey, and Iraq, I’ve not seen a conquering people.  I’ve usually just seen misery and the human hope that good fortune will come with a better heart.   I’ve seen fraternity among a men who live in lands where fraternal behavior is rare.  Ms. Geller would do well to travel more.   It’s a very good and essential cause to fight jihadism, but such a struggle should not incline us to maul Islamic history or to treat Muslims as if they were merely a walking version of this surah or that legal treatise.   Christians and Jews and atheists are much more than the sum of their parts.   So, too, are Muslims.

After this exchange, Geller’s partner, Robert Spencer published a defense of Geller’s statement in which he brings in “translations” like the Hilali-Khan, commentaries and interpretations as if they represent what most Muslims (or particularly American Muslims, or “westernized Muslims” as Geller calls them) understand about the meaning of Surah Fatiha.  The Hilali-Khan translation is an extremist interpretation of the Qur’an produced in Saudi Arabia and given out free.  I wrote about the Hilali-Khan translation at length here.  Here are a few passages from that article:

The number of comments in parenthesis in this particular translation is more than excessive, and instead of clarifying the text or explaining a word or phrase that cannot be easily translated into English, these comments make the text very difficult to follow and often distort rather than amplify the meaning.

The appendices contain discussions of Christian versus Muslim beliefs that read more like a polemical debate and really do not belong as part of a translation.

I will give just a few examples of the difficulties with this translation.  Sadly, I could give many more examples, but these should sufice to show the extremist character of this translation.

Beginning immediately with Surah Fatiha 1:1 (the opening chapter of the Qur’an) we find a translation not to be found anywhere else:

“Guide us to the Straight Way.  The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who have earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).” (HK translation 1:1-7)

This can only give the impression to any non-Muslim or Muslim who either does not have fluency in Arabic or access to individuals with competency in Classical Qur’anic Arabic that the Qur’an denounces all Jews and Christians.  This is a great untruth.

This unique translation is then followed by an extremely long footnote which justifies this hateful translation based on traditions from texts that go back to the Middle Ages (Ibn Kathir, Qurtubi, Tabari) as if these are the only interpretations, and without any discussion of the history of these commentaries and the hadiths on which they are based.

…  In the interests of preserving the purity of the Qur’an as much as possible for non-Arabic speakers and also as a means to combat the tirades of professional Islam bashers and Muslim haters, I would strongly recommend that every copy of the Hilali-Khan translation be removed from every mosque in the U.S.  …  This current crisis (and many others), I believe is a direct result of such translations as the Hilali-Khan which have been responsible for influencing some Muslims with extremist interpretations (and also providing them “justification” for criminal actions), and for providing Islamophobes with “proof” of the supposed “savagery” of Islam.  Basically, this translation (and others like it) are propaganda coming out of Saudi Arabia which attempts to spread their particular supremacist, divisive, bigoted, and very dangerous interpretation of Islam.

There are only two groups who equate jihad and terrorism – the terrorists and the Islamophobes.

Across the world, even in countries where Muslims and their non-Muslim neighbors have lived together for centuries in peace, we are seeing violence against churches and against minorities, and seeing violent non-Islamic responses to the provocations of Islamophobes.  Why?

I believe that propaganda such as the Hilali-Khan translation and other materials coming primarily out of Saudi Arabia are one of the root causes.

We need a counter-narrative, not only to the Islamophobes, but to the Muslim extremists, and our scholars and community leaders need to help get the message of traditional Islam out to the masses.

I believe that it is time for ordinary Muslims to go into their local mosque or Islamic bookstore and see if this translation is there, and if it is to ask the Imam or mosque leadership to remove it immediately and dispose of it in the appropriate Islamic manner.  And, it is time for the leadership of national organizations to speak out loudly and clearly condemning such translations and materials.  The Saudi’s may provide “free” copies of this translation, but there is a cost, and we are all paying it.

Here is a transliteration and translation of Sura Fatiha by Shakh Kabir Helminski of the Threshold Society:

Bismillaah ar-Rahman ar-Raheem
Al hamdu lillaahi rabbil ‘alameen
Ar-Rahman ar-Raheem Maaliki yaumid Deen
Iyyaaka na’abudu wa iyyaaka nasta’een
Ihdinas siraatal mustaqeem
Siraatal ladheena an ‘amta’ alaihim
Ghairil maghduubi’ alaihim waladaaleen
Aameen

In the name of God, the infinitely Compassionate and Merciful.
Praise be to God, Lord of all the worlds.
The Compassionate, the Merciful. Ruler on the Day of Reckoning.
You alone do we worship, and You alone do we ask for help.
Guide us on the straight path,
the path of those who have received your grace;
not the path of those who have brought down wrath, nor of those who wander astray.
Amen.

