Sunday, March 1, 2009

Dorrie's Weekend Picks, 2/27/09-3/1/09
Raymond Ibrahim: A Response to the Critics: Taqiyya Revisited (Part I)
[Okay, I couldn't very well ignore these 2 articles that prove the whole POINT of the title of this blog, could I?] Having written at length on various aspects of Islam, it is always my writings concerning doctrinal deceit that elicit (sometimes irate) responses. As such, the purpose of this article is to revisit the issue of deceit and taqiyya in Islam, and address the many ostensibly plausible rebuttals made by both Muslims and non-Muslims. . . .
Raymond Ibrahim: A Response to the Critics: Taqiyya Revisited (Part II)
Regarding my recent “War and Peace—and Deceit—in Islam," others have written to me complaining that, by not juxtaposing more “moderate interpretations” to the mainstream ones, I delineated (e.g., Tabari, Ibn Kathir, al-Qurtubi, al-Razi, al-Arabi, et al), I am supposedly “distorting.” While there are in fact “moderate interpretations,” most of these come from minority sects—such as the Ahmadiyyas or the Quraniyuns—who, as they make up a trivial percentage of the Islamic world, and are in fact often accused of and persecuted for apostasy by mainstream Muslims, are definitely not representative of the latter. . . .
We Need You... to Fight Jihad
Why the Anti-Jihad League of America? This web site is to promote activism between citizens in the "war of ideas" against Jihad and its ideological basis in Islamic supremacism through communications between a league of groups, individuals, and anti-Jihad specialists.

Such an Anti-Jihad League seeks to promote our positions against Jihad and its Islamic supremacist basis to American government officials. . . .
Wilders in Washington: His Speech at the US Capitol
Thank you very much for inviting me. And - to the immigration authorities - thank you for letting me into this great country. It is always a pleasure to cross a border without being sent back on the first plane.

I feel very honoured to have the privilege to speak and to show my short documentary, Fitna, here in this heart of your democracy, here in the US Senate.

Today, the dearest of our many freedoms is under attack all throughout Europe. Free speech is no longer a given. What we once considered a natural element of our existence, our birth right, is now something we once again have to battle for. . . .
Ellison Expresses Concern and Disappointment with Decision to Screen Anti-Islamic Film
Takes Issue with sponsorship of film by Senator Kyl
[Well, of course he would. He has to earn the money the Muslim Brotherhood is paying him, doesn't he?]

Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) took issue with the screening of a film by the controversial Dutch Parliamentarian, Geert Wilders, in the United States Capitol. The film being screened, "Fitna," is said to compare Islamic terrorism to Nazism. [No, it compares Qur'anic statements to the murderous behavior by Muslims going on all over the world.] The screening is sponsored by Senator John Kyl (R-AZ).

"I am a strong an advocate of First Amendment free speech [until he's not because it speaks the truth]. However, this is not about free speech, but rather an issue of propriety, timing, and venue," Ellison said. "Senator Kyl has every right to host anyone he chooses; however, it becomes a question of propriety to use the United States Capitol as a venue for the condemnation of an entire religion," [which of course Fitna doesn't do. It condemns calls to violence in the name of Allah] Ellison said.

Does anybody have any question that Ellison has been bought and paid for by the Muslim Brotherhood (which paid for his recent hajj to Mecca, by the way. Good going, US Rep)? What else would he say to freedom of speech? He does not, you’ll notice, declaim any of the facts in Wilders’ film.
If given the chance to fly back in time to hear Patrick Henry deliver his "liberty or death" speech, I probably would. No, I'm sure I would. In a very real sense, that's why I left Danville and drove almost six hours (and almost another six on the way back immediately after) to hear a man from the Netherlands named Geert Wilders. . . .
Muslim prayer-in-school controversy might be solved
. . . “As far as I am concerned the issue is resolved,’’ Sico said. “We did the right thing. The kids did the right thing. No one was making fun.’’

Afsheen Shamsi, spokeswoman for the Council on American Islamic Relations [who else?], which has intervened with the district on Awwad’s behalf, said the accommodation was a correct step. “It’s a question of finding the right balance and making sure the student is comfortable and the district is comfortable,’’ she said.

Uh-huh. But the Christian kids can’t recite the Lord’s Prayer at school. Where is the balance in that?
Are Acts of Staged Controversy an Islamist Strategic Tactic?

Well, personally, I don’t even have to nod, it’s so obvious to me. But you might want to read the whole article to be sure, too.
What’s Behind The Enormous Denial That Beheadings Are Related To Islam?
Hard on the heels of the Buffalo beheading, the mainstream and feminist media hosted many Islamic clerics, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian religious writers, as well as liberal, secular feminists, all of whom insisted that honor killings are no different than domestic violence, that both are crimes, and that honor killings have nothing to do with Islam, just as domestic violence has nothing to do with religion. . . .

Oh, this is serious circular thinking. Read the hadith, the Qur’an, the Sira . . . Women are property. They are expendable. They are collateral damage; no harm done when you kill a couple dozen, you see. But the damage done to a MAN's image if a woman gets uppity . . . well, it's intolerable.
SoCal Muslims Angry at Informants in Mosques
. . . A Muslim advocacy organization [CAIR, who else?] said Friday that American Muslims are feeling "anger, disillusionment, and mistrust" [did they ever actually not feel any of those emotions?] toward the FBI in the aftermath of reports that it used an informant to infiltrate Southland mosques.

