Saturday, September 23, 2006
Launching A Jihad On The Automotive Market
Some Columbus radio stations have rejected as insensitive an advertisement for a car dealership that invokes Islamic references.
The general manager of the dealership, though, says the promotions — which he called "tongue-in-cheek" — will air on some stations beginning next week.
In the spot, Keith Dennis of Dennis Mitsubishi talks about "launching a jihad on the automotive market."
Sales representatives "will be wearing burqas all weekend long," the ad says. One of the vehicles on sale "can comfortably seat up to 12 jihadists in the back."
"Our prices are lower than the evildoers’ every day. Just ask the pope! " the ad says. "Friday is fatwa Friday, with free rubber swords for the kiddies."
Some local radio stations are refusing to play the ad:
But Aaron Masterson, general manager of Dennis Auto Point, which writes and produces its own commercials, promised that the commercial will air.
"It starts next Friday morning," Masterson said. "As far as I can see, the top 10 stations — minimum — in the market. We made it very clear we wanted market saturation to get the point across."
The dealership was a little surprised by the hesitation to run the ad, Masterson said, although he noted, "According to the people who have heard it, it is the most controversial commercial they’ve heard in the last 15 years."
Calling the commercial aggressive, Masterson said, "This is one where we feel we’re taking a bull’s-eye on terrorists. After all the nonsense that the terrorists put the public through, they’re fair game."
And, of course, the CAIR objects:
The president of the Columbus chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, doesn’t think terrorism is to be taken lightly. (Pastorius note: Oh no, CAIR would never take terrorism lightly. Never, never, never.)
Asma Mobin-Uddin said she is concerned the ad’s tone and imagery are "mocking and disrespectful to many different areas. One is Islamic faith and Islamic culture."
(Pastorius note: Making fun of terrorists is making fun of Islamic culture.)
When Dennis previewed the commercial Wednesday for radio executives, Masterson said, "everybody in the room thought it was very funny, extremely aggressive."
Yet executives did have some concerns.
"We talk about the pope, fatwa, terrorists. You hear one of these words, and their minds froze on it," he said.
Nonetheless, he said, the company plans few changes.
I may actually buy a car from this dealership and have it shipped to me. I need a new car, so why not?
If we all support Dennis Mitsubishi, then more companies will take up the mantle. If the media won't speak out, maybe advertisers will.
"DhimmiTube" at YouTube
I'm posting this for a fellow anti-jihadi blogger and YouTuber who just couldn't last against YouTube's PC political slant:
From his own blog:
"Crusader18 User Account suspended by YouTube
That's right, don't bother clicking the links to videos by Crusader18 below, because they no longer work. YT users AbuMustafa and Jihad4u remain as do most of the YT jihadists. Most of those who oppose them have been suspended, and surely more will follow. That's That. Stand By, and as I find a new server, I will be re-uploading. Until then, please enjoy the letter of suspension, and the letter I sent in response, to YouTube"
Check it all out, and do note that those other jihadi users are still around, as well as MOUNTAINS of videos about Islam that are in Arabic, but all in praise of Islam. What the rest of the videos are about other than praise and how much of a recruiting tool they are remains to be seen as translations aren't available and as YouTube doesn't bother to check them out.
Atlashas already posted this with more detail at her site, along with a shout out to my video goofiness (thanks there, baby!!) and I hope we can keep this particular nod to "Dhimmitube" alive and well.--Hat-Tips--Atlas/Pamela and Crusader18
Another Ironic Catholic FYI
I just found this a bit funny, or full of "ironicness" as Stephen Colbert put it once, seeing as the prayer intentions sent out by the Pope are released to Churches worldwide annually and not as events happen:
"Pope's September prayer intentions
Sep. 04 (CWNews.com) - The Vatican has announced the prayer intentions designated by Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) for the month of September.
The Holy Father's general prayer intention is: "That those who use the means of social communication may always do so conscientiously and responsibly." The Pope's mission intention is: "That in the mission territories the entire People of God may recognize that permanent formation is their own priority."
So did Pope Benedict XVI know that he'd be saying something that would be, well, under scrutiny by those who "use the means of social communication"? At any rate, it would seem that all of our prayers didn't do too much good considering how his speech was quoted out of context and broadcast throughout the planet's most irresponsible region of using those "means of social communication".
One other note, this has been broadcast on the global Catholic network, EWTN, translated as those who "use the media". Yeah, now you all know that I watch EWTN. But you have to admit, that's a good one. I believe that the prayer intention for October is to pray for an end to terrorism, so let's hope that the ummah doesn't go and make that one even more relevant than it already is.
From Vatican Reporter:
At least one writer for Catholic press out of the Vatican is now saying that Pope Benedict XVI has no intention of backing down from his call for dialogue. This after another Vatican insider reportedly said that the Pope's reference to a dialogue with a Persian invader was a clear and direct reference to Iranian leader Mahmood Ahmadinejad, the intention being to pre-empt any "invitation to conversion to Islam" to the Pope from Iran.
From EWTN News:
"(Sandro) Magister points out that it is because the Pope knew just what he was doing and is not afraid to do it, that he will not, “fall silent or backpedal.” The dialogue with Islam is a real concern of the Holy Father’s, as so many at the Vatican have noted in recent weeks.
And, as for the words of Emperor Manuel II Paleologos (who is quickly becoming the best-know Byzantine emperor of all time) Magister holds that they were deliberate.
The time of the emperor, like our own times, were filled with war and holy war. Yet in the midst of such conflict Manuel saw the need to bring his Persian counterpart, “to the terrain of truth, reason, law, and violence, to what marks the real difference between the Christian faith and Islam, to the key questions upon which war or peace between the two civilizations depends,” the Vatican writer explains.
Pope Benedict, too, is asking Islam, “to place a limit of its own on ‘jihad.’ He proposes to the Muslims that they separate violence from faith, as prescribed by the Qur’an itself, and that they again connect faith with reason, because ‘acting against reason is in contradiction with the nature of God.’”
Personally, I don't believe for a minute that Pope Benedict XVI "stumbled" into this controversy or is just not as "media savvy" as his predecessor. Josef Cardinal Ratzinger was always willing to take on the enemies of his faith. He did say that he would have to put certain personal goals aside while Pope to be the true voice of the head of the Church, but he never stated that he would back down from challenging those who challenge his own Church.
He's not the first Pope in history to have had a fan club from his days as just a Cardinal for nothing. Plenty of Catholics "love their German Shepherd", and with good reason as the world can now see.
Cross-posted at What Would Charles Martel Do?
Storm Track Intimidation: What’s Wrong with this Picture?
From The Gathering Storm
I get really frustrated sometimes. Why, on the one hand, the supposed moderate muslims are so blind to the threat to their own religion, while on the other hand their leaders believe Islam, as it’s practiced today, is morally equivalent to a 21st century civilization.
I’ve written before that how muslims are seen and treated in the West depends entirely upon them and if they don’t make a very public effort to distance themselves from the jihadists, there will come a day when any and all muslims will be seen as an enemy to a nation and be treated like the Japanese-Americans were treated in WWII. But this threat to their freedom hasn’t sunken in yet and they continue to blather on. First, they play the victim card over and over again, and second, they haven’t awoken to the fact they – and no one else - have the responsibility to confront those who, as Bush has deemed, hijacked their religion.
But it seems they will do neither.
A selection of news items proves out these facts. First the victim card.
Imams, academics and Arab leaders convened at a central
Now think about that for a minute. Why is it
But the Islamists demand more. Even a separate set of laws – the Sharia – for muslims as they demanded - yes demanded – in
Then we have
But as far as victimization goes – this one take the cake. Or maybe it’s just another example of the muslim mind’s inability to confront reality. Parvez Ahmed, the board chairman of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (our so called moderate muslim friends at CAIR), "
Let’s go on to my other point. Muslims incapacity to see the threat before them and their unwillingness to confront it.
The police and intelligence services are beginning to wake up to the treats that local mosques are posing to our security – and are taking action. It is a fact that mosques have been and are still be used for jihadist propaganda and recruiting, and command and control of terrorist operations in the Europe and
And response from the Islamic community for exposing and arresting those who would hijack their religion? A big thank you? Perhaps even supported the police in the investigation? In your dreams. The response from the muslim community was this from the New York Times. “Many Muslims believe that the use of informers set back the police's campaign to win their trust and cooperation.” And this. “Wherever police spies are found among the Muslims, they must be rooted out. There must be zero tolerance for cooperation with the oppressors.” The title of the article says it all – “US MUSLIM COMMUNITIES FINALLY CATCH ON TO POLICE SPIES”
And then this piece of ridiculous tripe. The conviction of a Pakistani immigrant on charges he plotted to blow up one of Manhattan's busiest subway stations has sparked mixed emotions within the city's Muslim community about undercover police work. The response from the muslim community?
"This is a real setback to the bridge building," said Michael Dibarro, a Jordanian immigrant who until recently worked as a clergy liaison with the New York Police Department. "We had meaningful meetings. We thought we were going somewhere with this."
Yes! YOU ARE MAKING PROGRESS! It’s called catching those who will defame the reputation of your religion and you should be screaming support for the police from the rooftops sending a signal to the jihaists among you that you will work with the police and turn them in. What is so difficult to understand? Or like any fundamentalist religion, it dims the mind to rational thought.
Imam Shaker Elsayed of Dar Alhijrah Islamic Center in
Yes, Mr. Elsayed, you are correct. Islam is the disease and, as stated here, the irrational response of the muslim community in Europe and
Finally there’s this. A correspondent for an Arab newspaper in
Umm. Hello? Yes. I do hope that your father’s messages are singled out and you are asked to pay a short visit to your local FBI office. Maybe it’s time you responded to your father’s words and correct his misunderstanding of his peaceful, tolerant religion and how his words are contributing to the ‘misunderstanding’ of muslims around the world.
Man of the Week
While I was tempted by Chavez hold up and pointing to Chomsky tripe, in the end it wasn't even close ...
The gentleman complaining about his rogaine problem when rubbed on his face wins ! Or is it open mike night at the Joe Cocker karaoke competition? Or perhaps it's something we can help with bran?
"You never close your eyes any more when I kiss your lips....." Bring it baby !
The Dangers of Falling Into a State of de Facto Sharia and Dhimmitude
Well, it finally happened. This Anti-Pope Madness has dragged me out of semi-web-retirement. They just had to riot again, didn't they?
I think it goes without saying that the rules which govern Muslims in their homelands are not appropriate in the West, in most cases not even welcomed, and in some cases even blatantly against our laws. Yet the same can be said for the code lived by members of the mafia. When the mafia became prominent in certain American cities, was there ever a direct response from the natives to these newly come thugs? No. Why? Because if you opposed them your family could end up dead and you with them. Because they operated secretly, underground, outside of the eyes of the law. It was the simplicity of the fear itself, the fear that if you did anything to insult or oppose them, you'd most certainly find some nameless figure from the mob world coming to make you suffer. A figure come from a group that's already shadowy, already not integrated into yours, already with loyalties not to you or your city or greater culture, but to its own. And these were just big shots in the world of crime syndicates and their lackeys, certainly not the religious or values system of an entire immigrant group. Think though, of that fear of the mafia that inspires television writers endlessly to this day, and then imagine the power of Muslim immigrant groups using the same specter of fear and intimidation, but with a conviction that comes from the group's very history, religion, sense of honor and being. Now that's one hell of a huge problem.
The rest is here.
Friday, September 22, 2006
Hat tip to the Grouchy Old Cripple.
Click on image to enlarge.
The Muslim Day Of Rage
Religion and Reason
The Western culture has changed Muslims’ attitude towards any religious issues from adherence to rebelliousness, from obedience to challenge and from following authorities to questioning authorities. The result is that people now believe that every person must make his own judgment and form an opinion in a field of studies that would take a scholar twenty years to be able to tread in with cautiousness and humility. The Western culture is built on rejection of faith, irrelevance of revelation, glorification of the human and the human authority versus the Divine thus putting reason over text, which is the reason why we are witnessing this intellectual mess in the Islamic arena.
Isn't that cute. Of course, the Islamic "scholars" would prefer an army of zombies but they can't come out and just say that, so they deal in such ridiculous palaver.
Sleight of Hand #1: People can challenge a religion, like Islam (gasp!), in the West. Ergo, the West rejects faith per se.
Big bad counterexample: USA.
Sleight of Hand #2: The West rejects faith, blah blah blah, this has caused an intellectual mess for the Muslims.
Hunh!? That would be a religious or a theological problem. What does intellect have anything to do with Islam?
On that note, don't miss the rest of the Q&A. The level of stupidity on display is both comic and Olympian.
Ami takes on Rami Khouri, a moderate Muslim, who wrote this article for the Daily Star. Khouri, in short, calls on Westerners to censor themselves. Not because there is, according to him, anything generally wrong with being critical about (certain) religions, but because Islam is an important part of many Muslims' personal identity and as such, it is logical for them to feel 'insulted' a little bit more easy than most Westerners.
The problem with such a reasoning is, of course, that one simply enables extremists to keep their hold on the Muslim world. Moderate Muslims should, instead of asking people not to criticize Islam in any way shape or form, try to make fellow Muslims 'enlightened', or 'reasonable' (regarding their religion).
Cross posted at Liberty and Justice.
UK Cemetary: Christian Graves Must Face Mecca
This just in from the Islamic Republic of Britain: all graves in this multi-faith cemetery must face Mecca, because otherwise, you see, you'd have Christian graves facing one way and Muslim graves facing another, and that wouldn't be...tidy. And of course we mustn't risk offending You Know Who.
Go read the whole thing.
Winds of War: Thinking the Unthinkable
From The Gathering Storm
This week’s circus of threats and buffoonery at the UN and its inability to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and into the hands of unstable countries has promoted many to begin thinking about the unthinkable – a nuclear strike against the US by al Qaeda. Some even have blogged on the return of the Cold War fallout shelter and how to attain one.
Just what are we facing if a Hiroshima - aka: a ‘crude’ nuclear device about 10-12 kilotons - size nuke was detonated by Al Qaeda in a major city in the US.
“A 12.5 kiloton nuclear explosion in New York Harbor will produce casualties more than one order of magnitude greater than those inflicted at the World Trade Center. Blast and thermal effects would kill 52,000 people immediately. Another 238,000 would be exposed to direct radiation from the blast, and of these 44,000 would suffer radiation sickness and more than 10,000 of these would receive lethal doses. In addition to this direct radiation from the explosion, fallout would expose another million and a half people. For this group, the 24 hour cumulative dose would be high enough to kill another 200,000 and cause several hundred thousand cases of radiation sickness. In addition there would be many thousands of people with mechanical and thermal injuries. Casualties on this scale would immediately overwhelm medical facilities leading to a high mortality rate among those injured but not killed by the initial blast and thermal effects. Over 1000 hospital beds would be destroyed by blast, and 8700 beds would be in areas with radiation exposures high enough to cause radiation sickness.”
The most obvious delivery system that al Qaeda would use is what has come to be known as a ’suitcase bomb’. A nuclear ‘backpack’ or ‘suitcase’ bomb would appear to be in the one to ten kiloton range. According to Roland Watson, let’s see what kind of damage a 1 kiloton bomb would do.
“As the fireball expands rapidly to its maximum diameter of 460 feet, its centre rages at a temperature of 10,000,000° C for its brief lifetime. Note that temperatures in the WTC attacks were unlikely to have exceeded 5,000° C. Metallic objects up to 450 feet from ground zero of the initial flash will vaporise. Metallic objects up to 670 feet away will melt. It is needless to guess what happens to people caught out in the open at these ranges – they cease to exist in any meaningful sense of the word and join the raw material for the later fallout. At 1400 feet from ground zero, rubbers and plastics will ignite and melt whilst wood will char and burn. For victims out in the open, 3rd degree burns are inflicted up to 0.4 miles away, 2nd degree burns up to half a mile away and 1st degree burns at up to nearly a mile away. It is at the extremity of this range that we have the "open oven door effect" which needs no further explanation. Meanwhile, those buildings which survived the melting effects of the heat radiation will be finished off by the high winds further into the city centre as winds approaching 670 mph will level or badly damage even steel concrete structures within 740 feet of the blast. No one inside this perimeter can hope to survive unless they are in good underground shelters. Where the wind speed drops to 380 mph at about 1050 feet, tall multi-storey buildings will be lucky to be left standing and survivors of the heat pulse will suffer potentially fatal lung injuries. As the speed drops to 225 mph at about 1650 feet, most dwelling houses will be wrecked and the streets blocked by debris. Flying fragments become the killer rather than sheer air pressure at these distances. What the initial radiation pulse did not ignite, the blast does by igniting new fires due to damaged power lines, gas mains and oil tanks. Asphyxiation can also occur at these ranges as much of the air is devoted to fuelling uncontrollable firestorms, which have no mercy on wooden housing.”
And what unlucky American city could be the target?
“Which is the unlucky American city? Certainly, it will be a city and it will be American as far as an Islamic fanatic with an extremely rare and potent weapon is concerned. New York? Los Angeles? San Francisco? New York has had a hard time of it with the two WTC attacks and the downing of flight 587 (yes, I believe it was a terrorist attack), so we may be forgiven for thinking the next attack will happen elsewhere. However, the Eastern seaboard is the favored route for bringing in smuggled items and terrorists will not want to spend critical time in long, hazardous journeys westwards. We know that some of the WTC terrorists were based and trained in Florida and that the alleged terrorist on trial just now was caught in the mid-southern state of Oklahoma (ominously he had undertaken Cessna flight training). I suggest that coastal cities further south or even into the Gulf of Mexico may be at greater risk. Furthermore, a city with a flat topology may be favored above more contoured cities since hills will deflect and absorb the blast waves as was the case in Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks. Hiroshima was a flatter city than Nagasaki and paid for this with a greater death toll and destruction per square mile. Seeking to get the last iota of destructive power out of their devilish device, the terrorists would also favor southern cities because of the hotter conditions and better atmospheric conditions. In other words, clear, sunny skies are better "tinderbox" conditions as would that time of day since Bin Laden would want clear conditions for the infamous mushroom cloud to be recorded by the world’s media.”
There are two sites on the Net where you can simulate the effects of nuke attack on a US city. One is the Nuclear Weapon Effects Calculator which provides an interactive tool intended to give an idea of the devastating blast effects of ground-level, shallow subsurface, and low-altitude nuclear weapon detonations. You can choose a yield from 1 kiloton to 4 megatons on one of several major US cities. The other site is even more interesting. Plug in your zip code and see the effects of a nuke dropped on your neighborhood.
To see these dry stats in action, view the recently discovered video footage of the results of the Hiroshima blast. Then envision that in your town or city. Don’t you think it’s time we stop these wacko rogue states before this happens? Or will it take 100,000 American dead to finally wake up the appeasers and apologists – or would they just say we brought it upon ourselves.
Probably so. As the old saying goes, “You can’t argue with drunkards and fools.”
But what about the American response? The blog, Stop Asking Why, speculates.
“If the attack is nuclear, there will be massive pressure exerted by the public to respond with a nuclear attack. But, on whom? This enemy lives in several countries and does not wear a uniform or have clearly marked military installations for easy targeting. More problematic is the fact that they live among civilians. Americans must come to grips with the real possibility that we will be left with only two viable response options: staying our hands and responding basically by continuing what we're doing already; or knowingly killing tens or even hundreds of thousands of civilians in order to respond to a nuclear attack with our own nuclear attack.”
Basically, the question is who do we attack? The terrorists detonated the bomb but who supplied them. Can we find out and retaliate against the supplier?
Maintaining total anonymity is difficult with a nuclear device. All radioisotopes possess a “signature” that exposes their point of origin. This signature makes it easier to trace the material and potentially point out who supplied it to the responsible terrorist group, making reprisals more likely.”
Is the government capable of such detective work? From an article in the New York Times in February of ’06.
“The Pentagon has formed a team of nuclear experts to analyze the fallout from a terrorist nuclear attack on American soil in an effort to identify the attackers, officials have said. The team, which can draw on hundreds of federal experts, uses such tools as robots that gather radioactive debris and sensitive gear to detect the origins of a device, whether a true atomic weapon or a so-called dirty bomb, that uses ordinary explosives to spew radioactivity. The objective is to determine quickly who exploded the device and where it came from, in part to clarify the options to strike back, the officials said. The government also hopes that terrorists will be less likely to use a nuclear device if they know that it can be traced.”
If we can trace the nuke back to its origins, we could retaliate against that country. But it will have consequences.
“The problem remains that we face an enemy who is motivated by death, not the desire to continue living. Instead of being deterred by a response that kills on such a massive scale, they will be encouraged. Instead of convincing their leaders of the futility of their actions in continuing the war with us (the goal in our use of atomic bombs against Japan in WWII), our nuclear response will entrench this enemy. It will help him recruit. It will solidify his support among fellow Muslims.”
And what about the social reaction? I’ve blogged on this before. Here’s what I think. After such an attack, citizens will sweep away any and all appeasing arguments for thoughtful sanity and calm and demand the government isolate any and all individuals that could pose a threat from more terrorist attacks on our soil. It won’t matter if they are while, black, red, brown or purple – only if are Muslim or support Muslims in this country.
A nuke detonation of American soil will result in an untold crisis for Muslims in America and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Muslims in the nation that supplied the terrorists with the nuclear device. Of course if the device was either stolen or purchased from one of our ‘allies’ then this would further complicate our retaliation.
There really isn’t any pleasant solution. For us, it will be war on a terrifying level. For Muslims, their lives will be “short, nasty and brutish”.
End the Occupation!
Here are a few examples of lands that need to be returned to their rightful owners, or cultures that need to be restored after being violated by cultural imperialists:
The Copts are the descendants of the original Egyptians. Their original language, Coptic, a lineal descendant of the Egyptian of the Pharaohs, has been replaced by Arabic, the language of the invaders. The Copts themselves, Christians, suffer constant persecution from the Islamic rulers of the land. Islam is an Arab religion and has been the vehicle of Arab imperialism and colonialism since its inception worldwide.
India has been subjected to invasion and subsequent colonization by Muslims on both its west and east. The current neighboring states of Pakistan and Bangladesh were formed only for the sake of accommodating the colonialist invaders and codifying the unjust status quo. Pakistan is the land of the Indus valley, where the most ancient artifacts of Indian civilization were found. Bangladesh was India’s greatest source of income before being stolen by the Muslims. The occupation must end now, and the Hindu territories returned to their rightful owners.
In full on Our Children Are The Guarantors »
The Day Of Rage
Today is the Muslim "Day Of Rage."
What the heck does that mean? What separates this day from any other day in the Muslim world?
Well, I think what it is is that they are going to get even angrier than normal today. Should be funny:
Muslim "leaders" are calling for a day of RAGE this Friday to protest the Pope's speech. Again.I'm glad we've toned things down to "anger" from "jihad." As if there's any difference in the Muslim world.
One thing to note: Fridays are similar to Sunday in the Christian world—Muslims are more likely to go to their mosques then than at any other time in the week.
So, in other words, these "raging" protests are being very carefully organized by the imams. Quite "peace-loving" of them, ain't it?
One thing's for sure—the pictures are bound to be priceless!
Yes, they are. I wonder what high-jinks the Muslims of our world will be up to today. Will it be hilarity of faces enraged for Allah, or will they bring the signs of death with them?
Or, will we see actual violence?
Will they set fire to embassies? Will they shoot Nuns in the back? Will they storm Christian churches, and beat parishioners in the street?
Oh, and by the way, Hizbollah is holding a "victory party" here on the Day of Rage."
BEIRUT (Reuters) - Hizbollah supporters from across Lebanon gather in the Shi’ite Muslim guerrilla group’s Beirut stronghold on Friday for a “divine victory” rally over Israel declared by its leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.
Organizers expect hundreds of thousands of people to attend the event in a district flattened by Israeli bombing during the 34-day war, but have not said if Nasrallah himself will appear.
Hundreds set out for the capital on Thursday, young and old, by car and on foot, from southern Shi’ite villages which bore the brunt of Israel’s aerial bombardment and invasion.
“However much we lost in terms of martyrs and destruction of houses, we remain steadfast,” said Ali Shalghoub, heading north from Qana on a two-day, 100-km (60-mile) trek to Beirut.
Alongside him walked people waving Hizbollah flags and banners and wearing yellow T-shirts bearing the group’s slogans. Others packed into minibuses and cars for the trip.
A Spanish U.N. peacekeeper shakes the hand of a Lebanese Hezbollah supporter wearing a yellow T-shirt and carrying a Hezbollah flag as he marches in the southern village of Kfar Kila, Lebanon, Thursday, Sept. 21, 2006, on his way to attend the massive victory rally that will take place in Beirut Friday afternoon.
And, one has to wonder if the UNIFIL troops plan to participate in the Day of Rage.
Am I being cynical in say I'm guessing this whole victory party thing is just an excuse to put together a riot?
Oh, and one other thing to note, today marks the beginning of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. This is one of the biggest Holidays on the Hebrew calendar. This year Rosh Hashanah actually coincides with the Sabbath day. Today also marks the beginning of Ramadan.
This seems a bit portentious to me.
Should be interesting.
Arab And Iranian Reaction To 9/11 - 5 Years Later
Back to School
My college classes started for me again today, after four months of vacation. I was excited to see my friends after such a long time. I thought we’d get together and talk about what we did during those four months; that we will share things like normal friends. I happily met with them all again, shook hands and then we headed for the food court, our normal hangout.
We sat there and started talking. Everyone started eagerly talking about what they did on vacation, how they felt about their grades, how they planned this party, how they had fun at that party, all the exciting places they went to, or the girls they met along the way. They were talking about things anyone would expect someone in their early 20s to talk about—it was plainly obvious that they were living “normal” lives.
When it was my turn to tell them about my life during vacation, I looked at them and said nothing. I was thinking ‘what should I tell them?’ While they were back in their homeland (most of them are from India) having the best time of their lives, I was in my family home in Dubai, just a few kilometers away, worrying about how Muslims might further oppress, injure or slaughter non-Muslims. Should I tell them that? Or should I tell them that my mom said it’s important that people like me, i.e. apostates from Islam, be killed? Or should I tell them about the many sleepless nights I had thinking about my situation, the times I felt alone—because I was feeling like a stranger among my own family, in my own home. Should I tell them that I, not once, went out to party or on a long drive just for the heck of it? Should I?
A friend of mine interrupted me while I was thinking through all this and asked, “Why are you so serious today? Is everything alright?” I wanted to scream out loud, ‘No! Everything is upside down! I have been a Christian for about three years now, long before I met any of you guys—to hell with Islam and to hell with my former life’.
But I merely ended up saying, “I have a headache, I don’t want to talk.” Leaving them all, I abruptly got up and went off by myself, not to party or enjoy anything, but to a secluded place so I could think about my plight all over again!
Cross-posted at Pedestrian Infidel.
Coca Cola and Pepsi Should Apologize to Muslims
Just look at what the mofos at Coke did:
Utterly disgraceful: They forgot to fit in "No Allah."
Pepsi is far worse. Observe:
It looks so innocent...till one finds out that PEPSI stands for Pinch Every Penny to Save Israel! (The founder of Pepsi was a sly bastard for coming up with that name in 1898.) In addition, the logo is so anti-Islamically tweakable.
Muslims deserve an apology and, for some reason, the Christians in Pakistan should comment on this matter as well.
Citgo Gas Stations Owned By Hugo Chaez' Venezuelan Government
What Everyone Believes but No One Can Say
This idea can be stated in many ways but it’s basically this: “Allah does not exist, Muhammad was not his prophet, and the Koran is not a holy book.”
Christians of all denominations believe this by the very fact of being Christians. Atheists believe Islam is superstition, as they believe about all religions. Western people have believed Islam is a false religion as a matter of course since Islam was founded in the 600s. This belief has never been controversial. It was part and parcel of being a Westerner and a Christian, a thread in the fabric of life, unquestioned and accepted and undisputable.
Despite 1300 years of near-universal understanding, this belief is today barred from the public square. In some parts of Europe, notably Belgium, to stating this openly could open oneself to criminal prosecution. Even in America it would be considered offensive and rude and insulting to announce this unspeakable but widely held belief.
Yet this is not rude or insulting in and of itself. It is a self-evident fact that unless you are a Muslim you do not believe in Allah or that an angel recited the Koran to Muhammad. It’s as plain and simple as that.
When did disbelief in Islam become an insult? How have we gotten to a point where no one can say what everyone believes?
To state publicly, openly, the obvious beliefs of billions of people – that Islam is a form of Arab tribal paganism disguised as monotheism – is all but impossible. We have become too “polite”, too “sensitive”, too “respectful” to say it. Yet we believe it and we know others believe it.
As a Christian neither I nor anyone I know is personally insulted that billions of people are not Christians, and as such, do not belief in the Incarnation and Resurrection of Christ. To non-Christians, Christ was an ancient Jewish sage executed by the Romans. I accept this. I don’t riot and kill people over it. This is part of living in the world.
If Muslims cannot accept that most people do not believe Allah exists, do not believe Muhammad was a divinely inspired prophet, and do not believe the Koran is a sacred book, then we really are in a clash of civilizations. If Muslims in Pakistan cannot accept that the Catholic Pope will occasionally, without even trying, insult and deny Islam, then we are in for a long and terrible conflict.
Cross-posted at Thomas the Wraith.
Meanwhile...Over in South East Asia: Naked Women More Dangerous Than Bombs
Muslim Cleric: Naked Women More Dangerous Than Terrorist Bombs
Abu Bakar Ba'asyir is the Indonesian head of Jemaah Islamiah, which seeks the establishment of an Islamic State in Southeast Asia. Ba'asyir was convicted for a minor role in the Bali bombings
"If you ask which are more dangerous, half-naked women or the Bali bombs? The answer is of course women who bare their bodies," Ba'asyir was quoted as saying by Antara news agency.
If a half naked women is more dangerous than a terrorist bombing, wouldn't that make a fully naked women more than twice as dangerous?
Hmmm. The Infidel Babe of the Week is loaded weapon!
Thursday, September 21, 2006
A quick news update.
The American and Israeli embassy in Oslo are believed to have been the prime targets for the four individuals arrested in connection with the synagogue shooting in Oslo last week.
Police believe that the four men aged from 26 to 29 had made plans to attack the American embassy in Henrik Ibsens gate and the Israeli embassy in Parkveien, or alternatively neighbouring buildings and embassy staff in the near future.
All the suspects deny the serious charges brought against them, according to sources VG has been in touch with. Due to the ongoing investigation and matters concerning national security, the court proceedings will not be open to the media.
From : News from Norway.
Go Ahead, Make My Day
The LGF post contained this amazing quote from the Daily News article, from Commission President Adrian Dove:
“We were looking to find anybody from the Muslim community that was discouraging terrorism, that was encouraging engagement in the dialogue and that was a potential bridge. While you may not have perfection, it is a starting point you can build upon,” Dove said.
“I challenge you to find another party in Los Angeles who is a practicing Muslim leader who would be less controversial.”
Now, I'm going to say something controversial with the hope that someone, anyone, can prove me wrong:
There is not a single moderate Muslim political organization, media outlet, academic institution, or government of any appreciable size, anywhere in the world.
Go ahead, prove me wrong. It will make my day. Because, like Adrian Dove said, I would love to find a bridge to a better relationship with Muslims. But unlike Adrian Dove, I am not willing to delude myself.
Please, please someone prove me wrong. I will say, it might rather hard to do, considering the official website of a major Islamic nation admits that Islam is spread by fear:
After God empowered Muslims to enter Mecca, Islam became the prevailing power and was spread by use of fear. This was particularly evident in the tribe of Quraysh, who had responded to the Prophet Muhammad’s new message of Islam with unrelenting persecution, eventually putting its resources in the service of the ever growing new religion. The Prophet then saw it preferable to contact neighbouring kings and rulers, including the two kings of Oman, Jaiffar and Abd, sons of Al Julanda, through peaceful means. History books tell us that the prophet had sent messages to the people of Oman, including a letter carried by military escort from Amr Inn Al Aas to Jaiffar and Abd, sons of Al Julanda, in which he wrote:
‘In the name of God the Merciful and the Compassionate, from Muhammad bin Abdullah to Jaiffar and Abd, sons of Al Julanda, peace be on those who choose the right path. Embrace Islam, and you shall be safe. I am God’s messenger to all humanity, here to alert all those alive that non believers are condemned. If you submit to Islam, you will remain kings, but if you abstain, your rule will be removed and my horses will enter your arena to prove my prophecy’.
I mean, what are you going to say?
Prove me wrong. Please, please, prove me wrong.
Yes Our Culture Is Better
I dare say our christian, jewish and humanistic culture is better than the islamic culture. We do not hang gays from cranes, we don't chop off hands in case of thievery. And I could go on citing many such examples.
As should be obvious he means "contemporary Christian, Jewish and Humanistic culture". The Leeuwarder Courant however, seems to have changed what he actually said into:
Wilders fulminated as always about down-sliding morals and immigration policy gone "completely mad". "Our christian culture just is better than the Jewish or the islamic culture. We do not hang gays from cranes". All cultures are not equal, according to Wilders.
And this is how 'we' treat those who dare speak out in favor of our Western culture. Question to the journalist who wrote the article for the Leeuwarder Courant: if you do not believe that one should be able to say that our culture is better than contemporary Islamic culture and, therefore, feel the need to make someone saying it nonetheless appear like a racist, why don't you just move to, say, Saudi Arabia, Iran or Pakistan?
It, shocker, almost seems as if certain journalists / newspapers have a political agenda of their own...
For the record: I most obviously agree with what Wilders said. Our Judeo-Christian culture is better than contemporary Islamic culture. For one, we do not blow up those who might disagree with us, we, indeed, do not hang homosexuals from cranes, we consider man and woman to be equals (thus women are not forced to wear a burqa because they have to hide their looks), the list goes on and on.
If I would not believe that our culture is better, I would instantly move abroad to one of the countries mentioned above.
Cross posted at Liberty and Justice.
What Colour is Your Fallout Shelter?
Here is some interesting speculation concerning the nuclear threat from Stanley Kurtz:
Once Iran gets the bomb, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are likely to develop their own nuclear weapons, for self-protection, and so as not to allow Iran to take de facto cultural-political control of the Muslim world. ... With three, four, or more nuclear states in the Muslim Middle East, what becomes of deterrence?Source.
A key to deterrence during the Cold War was our ability to know who had hit whom. With a small number of geographically separated nuclear states, and with the big opponents training satellites and specialized advance-guard radar emplacements on each other, it was relatively easy to know where a missile had come from. But what if a nuclear missile is launched at the United States from somewhere in a fully nuclearized Middle East, in the middle of a war in which, say, Saudi Arabia and Iran are already lobbing conventional missiles at one another? Would we know who had attacked us? Could we actually drop a retaliatory nuclear bomb on someone without being absolutely certain? .... It might be almost impossible to trace the attack back to its source with certainty, especially in the midst of an ongoing conventional conflict.
.... With several Muslim countries in possession of the bomb, it would be extremely difficult to trace the state source of a nuclear terror strike. In fact, this very difficulty would encourage states (or ill-controlled elements within nuclear states — like Pakistan’s intelligence services or Iran’s Revolutionary Guards) to pass nukes to terrorists. The tougher it is to trace the source of a weapon, the easier it is to give the weapon away. In short, nuclear proliferation to multiple Muslim states greatly increases the chances of a nuclear terror strike.
In the 1950s and early 1960s, worrying about nuclear war was quite common. Students were shown films in school of what to do in the case of a nuclear strike, and practiced nuclear attack drills. Thinking and talking about installing a fallout shelter was not seen as extreme in much of North America.
Then came detente, and fears of nuclear war subsided significantly. After detente, it seemed that only extreme survivalists were still talking seriously about nuclear fallout and survival shelters.
That was then, this is now. Although those who are aware of the Iranian and North Korean threats may be thinking about buying a fallout shelter, now they are being joined by extreme leftists and mainstream american democrats in the anti-Bush camp. They may use different logic, but they arrive at the same point--web-surfing fallout shelters out of sheer panic.
You say you are a moonbat leftist? No problem. Global warming and peak oil are sure to destroy the world economy, triggering wars of survival that will certainly escalate to nuclear exchanges. You had better get your fallout shelter. You say you are an anti-Bush democrat? Better yet. You know that Bush ordered the strike on the WTC towers in NYC, but that only got him so far. Now he needs something more potent. What better than a nuclear strike on a large city in a predominantly Democratic Party controlled area? We take cash or credit cards. But, you say, you are really a right wingnut? Excellent! The muslim fanatics will not rest until you are forced into converting to Islam, taken into slavery, or killed. If you refuse, they will simply nuke your cities until you are all dead. Order now.
Here is one place to get your shelter, conveniently named bomb-shelter.net. Here is another site for more information. This site provides information about a large group shelter within easy driving distance of Toronto. Here is Wikipedia's Fallout Shelter page. Here is yet another information packed source for those in a hurry.
What cities are likely to be hit? New York City, Washington D.C., and Los Angeles are almost certain to be targets eventually. But be your own prognosticator. Looking at the world through your own ideological eyes, what cities do you think might be targeted the soonest? Think of it as not if, but when.
One thing is very likely. If there is a nuclear attack by muslim extremists, it is likely to be an attempt on several cities simultaneously. That means that it will be no small disaster like Hurricane Katrina. Any local city or state governments that are as incompetent as the Nagin and Blanco teams will be out of luck. With federal resources urgently demanded by several sites simultaneously--all with at least tens of thousands of casualties--there will be no world wide media obsession with one crime-ridden waterlogged city. Each city and country in the entire world will instead be worried about its own posterior if it ever comes to that point.
Revised from an earlier Al Fin posting.
Storm Track Intimidation: Mum's the Word, Lest We Provoke a Lethal Tantrum
“If you mock Islam with a drawing or a novel, you get riots and dead people. News of mishandled holy books yields riots and dead people. Insufficiently reverent short films by a Dutchman yields a dead person, specifically the Dutchman. Now we add this detail: Quoting medieval religious colloquies is a reasonable justification for burning churches, shooting a nun and holding up signs demanding that the pope convert to Islam or saw off his own head. (There have been reports of carpal tunnel syndrome among radical Islam's enforcers, and they have requested we all help out.) This is a new twist: Now history itself cannot be discussed. Since it's difficult to predict what else will enflame the devout, Islam has to be treated with unusual deference, like a 3-year-old child with anger management problems. But it's not what we say that truly offends. It's what we are. The West's lack of interest in joining the Ummah is an affront in itself, and we broadcast our sins in High Infidelity. If you believed that the West's apostasy was an affront to God, you'd spend your leisure hours torching straw popes too. Progressives at home and abroad seem oddly unconcerned. "Islamophobia," after all, is just a product of the BushCo junta's relentless fearmongering, and Benedict is the Nazi pope who personally swipes the condoms from people's bedroom drawers. But it's an inconvenient truth, to coin a phrase, when the ranters show up with vibrating uvulas demanding the pope's assassination. (Would they be satisfied with a docudrama version? It would go over big at Cannes.)”
Read it all. Read it again. This is what passes for moral equivalency.
Pass it around.
Winds of War: He Gets It! Fighting a War We Can’t Win
Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Wednesday that terrorist havens outside Afghanistan "must be destroyed" in order to halt what he called a "murderous campaign" against the Afghan people waged by infiltrators from abroad.
What Mr. Krazai is saying in not so clear words is that we are fighting an asynchronous war in Afghanistan (and also in Iraq), and he’s losing it.
“In his address to the U.N. General Assembly, Karzai did not specify who was to blame for the recent spate of attacks that have targeted schools, clinics, aid workers and international peacekeepers. But he noted that most of the attacks took place in southern Afghanistan — where it borders with Pakistan's tribal areas. "Terrorism does not emanate from within Afghanistan; Afghanistan is its worst victim," Karzai said. "Military action in Afghanistan alone, therefore, will not deliver our shared goal of eliminating terrorism.
We’re making the same mistakes we made in Vietnam and allowing the enemy to have sanctuaries that we are not allowed to touch. In September of this year, Bush said he uses lessons from Vietnam War in his leadership of Iraq war. "I remember the tactical decisions being made out of the White House during that period of time," Bush told conservative columnists. "I thought it was a mistake then and I think it's a mistake now." Whatever lessons he learned, they were the wrong lessons.
But Krazai finally gets it.
"We must look beyond Afghanistan to the sources of terrorism. We must destroy terrorist sanctuaries beyond Afghanistan, dismantle the elaborate networks in the region that recruit, train, finance, arm and deploy terrorists," he said.
We must allow the military to fight within the designated theater of war and prohibit the enemy from using sanctuaries where they can command and control safely and strike from these safe havens.
But the theater of battle is not just on the battlefield. It’s in the non-Muslim countries like our own; in our cities and neighborhoods. We sit quietly while local radical mosques are used as command and control, propaganda, and recruitment centers basking in the freedom of the asynchronous war and the support of the apologists and appeasers on the Left.
It’s time we recognize the asynchronous nature of this war and how the Islamists are using it to their advantage. If we are to win this war, we need to move the politicians out of the way and let the military fight in the entire theater of war.
Nuclear Attack Planned For Ramadan?
Today, Allah at Hot Air reports that Hamid Mir was interviewed on the nationally-syndicated American talk radio program The Glenn Beck Show. Here are some of the details:
If you haven’t followed the unfolding Al Qaeda WMD storyline, start with this post from May and these two from the past week. The audio picks up with Mir talking about his recent meeting in Afghanistan with AQ capo Abu Dawood. It ends with him alleging a closer relationship between Al Qaeda and Iran than most counterterror experts believe.
I could only get away with a six-minute clip. For a summary of the whole interview, read Vinnie’s post at My Pet Jawa.
Click here and scroll down to hear the interview over at Hot Air.
Ahmadinejad In Wonderland
John Reid In Londonistan
I think John Reid handles himself very well here, never allowing anger to intercede, never allowing reason to be impeded, he replies, "My friend, there is no part of this country which any of us are excluded from."
Of course, the Islamists would beg to differ, and that is why it is important that everyone view this clip.
Get ready for court fights over house & senate seats, be very ready
Senate Democrats plan probes into Iraq war
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Accusing Republicans of failing to adequately monitor the conduct of the war in Iraq, Senate Democrats on Wednesday announced their own series of hearings into what they called a failed policy.
"Three years into war, the American people still don't have a clear picture of what's gone wrong in Iraq -- or how to set it right," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
"We've been going backward for too long," he said.
Democrats said they had invited Republicans to attend the hearings, which will start in Washington on Monday and move across the country in October and November -- before and after the November 7 congressional elections in which control of both houses are at stake.
Reid and other top Democrats told a news conference the current Congress had conducted fewer oversight hearings than previous wartime Congresses. They said lawmakers held 152 days of hearings on the Korean War and 328 days on Vietnam.
Republicans countered that they had held dozens of hearings and briefings on Iraq and the full Senate had debated many aspects of the war.
U.S. public takes dim view of job Congress is doing
NEW YORK With less than seven weeks to go until the midterm elections, Americans have a distinctly negative view of the Republican-controlled Congress, with overwhelming majorities saying they disapprove of the job it is doing and that its members do not deserve re-election this fall, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. The alienation with Congress is as intense as it has been since 1994, when Republicans swept Democrats out of control after 40 years of dominance in the House. It signals the challenge the Republican Party faces in trying hold on to power in the face of a clear surge of anti-incumbent sentiment. Two-thirds of respondents said Congress had done less than it typically does during a congressional session. A majority said they could not name a single major accomplishment of this Congress. Just 25 percent of respondents said they approved of the way Congress was doing its job. The Times/CBS News poll found that President George W. Bush did not improve his own or his party's standing through his intense campaign of speeches and events marking the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.
Excuse me, idiot repubs, but do you yet wish you had tackled a secure border already? Define torture, or what is considered "inhumane" without fear and with common sense? Immigration reform? ....you're a waste of space and the only thing saving you from a tsunami-esque landslide is the democrats
But there's more on the seats in play
A Diabollockal Conversation11:43:00 am permanent link# 1 Comments
Christopher Hitchens Almost Gets It
Last Monday, the 18th, I caught the last few minutes of a Claremont Institute forum “Five Years After September 11,” as part of their Constitution Day events, which was shown on CSPAN. The panel was made up of: Mark Helprin, Christopher Hitchens, William Kristol, Brian T. Kennedy. The end was very interesting in itself. Hitchens, in reply to a question I can’t remember, stated the same thesis, in a somewhat different form, he ended his column also from last Monday titled “Papal Bull” on the Popes speech that has yet again stirred up the death worshippers. Hitchens made the point that one does not fight one form of unreason with another, in this case, Christianity. As he concluded his Monday column that is posted at Slate:
He pretends that the word Logos can mean either "the word" or "reason," which it can in Greek but never does in the Bible, where it is presented as heavenly truth. He mentions Kant and Descartes in passing, leaves out Spinoza and Hume entirely, and dishonestly tries to make it seem as if religion and the Enlightenment and science are ultimately compatible, when the whole effort of free inquiry always had to be asserted, at great risk, against the fantastic illusion of "revealed" truth and its all-too-earthly human potentates.
One of the few bloggers to comment on the deeper philosophic meaning of the Pope’s address is Gus Van Horn. Van Horn notes that the main point of the Pope’s message was about the danger of secularism. Of course, what else is the Pope going to say but that faith and reason are comparable? Since Thomas Aquinas that has been the Church’s position. Catholic World News has made the Pope’s entire speech available.
Back to Hitchens’ latest for another moment. Hitchens, in the panel discussion, frames the issue not just as reason versus unreason but also as religion versus secularism. There is a serious problem with the latter dichotomy. The problem is that there are many Christians who are far more rational that many in the secular Left. When it comes to undermining reason the Catholic Church is a piker compared to Post Modern nihilists. An impressionable nineteen-year-old after hearing his professor “prove” that certainty is impossible and that truth and values are all relative may start to think, “if this is reason, then to hell with it.” (Quote from Ayn Rand in a slightly different context) It is the modern skeptics and sophists who have done the most to undermine reason in the last several decades.
The Post Modern types had the ground prepared for them by the Marxists. Marxism is a secular cult that undermines reason by masquerading as a scientific social theory. The hard Left has degenerated to the point by obtaining an informal “Unholy Alliance” with the arch-enemies of reason and freedom. Follow the link and read the quote of George Galloway. The irrational left has the same goals and enemies that it did prior to 1989. There goal was described by Orwell in 1984 by Big Brother spokesman O’Brien:
Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?...If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever.
And the thing is this, many of the secular left, including environmentalists, do not care who is wearing the boot.
The Pope seems to believe that a stable compromise between reason and unreason is possible. All one has to do is look at the descent of the secular left into militant irrationality to see that this is not possible:
When a tradition which began as an alleged expression of “pure reason” and stern morality ends up fooling with LSD, “Saint Genet,” and “polymorphous perverse sexuality,” its breach with cognition and with values is complete. The growing disillusionment of the early postwar years marked the beginning of the Kantian end. The convulsion of the sixties was the next step: the declaration of bankruptcy. (Leonard Peikoff, The Ominous Parallels, p. 309)
In this case both the “soft” relativist and “hard” subjectivist wings of the left are either running interference for or ignoring Jihad. For their part Moslem Jihad is pure mysticism straight from the Middle Ages with its complement of hatred for reason and all that reason makes possible.
The Pope for his part would render to mysticism the whole area of values:
We shall return to this problem later. In the meantime, it must be observed that from this standpoint any attempt to maintain theology’s claim to be “scientific” would end up reducing Christianity to a mere fragment of its former self. But we must say more: it is man himself who ends up being reduced, for the specifically human questions about our origin and destiny, the questions raised by religion and ethics, then have no place within the purview of collective reason as defined by “science” and must thus be relegated to the realm of the subjective. The subject then decides, on the basis of his experiences, what he considers tenable in matters of religion, and the subjective “conscience” becomes the sole arbiter of what is ethical. In this way, though, ethics and religion lose their power to create a community and become a completely personal matter.
This is a dangerous state of affairs for humanity, as we see from the disturbing pathologies of religion and reason which necessarily erupt when reason is so reduced that questions of religion and ethics no longer concern it. Attempts to construct an ethic from the rules of evolution or from psychology and sociology, end up being simply inadequate.
Read this passage carefully, a little later in his talk the Pope states that philosophy is the handmaiden of theology. It is the modern secularists who have made it so. All the Pope has to do is point to the fact the modern philosophy has consigned ethics to the realm of the subjective and then declares the New Testament as “the imprint of the Greek spirit.” It is not. But, who in positions of leadership or public prominence even understand much less emulates the “Greek spirit?”
Crossposted at The Dougout
The Janus Face of Islam
At first sight, his hair and neatly trimmed short beard hint at professional styling at an expensive men’s hair salon in London. His sports jacket could have come off the rack on Saville Row, and his open collar shirt might be a pricier Izod. In the background are well-stocked bookshelves, and they, together with his benign demeanor, suggest the career of perhaps an assistant director of the Royal Shakespeare Festival, or a market analyst, or a symphony conductor. There is a certain rugged air in his manner; one might guess that perhaps he participates, in his free time, as a fully kitted Cavalier or Roundhead during reenactments of battles of the English Civil War of the 1640’s.
This is Dr. Muhammad Abdul Bari, 52, the new secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain and chairman of the East London mosque. He has a Ph.D. in physics from King’s College London (according to the Daily Telegraph; the BBC News profile, however, claims he is a behavioral specialist with a PH.D. from the same school), and a management degree from the Open University. Before earning those he trained as an engineer in the Bangladeshi air force.
He was born in Bangladesh and emigrated to Britain in 1979. He is the author of several books, among them Race, Religion and Muslim Identity in Britain, Building Muslim Families, and The Greatest Gift: A Guide to Parenting. He was awarded an MBE (Member of the British Empire) in 2003. He is active in various other Muslim civic councils and groups, and was president of the Islam Forum Europe. According to BBC News, he is also on the organizing committee for the 2012 London Olympic Games.
He is influential in British “social” politics, getting phone calls from Downing Street, politicians, and other quarters on Muslim matters. He is credited with helping multiculturalist, anti-British George Galloway win a seat in Parliament by urging East End Muslims to vote. “We want to help fight hooliganism,” he told the Sunday Telegraph, “drugs and broken families; we want the British to become better neighbors. Muslims can give and teach Britain so much: looking after the elderly, enduring marriages, respect, strong faith, no alcohol.”
And no short skirts, premarital sex and cohabitation, either. He echoes the moral agenda of the staunchest Christian Republicans in the U.S. Bari is ostensively patriotic. When British football teams play, he and his family “always fly the flag.”
All in all, Bari appears to be the elusive “moderate” Muslim sought by those who believe that Western civilization and Islam can coexist peacefully.
“I joined the air force because I was good at school,” he said during a Daily Telegraph interview (June 6, 2006) shortly after his election to the Muslim Council. “A few years after my training in Britain, I realized I was a better academic than a pilot. I got a scholarship to do a Ph.D. in physics at King’s College London. I taught in Haringey – that was tough. But I liked it here: the cool weather, the easy nature of the British. This is my home.”
A droll enough observation.
“Our religion teaches us to be good neighbors and friends. Any group or religion has one or two people who are bad. But now we are all seen as the enemy.” And on September 9 he told the Sunday Telegraph, “There are a few bad apples in the Muslim community who are doing terrible acts and we want to root them out. We want to isolate the bad people and put them in the dock. But we all have to work together to do that.”
“Work together.” Also an innocuous observation, except that it imputes a separatist premise that puts Muslims at odds with the rest of Britain. But, separatism is not on Bari’s mind. As the Muslim Council’s new secretary-general, he will maintain that organization’s opposition to racial and religious profiling at airports and the government’s anti-terrorist legislation, and continue its call for a law that would ban incitement to religious hatred. (Which, in practice, would mean a law that muzzles critics of Islam, whose words might cause Muslims to express their hatred in demonstrations and violence. Muslims, of course, could continue to excoriate non-believers with impunity, as they do now, all over the world.)
“His aim,” reports the Daily Telegraph interview, “will be to encourage Britain to adopt more Muslim ways, as well as to encourage Muslims to be good British citizens. He thinks that non-Muslim Britons would benefit from having arranged marriages and espousing stronger family values; they would also do well to stop drinking and gambling and to follow many of the teachings of Islam.”
And become half-caste Muslims? What a scheme for incremental submission to Islam and Sharia law! The grinning mask of Janus is beginning to come into focus.
What bothers Bari most is what he calls the “demonization” of Muslims in Britain. He told the Telegraph that he sensed a mood of “anxiety, frustration and, especially among young people, anger.” “The young are the dynamic section of society and there are many issues facing young Muslims – including alienation, deprivation, frustration, and, in a small section, there is extremism,” he told the BBC.
One would like to pose this question to Dr. Bari: If Muslims have caused such a magnitude of death and carnage over the last five years, sanctioned by the Koran in a declared war against Western civilization, wouldn’t it be logical to “demonize” Muslims? When Nazi Germany blitzed Britain in WWII, wasn’t it logical for Britons to “demonize” Nazis?
“He did not understand why ‘the whole of our diverse [Muslim] community’ was being targeted,” reports the Sunday Telegraph. Bari said, “When the IRA was blowing people up, the entire Catholic population of Britain was not demonized, so why is it happening to the Muslim community?”
Such a diverting, fatuous query deserves a retort. The entire Catholic population of Britain was not demonized because the IRA had no totalitarian agenda, nor had the Catholic Church in Britain. The IRA was waging terrorism – on military music schools, on the Household Cavalry on parade, on commuter trains, on Protestants and Catholics alike, in Ireland and in Britain – in order to end British rule in Northern Ireland. I am certain that Dr. Bari knows this, but has counted on no one else making the distinction between the separatist aims of the IRA and the one-way assimilation agenda of British Islam.
Bari blames the news media and the police for “contributing to the rise of Islamophobia.” If Islamophobia is on the rise, can anyone not a Muslim be blamed, especially if the murders and carnage are committed in the name of Islam?
The partnering tragic mask of Janus now pops into view. “If that demonization continues,” Bari told the Sunday Telegraph, “then Britain will have to deal with two million Muslims terrorists – 700,000 of them in London. If you attack a whole community, it becomes despondent and aggressive.”
Come again? Who is attacking whom? Who is being aggressive? In the name of what creed? Is that a threat? Or a promise?
Of course, Bari had something to say about Pope Benedict XVI’s recent citation from a medieval text about the nature of Islam, in which a 14th century Byzantine emperor asked a Persian Muslim: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
The September 16 edition of the Daily Telegraph reports Bari saying, “the Pope was regurgitating the words of a bigot.”
“One would expect [the Pope] to repudiate the Byzantine emperor’s views in the interests of truth and harmonious relations between Islam and Catholicism,” he said.
No evidence of dissemblance there.
Well, there you have it. Both masks of Janus. There are no reports of what “moderate” Dr. Bari has to say about the violent demonstrations, death threats and promises of retribution against Benedict and Catholics in general by all those “alienated, frustrated, and angry” Muslims in Britain and abroad. All of which serve to second Emperor Manuel II Paleologus’s “bigoted” motion that Islam is not so much despondent as aggressive. Bari’s silence is deafening.
Never mind what the behind-the-scenes managers and stagers of all those “spontaneous” demonstrations around the globe say or think (the ones who apparently have stockrooms full of infidel national flags ready to burn, and prepared placards and banners in English ready to hoist and wave for the cameras). It would be interesting to hear how “moderate” Dr. Bari would suavely answer these questions: Why is Islam so bothered by an infidel telling the truth? Does not Mohammad advocate spreading Islam by the sword? Or is it Benedict’s (or Paleologus’s) characterization of Islam’s means and ends as “evil” and “inhuman” that has riled all those “good neighbors and friends”?
Do Muslims protesteth too much?
To iterate: While the Koran repeatedly urges the faithful to kill infidels who do not submit, Muslims are feigning indignation, claiming that the Pope’s indirect identification of that fact is an insult worthy of murder, the destruction of Catholic churches, and a special jihad against Christians.
No killer likes being labeled a killer. Misunderstood, perhaps. Frustrated. Angry, or oppressed, or deprived, or a victim of imagined persecution, or despondent, or temporarily insane. But never a killer, even if he confesses to killing.
It would be difficult to find a more perfect instance of why Islam is closed to reason, and why it cannot be open to civilized “dialogue,” something Pope Benedict’s statement was intended to initiate. Every inconsistency or contradiction in Islam, if revealed by a non-believer, would be rebuffed by Muslims, as well as any truth – such as the ongoing jihadist infidelicide – that conflicted with Islam’s posturing as a “peaceful” creed ready to coexist with other creeds.
Dr. Bari doubtless would deny that “radical Islam” is a redundancy, but he would agree with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who during an ABC interview on September 19th, asserted that Islamic fundamentalist “extremism” is “the perversion of a great religion.” And, he was probably heartened by President Bush’s remark, during his address to the U.N. the same day, that the U.S. “is not at war with Islam.”
Pardon me, Mr. President, but, yes, it is. At least it is with Islamic totalitarianism. And Dr. Bari is one of numerous soft-soapers who can help make that horror possible. One must wonder how many of his disingenuous ilk are active in the U.S.
Crossposted at The Dougout