Here is the introduction to this verse from the translation by Muhammad Asad

THIS SURAH is also called Fatihat al-Kitab (“The Opening of the Divine Writ”), Umm al-Kitab (“The Essence of the Divine Writ”), Surat al-Hamd (“The Surah of Praise”), Asas al-Qur’an (“The Foundation of the Qur’an”), and is known by several other names as well. It ismentioned elsewhere in the Qur’an as As-Sab’ al-Mathani (“The Seven Oft-Repeated[Verses]”) because it is repeated several times in the course of each of the five daily prayers.According to Bukhari, the designation Umm al-Kitab was given to it by the Prophet himself,and this in view of the fact that it contains, in a condensed form, all the fundamental principleslaid down in the Qur’an: the principle of God’s oneness and uniqueness, of His being theoriginator and fosterer of the universe, the fount of all life-giving grace, the One to whom manis ultimately responsible, the only power that can really guide and help; the call to righteousaction in the life of this world (“guide us the straight way”); the principle of life after deathand of the organic consequences of man’s actions and behaviour (expressed in the term “Dayof Judgment”); the principle of guidance through God’s message-bearers (evident in thereference to “those upon whom God has bestowed His blessings”) and, flowing from it, the principle of the continuity of all true religions (implied in the allusion to people who havelived – and erred – in the past); and, finally, the need for voluntary self-surrender to the will of the Supreme Being and, thus, for worshipping Him alone. It is for this reason that this surahhas been formulated as a prayer, to be constantly repeated and reflected upon by the believer.“The Opening” was one of the earliest revelations bestowed upon the Prophet. Someauthorities (for instance, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib) were even of the opinion that it was the very firstrevelation; but this view is contradicted by authentic Traditions quoted by both Bukhari andMuslim, which unmistakably show that the first five verses of surah 96 (“The Germ-Cell”)constituted the beginning of revelation. It is probable, however, that whereas the earlier revelations consisted of only a few verses each, “The Opening” was the first surah revealed tothe Prophet in its entirety at one time: and this would explain the view held by ‘Ali.

Here is Asad’s translation and commentary

In the name of God, The Most Gracious, The Dispenser of Grace:
ALL PRAISE is due to God alone, the Sustainer of all the worlds,
the Most Gracious,the Dispenser of Grace,
Lord of the Day of Judgment!
Thee alone do we worship; and unto Thee alone do we turn for aid.
Guide us the straight way, the way of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings,
not of those who have been condemned [by Thee], nor of those who go astray!

According to most of the authorities, this invocation (which occurs at the beginning of everysurah with the exception of surah 9) constitutes an integral part of “The Opening” and is,therefore, numbered as verse 1. In all other instances, the invocation “in the name of God” precedes the surah as such, and is not counted among its verses. – Both the divine epithets rahman and rahim are derived from the noun rahmah, which signifies “mercy”, “compassion”,“loving tenderness” and, more comprehensively, “grace”. From the very earliest times, Islamic scholars have endeavoured to define the exact shades of meaning which differentiate the two terms. The best and simplest of these explanations is undoubtedly the one advanced by Ibnal-Qayyim (as quoted in Manar I,48): the term rahman circumscribes the quality of abounding grace inherent in, and inseparable from, the concept of God’s Being, whereas rahim expresses the manifestation of that grace in, and its effect upon, His creation – in other words, an aspect of His activity.

In this instance, the term “worlds” denotes all categories of existence both in the physicaland the spiritual sense. The Arabic expression rabb – rendered by me as “Sustainer” -embraces a wide complex of meanings not easily expressed by a single term in another language.It comprises the ideas of having a just claim to the possession of anything and, consequently,authority over it, as well as of rearing, sustaining and fostering anything from its inceptionto its final completion. Thus, the head of a family is called rabb ad-dar (“master of the house”) because he has authority over it and is responsible for its maintenance; similarly, his wifeis called rabbat ad-dar (“mistress of the house”). Preceded by the definite article al, the designation rabb is applied, in the Qur’an, exclusively to God as the sole fosterer andsustainer of all creation – objective as well as conceptual – and therefore the ultimatesource of all authority.

According to almost all the commentators, God’s “condemnation” (ghadab, lit., “wrath”) is synonymous with the evil consequences which man brings upon himself by wilfully rejecting God’s guidance and acting contrary to His injunctions. Some commentators (e.g., Zamakhshari)interpret this passage as follows: “… the way of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings – those who have not been condemned [by Thee], and who do not go astray”: inother words, they regard the last two expressions as defining “those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings”. Other commentators (e.g., Baghawi and Ibn Kathir) do not subscribeto this interpretation – which would imply the use of negative definitions – and understand the last verse of the surah in the manner rendered by me above. As regards the two categoriesof people following a wrong course, some of the greatest Islamic thinkers (e.g., Al-Ghazali or, in recent times, Muhammad ‘Abduh) held the view that the people described as having incurred “God’s condemnation” – that is, having deprived themselves of His grace – are thosewho have become fully cognizant of God’s message and, having understood it, have rejected it; while by “those who go astray” are meant people whom the truth has either not reached at all,or to whom it has come in so garbled and corrupted a form as to make it difficult for them.

And, before Pamela Geller gets too attached to her specious claims, she should consider that the Blessing/Benediction recited each morning by Orthodox Jews is the following“Blessed are you O God, King of the Universe, Who has not made me . . . ” and conclude, respectively, “a goy [Gentile],” “a slave,” and “a woman.”
UPDATE 6/1/2011

Another Islamophobe, Andrew Bostom has jumped on this bandwagon of insisting that the Hilali-Khan translation/commentary reflects the meaning of Surah Fatiha.

UPDATE 1/29/2012

Geller again raises this spurious issue saying: “The Muslims refer to Christians in their daily prayers as “those who are led astray” (Muslims curse Christians and Jews multiple times in daily prayers). This madness validates their contempt and supremacism.”
UPDATE 2/11/2013

Geller is nothing if not consistent.  Today she published Hamas-CAIR leads Arizona State Senate in anti-Jewish, Anti-Christian Prayer raising this same debunked issue yet again. She says:  “How many people actually know that every time Muslims get down on their knees, posteriors in the air, they are cursing Christian and Jews? Obama says, “respect it!”

All of this fury on the part of Geller (and her partner in hate Robert Spencer) was because an Arizona Imam, Anas Hlayhel, who is also the Chairman of the Arizona Chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations CAIR-AZ led the Arizona State Senate’s prayer invocation with a reading of Surah al-Fatiha.

Geller & Spencer promote Muslim “collective guilt” over a FB post

Geller & Spencer promote Muslim “collective guilt” over a FB post

by Sheila Musaji
Pamela Geller posted an article Dearborn Muslim calls for killing anti-Islam protesters and her partner in the AFDI hate group posted an article with the same title.

They reprinted an article by David Wood which included a screen grab of this FaceBook post:

This is a hateful message.  The individual responsible should be ashamed.  If there are any FaceBook regulations that he has violated, he should lose his ability to post.  However, this single hateful message was all that it took for Geller & Spencer to not only post articles including the “Muslim” description, but also to tweet on the #MyJihad hashtag


Spencer asked “Will Dearborn authorities investigate Aboudi Berro? Don’t hold your breath.”  Geller said: “Islam in America. Respect it.”

So, according to them, this tweet by one individual jerk somehow is representative of “Islam in America” and this should be investigated by local law enforcement.

I wonder why their concern is always so selective, and only focuses on Muslims who behave badly.

Here are a just a few tweets from Islamophobic spammers on the #MyJihad site:









Would Geller and Spencer agree that all of these are hateful?  If so, why do such statements not concern them?  Would a headline like “Christian calls for killing Muslims” serve any purpose.  Are all Christians or all Jews somehow responsible for the bigotry of some?  Should all of these individuals also be investigated?  If they are not investigated is that “proof” of some Christian conspiracy to impose their will on non-Christians.

I doubt that they would be concerned, as some of their own AFDI/SIOA/SION leadership have previously suggested genocide, wiping out Muslim “bacteria” and “destroying Islam”.

This is pure hatred.

Robert Spencer and the Melkite Greek Catholic Church

url.jpg

Robert Spencer and the Melkite Greek Catholic Church

by Richard Bartholomew (barthsnotes.com)

News that Robert Spencer has been dis-invited from speaking at a Roman Catholic Men’s Conference in the US Diocese of Worcester has prompted renewed interest in Spencer’s own Catholicism; a comment posted to a short account of the cancellation derived from a Boston Globe article includes the following:

Posted by: Archpriest – Jan. 31, 2013 10:36 PM ET USA
Appalling! Robert Spencer is a Catholic deacon in good standing with [a] Melkite Diocese… To call Father Deacon Robert a “hate-monger” is unjust and adds further injury to the situation of Eastern Catholics – daily persecuted and even martyred in the Middle East. I am a retired military chaplain. Deacon Robert has addressed military staff symposia. Is the Diocese of Worcester so politically-correct that it would ignore the suffering of fellow Christians in the lands of Christ’s birth?

Spencer’s identification as a Melkite Greek Catholic is well-known, but the detail that he is a deacon is new, and can be confirmed via reference to other sites noted by Loonwatch. Spencer here follows the example of the late Paul Weyrich, whom he regarded as a mentor-figure, although Spencer’s Melkite affiliation also reflects his personal circumstances: he is of Greek Orthodox heritage (family displaced from Turkey) and married to a Catholic, and so a form of Catholicism that follows an Orthodox style has obvious attractions.

Some of Spencer’s books include the name of the priest of his church among the acknowledgements, although the church itself does not appear to promote the kind of anti-Islam polemicising for which Spencer is notorious. In 2006 Spencer promoted a report about a speech given by then-US Melkite leader Archbishop Cyril Salim Bustros, in which Bustros made criticisms of Islam; however, Bustros did not resort to the kind of rabble-rousing rhetoric and sloppiness that are Spencer’s hallmarks.

Spencer was less pleased with Bustros in 2010, when it was reported that Bustros had opined at a Vatican Synod that

We want to say that the promise of God in the Old Testament, relating to the ‘promised land’ … as Christians, we’re saying that this promise was essentially nullified [in French, "abolished"] by the presence of Jesus Christ, who then brought about the Kingdom of God. As Christians, we cannot talk about a ‘promised land’ for the Jews. We talk about a ‘promised land’ which is the Kingdom of God… Sacred scripture should not be used to justify the occupation of Palestinian land on the part of the Israelis.

The ADL described this as “the worst kind of anti-Judaism, bordering on anti-Semitism”, and argued that ”Archbishop Bustros contradicts decades of official Vatican and papal teachings which affirm God’s ongoing Covenant with the Jewish people at Sinai, and calls on Christians to appreciate the Jewish people’s religious self-understanding, including its spiritual attachment to the land of Israel.”

Spencer, while declining to disclose that Bustros was his clerical superior, explained that 

…he is strongly in the running to become the next Archbishop of Beirut, and could be trying to reassure Muslim leaders in Lebanon that his stint in the United States has not tainted him with Zionism, and he is still as anti-Israel as he was as Archbishop of Baalbek, before he came to America. It is a pity that a Christian leader would have to behave this way, and I am not saying he is not doing it out of conviction also, but in any case it is a reflection of the situation on the ground in Islamic countries: Christians who don’t echo the Islamic political line face hard going…

Accordingly, we cannot judge… Archbishop Cyril harshly.

Those anti-Israel comments formed the basis of a follow-up guest post by David Littman; Bustros had spoken to the Organization of the Islamic Conference in Rabat in 2002, and his words had been ugly and crude:

…Today, the Jews allege that Al-Quds belongs to them only. They have made it the capital of their Zionist state, arguing that it is the land of their ancestors since Ibrahim. If only they followed the example of this ancestor, who accepted to sacrifice his own son for the love of God. Instead, they have no qualms about killing the children of the others for the sake of their racist ambitions. John the Baptist, the great prophet who prepared for the advent of Jesus and called people to repent their sins to God, told the Jews: “O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance, and think not to say within yourselves. We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham”[Matthew 3: 7-8]…

Littman, like Spencer, puts this down to the “dhimmitude mindset”, but the reference to “Al-Quds” for Jerusalem notwithstanding, in both 2002 and 2010 the Bustros appears to be drawing on long-standing independent Christian traditions of anti-Judaism.

However, Spencer then posted the following:

I owe the Melkite Archbishop Cyril Salim Bustros an apology: when I wrote about his remarks at the recent Vatican Synod, I was relying on incomplete and inaccurate press reports, and did not fully understand his position. Now, in a Jihad Watch exclusive, Archbishop Cyril clarifies his remarks and explains his position.

Spencer does not explain how the press reports were “inaccurate”, although the statement that follows his introduction takes a more moderate line and calls for a two-state solution (this is also – surprisingly – Spencer’s own position). One wonders why the Archbishop thought it would be sensible to put things right through a exclusive statement to an opportunistic anti-Islam blog, rather than to issue a statement through more reputable channels; perhaps Spencer’s position as a “deacon in good standing” is the reason.

According to the Boston Globe, Spencer had been due to speak at the Men’s Conference in Worcester on the subject of Islam, and the paper quotes the Diocese on why the invitation was recinded:

…”Although the intention of the conference organizers was to have a presenter on Islam from a Catholic’s perspective, we are asking Robert Spencer to not come to the Worcester Catholic Men’s Conference, given that his presence is being seen as harmful to Catholic–Islamic relations both locally and nationally,” Raymond ­Delisle, a spokesman for the ­diocese, said in a statement ­issued to the Globe.

The report adds that the Islamic Council of New England had urged the Diocese to cancel “after the Globe sought comment on his scheduled appearance from the diocese and from Muslim organizations”; Spencer now alleges, citing “sources”, that the article’s author, Lisa Wangsness, had asked Islamic groups to contact the Diocese (she denies it).

Of course, the problem with Spencer goes beyond “Catholic–Islamic relations”; the man is not a sensible speaker for any organisation that wants to be taken seriously. His blog frequently carries inaccurate and inflammatory items; sometimes, he quietly deletes material without making corrections if he knows that he can’t defend a claim (see here and here), but he also sometimes lashes out, accusing those who challenge an inaccuracy of supporting Islamic extremism. Spencer also identifies completely with the lurid claims and activism of the birther Pamela Geller. In 2009, Spencer cried “libel” when it was suggested he may have met leaders of the English Defence League; yet now, following Geller, he is an enthusiast for the organisation, appearing alongside Stephen Lennon (“Tommy Robinson”) and Kevin Carroll and opining that Lennon’s current imprisonment for passport fraud means that he is a “political prisoner”.

Robert Spencer needs to learn to do a fact check

Spencer is working hard to disassociate himself from one of his fans

Robert Spencer needs to learn to do a fact check

by Sheila Musaji

An individual using the twitter name @LearningKoran posted two hateful and unacceptable tweet on the #MyJihad hashtag.  Here are those tweets:

 

Many Muslims involved with the #MyJihad campaign responded to him as soon as we saw the tweets.

The MyJihadOrg account administrator tweeted him and told him they don’t condone such talk and consider himself blocked.

I posted a reminder that Sheikh Ali Gomaa said Violence is never an acceptable answer to provocation.  I told him that such a statement was totally outside the bounds of Islam, and that I found it fascinating that the #MyJihad campaign angers Musim extremists & Islamophobes.

Angie Emara posted a series of reminders:  calling him a hypocrite and an extremist and someone trying to sabotage the campaign.  She told him that it’s funny how you & Islamophobes share the EXACT sentiment towards majority Muslims!  She asked him “what’s wrong w u? Islam was never ever by force. U ruin the beauty of Islam picking ayat out of context 4 ur benefit”.  She asked him to “change the condition of your heart” and told him “you have major issues.seek therapy. That’s not Islam.”

Within hours he stopped posting, and when his twitter name was clicked on it said he was suspended.

No one involved with #MyJihad knows who this person was, whether he/she is a Muslim, or why he would make such a hateful post. Sad little incident, but handled as well as anyone connected with #MyJihad could handle unsolicited tweets.

However, that was not the end of the saga.  Robert Spencer posted an article with a screenshot of the tweet and Spencer’s own comments.  Spencer said “The deceptive and misleading #MyJihad campaign has apparently attracted at least one persistent Misunderstander of Islam. No doubt Hamas-linked CAIR’s Ahmed Rehab is in deep talks with this fellow already, explaining to him that jihad doesn’t really involve killing anyone, but is really just romping through the daisies.”

He is correct that the individual misunderstands Islam.  The rest is simply an attempt to cast aspersions on the #MyJihad campaign as if they can control individuals tweeting using that hashtag.  Spencer also does not mention any of the responses to this individual.  Not only do Islamophobes not know how to do a “search”, they also don’t know how to follow a conversation on twitter.

All Spencer would have had to was to follow the conversation, and he would have seen that the individual was immediately called to task and condemned for what he had said, asked to stop, and ultimately suspended.

But, Spencer is too busy demonizing Islam and Muslims to be concerned about facts.  He used this non-incident to stir up a frenzy among his readers.  The comments under Spencer’s article show how easily they are influenced.  Here are a few:

— John Spielman “These pagan muslim’s blind devotion to their demon god Allah’s cult of death is getting tiresome.” — Meryl Petkoff “The psychological projection of pedohammedans is f’ing SURREAL!. Poe’s Law is all that comes into mind when i read verbiage like that.”— Iloveport “I say, bring it on!!! You camel urine drinking numbnut maniacs.  I’m ready and able. You’re not kidding when you say this is getting tiresome. I’m so tired of the major a**kissing going on to appease these bozo’s.  Let’s dance….

And since he began the title of his article with the #MyJihad hashtag, many of these folks are tweeting this, again overwhelming the hashtag with hate.

Anyone who visits the hashtag can see over the course of any day how many Islamophobes come there and post hateful messages.  Some individuals post scores of messages each day, many of them repeat whatever is the current meme in an article on Pamela Geller or Robert Spencer’s sites that begins with the #MyJihad hashtag.  Some post the exact same comment over and over.  See the article Anti-Muslim Propaganda Against #MyJIhad Campaign for many of the claims made and responses to them.  Sometimes 20 or 30 of them will retweet or repeat the same comment over the course of a few minutes.  It is amazing that there are human beings who can find so much time to do nothing except spread hatred.

Some are more hateful than others one calling himself @pissedizard calls Muslims “vermin”, “demons” and “disgusting”, says “all Muslims smell like ass. Dead,rotting ass”, and has made a number of tweets suggesting directly that Muslims should be killed.  One of his tweets appears at the top of this article.

Robert Spencer would never notice such hatred directed at Muslims.  And, that is not surprising, since there has been plenty of it from his own AFDI/SION board and he has made no condemnations.  He also does not remove hateful comments from his site.

I wish we knew how the solitary nut job @LearningKoran was suspended by twitter, as the gang of about 30 Islamophobic nut jobs who are serial spammers of the hashtag should also be suspended, but continue with no problems.

All of this is very frustrating, but the Muslims involved with the #MyJihad campaign are resolute and committed to taking back Islam and the term jihad from both the Muslim extremists and Islamophobes.

It would be wonderful if not only more Muslims, but also any non-Muslims who believe in mutual respect, bridge building, and understanding would visit the hashtag and help to keep it from being overrun by haters.

It is amazing that projects such as #MyJihad through which American Muslims are attempting to counter extremist interpretations are seen as so threatening to those who say they wish Muslims would speak up.  Whatever claim or catch-phrase is put out by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer becomes the meme of the day, endlessly repeated by their followers on the #MyJihad hashtag and drowning it in hate.  All they are doing is making it more difficult for American Muslims to counter actual extremism.  They are a painful distraction.
UPDATE 1/28/2013

David Wood on a site called Answering Muslims posted an article about these tweets from @LearningKoran.  He titles his article “Muslim Tries to Educate Me about Peaceful Islam, Then Calls for the Execution of Critics!”.

Even David Wood notes that @LearningKoran became angry when he was condemned by individuals involved in the #MyJihad campaign, and before he was suspended by twitter posted this tweet:

 

Wood is one of the individuals who has been a serial tweeter of anti-Muslim messages, so not surprisingly his view of this exchange casts blame on Muslims and Islam.

The reality is that no one knows who this person @LearningKoran is, or whether or not he is a Muslim.  He could be anybody.  One of the difficulties with social media like twitter is that individuals can set up an account and a screen persona using any name they wish and post anonymously.

Whoever @LearningKoran is, he deserves condemnation as does @pissedlizard and others who have posted such messages threatening Muslims.  You can see screen shots of a few of these hateful anti-Muslim posts at the bottom of the page.

Did AFDI’s “Savage/Jihad” hate ads inspire bus threats?

Did AFDI’s “Savage/Jihad” hate ads inspire bus threats?

by Sheila Musaji
Pamela Geller posted an article with the hysterical title CAIR’s #myjihad Chicago campaign inspires …. bus jihad – Wannabe Jihadist threatens ‘jihad’ bombing on Chicago bus.  Robert Spencer posted his own misleading article.  She includes a link to a Chicago Tribune article.  She and her partner in hate, Robert Spencer also tweeted a link to their articles using the #MyJihad hashtag, and their minions followed suit.

What is the story

The Chicago Tribune reported that a man named Caleb Russell threatened to blow up a CTA bus in Chicago and told police he was “jihad against the white devil”.  Several passengers told police that Russell made derogatory and racial remarks and threatened to “blow this (expletive) up.”

His booking photo included is quite alarming, and may speak to his mental state.  A few other news sources have posted on this, but none have any additional information.  That’s all that is known so far.

No idea if the man is a Muslim or not, no idea about his mental state, no idea about anything at all except that this incident happened.

How would Geller know his motivation or what inspired him.  Her “defeat jihad” ads have also run in Chicago.  Whether this man was influenced in any way by either of these ads is impossible to say.  However, it certainly is possible to make an educated guess.

The implication of the AFDI ads is that jihad and terrorism are synonymous which could give an ignorant person the idea that such an act was covered by the word “jihad”.

The #MyJihad campaign ads (whose motto is ““Taking back Jihad one hashtag at a time from anti-Muslim and Muslim extremists.  Taking back Islam.”)  are giving a very opposite message to both Muslim and non-Muslim extremists. See “My Jihad” #MyJihad Campaign Angers Hizb-ut Tahrir and AFDI Extremists.  Which includes the statement:

“There are only two groups who equate jihad and terrorism – the terrorists and the Islamophobes.  Neither terrorists or Islamophobes have the right to co-opt or hijack or defame the term jihad by their criminal interpretations. We reject the terrorist definition and we reject the Islamophobes definition of Jihad in favor of the traditional, legitimate, respectable, spiritual concept. JIHAD is not a dirty word.”

Which ad and which worldview is more likely to have given anyone the impression that terrorism against civilians is the meaning of jihad?

"My Jihad" campaign was sparked by AFDI/SIOA's series of hateful ads against Muslims(MyJihad.org).

Pamela Geller to Release New Anti Jihad Bus Ads in NYC | Blaze Exclusive

The original subway ad (Photo Credit: American Freedom Defense Initiative/ABC News)
Using nothing except common sense, and a heart not filled with hate, any rational person can see which ad is likely to stir such base passions.

This is a case of simply making something up without any facts at all.
**********************

See the full article Resources for dealing with Islamophobes for much more information about and links to responses to many claims, including critical reports on the Islamophobia Industry.  Here is a summary:

The Islamophobia Industry exists and is engaged in an anti-Muslim Crusade.  They have a manifesto for spreading their propaganda, and which states their goal of “destroying Islam — as a culture, a political ideology, and a religion.” They produce anti-Muslim films.  They are forming new organizations and coalitions of organizations at a dizzying speed, not only nationally, but also internationally.   They have formed an International Leadership Team “which will function as a mobile, proactive, reactive on-the-ground team developing and executing confidential action plans that strike at the heart of the global anti-freedom agenda.”

Sadly, the Islamophobic echo chamber has been aided by some in the Jewish and Christian clergy, and even by some of our elected representatives, particularly in the GOP.

These individuals and organizations consistently promote the false what everyone “knows” lies about Islam and Muslims (including distorting the meaning of Qur’anic verses, and distorting the meaning of Islamic terms such as taqiyya, jihad, sharia, Abrogation (Naskh) in the Qur’an, etc.

Islamophobes falsely claim to see “JIHAD” PLOTS everywhere, particularly where they don’t exist.   They, like Muslim extremists, don’t understand the true meaning of the term jihad.  The Islamophobes have uncovered countless examples of “shocking”, non-existent Muslim jihad plots.

Islamophobes generalize specific incidents to reflect on all Muslims or all of Islam.    Islamophobes consistently push demonstrably false memes such as:  – we are in danger from creeping Sharia, – the Muslim population is increasing at an alarming rate, – 80% of American Mosques are radicalized,  -  There have been 270 million victims of “jihad”  -  There have been 17,000+ “Islamic terrorist” attacks since 9/11    – Muslims in government are accused of being Muslim Brotherhood plants, stealth jihadists, and creeping Sharia proponents and should be MARGINALIZED or excluded.  Muslim and Arab organizations and individuals are connected to the infamous Muslim Brotherhood document or the unindicted co-conspirator label, or accused of not condemning Hamas.  When Islamophobes are caught in the act of making up or distorting claims they engage in devious methods to attempt to conceal the evidence.

The Islamophobia of these folks is very real, it is also strikingly similar to a previous generations’ anti-Semitism, and it has predictable consequences.

You would never know from listening to any of the members of the Islamophobia Industry that Muslims have defended  freedom of speech, participated in interfaith dialogue, defended freedom of faith against apostasy laws,  condemned blasphemy laws, condemned holocaust denial and anti-Semitism, promoted non-violent solutions to the many problems we face, called for protecting all houses of worship and condemned any attacks on churches or synagogues anywhere, condemned violent responses to numerous incidents including the response to the Innocence of Muslims film, spoken out against child marriage, are working to stop domestic violence in our community, etc.  Type condemn into the TAM search engine and 145 statements of condemnation come up in addition to the collections in our lengthy section Muslim voices against extremism terrorism and violence  Muslims speak out loudly and clearly condemning our own extremists, and their extremist statements and actions.  Type “lunatic fringe” into the TAM search engine for many such articles condemning particular extremists and extremist groups and activities.
You would never know that Muslims are decent, hardworking, productive citizens, making a positive contribution to this society.  Muslims haven’t just spoken out against abuses carried out anywhere in the world that dishonor Islam, but also worked doing positive things.

The claim that the Islamophobes are “truth-tellers” and “defenders of freedom” who actually “love Muslims” and have never engaged in “broadbrush demonization” or “advocated violence”, or that nothing that they say could have had anything to do with any act of violence are nonsense.  The claim that they are falsely being accused of Islamophobia for no reason other than their legitimate concerns about real issues and that in fact there is not even such a thing as Islamophobia, or their claim that the fact that there are fewer hate crimes against Muslims than against Jews or that some Muslims have fabricated such crimes “proves” that Islamophobia doesn’t exist,  or that the term Islamophobia was made up by Muslims in order to stifle their freedom of speech, or that anti-Muslim bigotry is “not Islamophobia but Islamorealism” are all nonsense.

The reason that this is so obvious to so many is that rational people can tell the difference between legitimate concerns and bigoted stereotypes.   There is a reason that many, even outside of the Muslim community see such demonization of Muslims as Islamophobic.  There is a reason that the ADL has stated that Brigitte Gabriel’s Act for America, Pamela Geller & Robert Spencer’s Stop the Islamization of America (SIOA), David Yerushalmi’s Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE)  are “groups that promote an extreme anti-Muslim agenda”.  There is a reason that The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has designated SIOA as a hate group, and that these individuals are featured in the SPLC reports Jihad Against Islam and The Anti-Muslim Inner Circle. , and that the SPLC calls Pamela Geller “the anti-Muslim movement’s most visible and flamboyant figurehead. She’s relentlessly shrill and coarse in her broad-brush denunciations of Islam. There is a reason that these individuals and organizations are featured prominently in: — the Center for American Progress reports “Fear Inc.” on the Islamophobia network in America and Understanding Sharia Law: Conservatives skewed interpretation needs debunking. — the People for the American Way Right Wing Playbook on Anti-Muslim Extremism.  — the NYCLU report Religious Freedom Under Attack:  The Rise of Anti-Mosque Activities in New York State.  — the Political Research Associates report Manufacturing the Muslim menace: Private firms, public servants, and the threat to rights and security.  — The ACLU report Nothing to Fear: Debunking the Mythical “Sharia Threat” to Our Judicial System — in The American Muslim TAM Who’s Who of the Anti-Muslim/Anti-Arab/Islamophobia Industry.   There is a reason that the SIOA’s trademark patent was denied by the U.S. government due to its anti-Muslim nature.   There is a reason that these individuals and organizations are featured in just about every legitimate report on Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hatred.

Click on the logo “Muslims denounce extremism and terrorism” on the front page of TAM for an extensive resource listing not only Muslim responses to extremism, but also resources for countering Islamophobia.

 

Sheila Musaji is the founding editor of The American Muslim (TAM).  Sheila received the Council on American-Islamic Relations 2007 Islamic Community Service Award for Journalism,  and the Loonwatch Anti-Loons of 2011: Profiles in Courage Award for her work in fighting Islamophobia.  Sheila was selected for inclusion in the 2012 edition of The Muslim 500: The World’s 500 Most Influential Muslims published since 2009 by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre in Amman, Jordan.    Biography  You can follow her on twitter @sheilamusaji ( https://twitter.com/SheilaMusaji )

Islamophobes Spencer and Greenfield Push Fabricated Mohammad Al-Arifi Fatwa Story

Mohammad Al-Arifi

Mohammad Al-Arifi

I want to hat tip Rookie who first alerted us to the story about a fabricated fatwa that allegedly gave Syrian rebels permission to engage in “intercourse marriage/gang rape,” the fabricated fatwa was attributed to a Saudi preacher by the name of Mohammad Al-Arifi.

Robert Spencer was pushing the false story on his JihadWatch and made a grudging update to the story quite some time after it was revealed to be fabricated in which he couldn’t help but take a dig at Shi’a Muslims.

Daniel Greenfield, premiere Genocide-inciter at David Horowitz’s FrontPageRag also published an article on the fabricated fatwa that attempts to paint it as real. Greenfield’s article has no update and in fact was headed with an incendiary picture from an older hoax being pushed by Islamophobes regarding a supposed “mass pedophilia wedding” in Gaza in 2009.

Greenfield titled this picture: “Hamas Muslim Child Brides“:

Hamas-Muslim-Child-Brides

I debunked this absurd hoax back in August of 2009 in the article, Anti-Muslim Blogosphere Runs Amuck: Forced to Eat Crow. Clearly, Greenfield wasn’t phased and continues to push this lie despite it being debunked  over three years ago.

AlterNet, which it self was fooled but had the decency to apologize for its mistake has the full story on the fabricated fatwa:

Exhibit A in How an Islamophobic Meme Can Spread Like Wildfire Across the Internet

January 2, 2013  |  Editor’s note: On January 2, AlterNet was one of several outlets that published what turned out to be an article based on a false report. We would like to apologize to our readers for the error.

On January 2nd, the story of a Saudi Sheikh issuing a fatwa that condoned ‘intercourse marriage’ or gang rape in Syria exploded over the internet.

According to various sources, Sheikh Mohammad Al-Arifi had stated that foreign fighters in Syria had the right to engage in short term marriages to satisfy their sexual desires and boost their determination to fight against the Assad regime. Syrian girls and women from age 14 upwards were considered fair game and apparently secured their own place in heaven if they participated in these ‘intercourse marriages’.

By the evening a simple Google search of the words, ‘Saudi Sheikh’ , Syrian, and ‘women’ brought up some 5 million references and at least 3 pages of links to articles spreading the news. Not surprisingly there was immediate online uproar too, though as one commentator put it, much of the discussion was about whether these arranged temporary marriages technically constituted ‘rape’. This in itself is worrying.

There was also skepticism from many quarters about the veracity of the report, particularly among savvy Mideast experts.  Rightly so. The story, much like the one a few months ago about Egyptian Islamist MPs proposing laws that permitted sex with a deceased spouse up to 6 hours after his/her death, turned out to be a gross lie.  Sheikh Al-Arifi has issued a denial via his Facebook page. Over the next few days, the various websites and media outlets that spread the story will no doubt issue their retractions. But the story also raises many questions.  For starters, where did it come from? AlterNet inadvertently picked it up from the overtly anti-Islamic Clarion Fund site. Others pointed to the Iranian regime backed Press TV as the primary source on December 31 2012.  But the earliest English language reporting comes on December 29 from an obscure YouTube news site called Eretz Zen, tagged as a YouTube channel by a “secular Syrian opposed to having [his] country turned into a Taliban-like state.”

What’s extraordinary and depressing is that a slew of websites picked up the story and ran with it, some claiming legitimacy because the other had posted it and clearly no one bothered to do some basic fact checking. Arguably this is just the nature of the net and minute by minute news updates. The story was too sensational to give up. But one would imagine that if a similar story emerged about a Christian cleric or a Rabbi, someone, somewhere would have paused before posting it. Sadly, in the case of stories about Muslim clerics or Islamists the same red flags don’t seem to apply.

Perhaps western journalists are so ignorant of Islam and the cultures in the Middle East that they are willing to believe anything. It’s nothing new — after all Western notions of the East were always immured in sexual decadence and the allure of harems. That was a trademark of the patronizing Orientalism of the past. Today we have a phobic version of Orientalism — expecting and only seeing and reporting the bad and the ugly.

Read the rest…