Hm. Imagine how non-Muslim Americans are feeling toward Muslims who don’t admit that what the informant said was true. Muslims are not our friends, near as I can figure. And it’s only Muslims who can change that opinion. Instead, they do a head fake and blame the FBI for spying.
U.S. pulling out of ‘Durban II’ conference
The Obama administration has decided to boycott the so-called Durban II conference over ant-Semitism concerns.

Multiple sources on a conference call with the White House on Feb. 27 told JTA that the Obama administration had opted not to attend any further preparatory meetings ahead of the planned U.N. conference against racism in Geneva in April.

Well, all right. But I don’t expect this reality to last.
European States Consider Boycotting Durban 2 Summit
European Union member states may follow in the footsteps of the United States, which announced Friday it would not be participating in the Durban anti-racism conference set to take place in April. While several states mull cancelling their participation in the conference, senior UN diplomats say the chances for the entire EU body to boycott the summit are slim.

Yeah, sigh, ain’t it the truth.
This is just a darn good site that perhaps you could all bookmark and check in with every now and then.

Western Michigan U. continues to try to interfere with free speech
[This is a letter I received via email from the Walid Shoebat org. I don't know if there's a link to it.]
Dear Mr. Green,
I am very concerned about a meeting with International Conservatives leader Chris McCann which was held Thursday, the 26th of February with three members of your administrative departments. The meeting which took place I would regard as very troubling and tantamount to intimidation in its content if not its tone. It also reveals the tremendous bias based on the personal views of these particular administrators who overreached when it came to the issue of free speech. Based on case law there is no balance between sensitivity and free speech; free speech trumps sensitivity under the first amendment, so the members of the administration were treading on the side of inappropriate intimidation of a group’s right of free speech by even attempting to ask a student to consider his actions on the issue of content of a poster because of the “sensitivities” of others.

I would like to remind you that Martin Luther King’s views in his day were regarded as “hateful” by the actual haters. I would contend this to be exactly the case in this situation. Martin Luther King’s right of free speech had to be protected when he too came under pressure. It is beyond belief that members of your administration would side with a group of students, probably representatives of the Muslim Student Association, as well as the radical “Peace Center” on campus who we know called Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Saleem “frauds” at an organizing meeting of the International conservatives for this event, and indicated directly by email that they oppose the March 10th event.

Again, similar slurs were used against Martin Luther King, the same as against our speakers, when he was outspoken on civil rights. Former terrorists who are now willing to speak out for their former enemy obviously will evoke a response from those that might support terrorism. You might possibly consider that the people who expressed fear concerning the event might be supporters of terrorism and now use fear as a way of touching the nerves of your administrators which prompted them to call the meeting with Mr. McCann.

Or, possibly even worse, is that some or all members of the administration who called this meeting might even side with the terrorist sympathizers, which is a position that could be construed from their personal view of the content of the posters. I do hope not.

It is incredulous how your administrators would entertain the views of students that would oppose these brave men who now speak out against what all Americans left or right of the political spectrum would regard as evil. It is also unbelievable that they might consider the argument that the poster used to promote the event, while certainly eye-catching and provocative in its title, certainly is not a hurtful message if you are against violence and terror which I hope that the administrators in question would be.

It is shameful that we in America are caving into fear from Islamic extremists who have their propaganda machines at American universities, located right on your doorstep. The very people who speak against the evil are viewed as bad and the people who support the terror are given the ear of your administrators. To pressure a student group to alter its message that wishes the message of freedom to be promoted using the tactic of “sensitivity training,” which was used at the said meeting on February 26, is a disgrace.

I hope that you not only will make it your business to reject the administrators who are causing unnecessary obstacles and the radical elements on the campus who oppose the event or use tactics to undermine it, but will also show support to anyone who speaks out for freedom for this great nation, the freedom of the Western Judeo Christian world which allows your institution, as well as thousands of other institutions similar to yours, to operate with the exchange of free ideas that in itself defines our aspirations as free people of the human race.

The jihadist terrorists wish that this very freedom be taken from us and, ironically, this is one of the topics that Mr. Shoebat and Mr. Saleem will talk about in their lecture on March 10.

I hope that you consider this letter and that if anything is done to undermine International Conservatives rights, including the lack of effort in policing the campus to stop vandals from tearing down posters, as well as enforcing bylaws incorrectly; our organization will use all the forces that are legally disposed to us if Western Michigan University is derelict in its duty on protecting those rights of free speech based fully on Constitutional law of the United States of America. We are already reviewing what has already transpired to examine whether it is within the rights afforded within the United States Constitution under the first amendment.

Yours sincerely,
Keith Davies
Executive Director of The Walid Shoebat Foundation and Forum For Middle East Understanding.
HATE PREACHER GETS OK TO RUN SHARIA LAW DEMO (in London. But, you’ll remember, Geert Wilders couldn't show Fitna there)
HATE preacher Anjem Choudary will march in London today, calling for Britain to adopt Islamic Sharia law.

The startling move comes just days after processions celebrating St George were banned for being racist.

St. George processions were banned?! Has anyone even checked out British history? St. George a racist? Oh, good grief.
Netanyahu's Middle East Outlook
. . . "I personally intend to take charge of a government committee that will regularly address the needs of the Palestinian economy in the West Bank. . . . In the recent conflict, the West Bank did not boil over. The people there cared about the loss of life in Gaza, but they said, 'We do not want to go that route. We have the beginnings of economic development in Jenin and we do not want an Islamic fundamentalist regime.' They'd like a society with law and order. . . ."

No comments: