Wait a minute. An Iranian “martyr” in Bosnia? But…but…for years we were told that all the Bosnian Muslims were moderates who loved America and just wanted self-determination! How did an “Islamic martyr” get in there? “‘Documentary film about the Life of the First Iranian Martyr in Bosnia,’” by Julia Gorin at Republican Riot, December 18:
But Bosnia wasn’t a jihad, right? And all those charges of ‘mujahedin’ presence were just vicious serbianationalist propaganda, right? Right?
In fact, Bosnia and Kosovo weren’t jihads only in the eyes of the West. The Muslim world — including former Pakistan president Musharraf in his book — knows better.
As Liz, who sent me this, wrote:
Everyone shed a tear for this dear, sweet Iranian who “went to Bosnia as ‘diplomat of Iran’, but was ‘martyred’ by those ‘racist Serbians.’” read more…
It is testimony to the effectiveness of my colleague Pamela Geller, in raising awareness of the issues surrounding the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero and Islamic supremacism in general, that the mainstream media is gunning for her with relentless fury. The cartoon above is apt, and applies to Jeffrey Goldberg’s vicious and ignorant attacks upon her in The Atlantic. Even though this present piece isn’t an interview, the principle is the same: a full-out campaign is on to discredit her, and the truth be damned in the process. read more…
Earlier today a reporter contacted me to remonstrate with me for my treatment of the reporter in this video. However, I am finished with playing along with the grand pretense that reporters are objective, neutral observers of events, and not the relentless and viciously unfair ideologues that they are. This story, a minor AP piece about some minor jihadists in Toledo, Ohio, is a case in point as to why they deserve no professional respect whatsoever.
Look first at the headline: two “terror plotters” were sentenced. So far they could be anyone. Islamic jihadists? Maybe? Could also be “Christian extremists” (who will surely be along in a minute to bear out every Bronx schoolgirl’s desperate and paranoid fear of them). Or maybe Tamil Tigers. Maoist fanatics. You never know. So let’s read on. read more…
A Christian girl kidnapped in Egypt tells her story. The Arabic-language Free Christian Voice (Sawt al-Masihi al-Hurr) carried this report, entitled “After her return, the young girl of the village of Fanus narrates the details behind the conspiracy to bully her family out of the village,” on June 17. It was translated exclusively for Jihad Watch by Raymond Ibrahim.
The young girl of the village of Fanus exposes the details of the conspiracy prepared for her:“As I was returning back to the house, they came upon me and put something on my mouth and stripped off the gold I was wearing. I fell unconscious — until I found myself on one of the streets of al-Minya [i.e., outside of the village], totally oblivious of what had happened.”
“The village elder gave my kidnapper money.”
“The village elder said to me: ‘We think you are too good for the Christian religion… Become Muslim and I will marry you, and sign over to you all my money and property, and provide you with an excellent life.’”
“The village elder entered our homes and beat us all…and he had people from his extended family of al-Dirabsa who came to the house with a drum in order to carry me in the streets in a wedding procession, saying: ‘Look at the Christian who became a Muslim!’”
“I wish the village elder were judged and jailed, for he tormented us and forced us — he and those who followed him — out of our village. And the government is standing by his side, abandoning us.”
Interview by Girgis Bashari — exclusive to The Copts United read more…
Like a punch-drunk fighter dragging himself up off the canvas after yet another knockdown, Adam Serwer, Leftist blogger for the American Prospect, is back for more after this — and once again provides a useful illustration of how the Left and their Islamic supremacist allies argue, or rather, evade argument. True to form for the Left, all Serwer has to dish out here is a repulsive stew of lies, smears, and juvenile twittery. Once again a Leftist jihad enabler fails abysmally to compete on the level of the evidence. “Spencer’s (Still) Tenuous Evidence,” by Adam Serwer in the American Prospect, June 14 (thanks to James):
Robert Spencer, the professional anti-Muslim activist who has been working to oppose the construction of an Islamic center near Ground Zero and a Mosque in Staten Island, takes issue with several of the claims I made in my post last week.
The term “anti-Muslim” is used to imply that I am “against” a group of people, personally, rather than against a supremacist and oppressive ideology. But in fact, oppression is oppression, no matter who is oppressed, or how much they love that oppression. I don’t subscribe to Wilsonian pipe dreams of bringing democracy to the benighted masses, and in reality there is little one can or should do for the oppressed if they do indeed love their oppression and wish to remain under its boot, but the fact remains that I am not “anti-Muslim.” Some years ago here at Jihad Watch I had an exchange with an English convert to Islam. I said: “I would like nothing better than a flowering, a renaissance, in the Muslim world, including full equality of rights for women and non-Muslims in Islamic societies: freedom of conscience, equality in laws regarding legal testimony, equal employment opportunities, etc.” Is all that “anti-Muslim”? My correspondent thought so. He responded: “So, you would like to see us ditch much of our religion and, thereby, become non-Muslims.” read more…
The New Yorker carried last week an attack on freedom fighter Ayaan Hirsi Ali that borders on the obscene in its extenuation of evil and denigration of those fighting against it. “Islamismism: How should Western intellectuals respond to Muslim scholars?,” by Pankaj Mishra in the New Yorker, June 7 (thanks to Jules):
Was the prophet Muhammad a pervert and a tyrant? Does Islam promote terrorism and enslave women? Does Islam oblige its followers to wage jihad on Westerners whose roots lie in the secular Enlightenment? Should Muslims consider converting to Christianity? For the Somali-born writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the answer to all these questions is a resounding “Yes!” Hirsi Ali, who renounced Islam in her thirties, speaks from experience of bigotry and intolerance among her former co-religionists: she was genitally mutilated as a child in Somalia, briefly radicalized by a preacher of jihad in Kenya, nearly forced into a marriage, threatened with death in the Netherlands by the Muslim assassin of her collaborator, the filmmaker Theo van Gogh, and is still hounded by murderous fanatics in her new home, America….
There is a great deal wrong with this right at the outset. Pankaj Mishra is suggesting that Ayaan Hirsi Ali believes “Muhammad was a pervert and a tyrant,” and that Islam promotes terrorism and enslaves women, and all the rest of the charges above, because she experienced “bigotry and intolerance among her former co-religionists,” was “genitally mutilated as a child in Somalia,” was “briefly radicalized,” and so on. In other words, if she hadn’t had such terrible personal experiences with Islam, she wouldn’t regard it with such a gimlet eye today.
But actually, the question of whether or not Muhammad was a pervert and a tyrant has nothing whatsoever to do with Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s experiences, whatever they may have been. The question of whether Muhammad was this or that can only be answered by consulting the most trustworthy sources about Muhammad — although one will get two different answers depending on whether one is searching for what Muhammad actually said and did, or for what Muslims believe he said and did, as they are not the same thing. Even the question of whether Islam enslaves women cannot be answered by Hirsi Ali’s personal experience, as illuminating as it may be of the condition of women in Islam; it has to be answered by reference to Islamic texts and teachings about women, and by a look at how those texts and teachings are put into practice in various parts of the Islamic world. read more…
Usually the two sides of the great political divide in the United States talk past each other, or ignore each other altogether. The list of the Leftist and Muslim academics and apologists who have refused my challenge to debate is very long; they know they can’t refute what I say on the basis of evidence, so they resort to broad-based smears and personal attacks — and haughty refusals to debate.
And on those rare occasions when the opposition does offer a substantive response, it’s tissue-paper thin. A friend recently told me that he posted a lengthy rebuttal to a pseudo-scholarly presentation purporting to prove false something I said about the meaning of an Arabic word (my friend is a native Arabic speaker); his comment was summarily deleted. And the piece at hand is no better: in it, the author pretends that I have far less evidence to support my case than I actually have, and hopes that his readers won’t notice.
They probably won’t, if they are usual run of knee-jerk, uncritical Leftists. But I did. And now you will. read more…
NEW YORK, June 10 — Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) has obtained a statement from Joseph Nassralla, the Egyptian Christian activist at the center of a widely-publicized incident during the SIOA freedom rally against the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, on June 6.
Instead of reporting on the nearly 10,000 who came out to stand for American values and against the 13-story mega-mosque slated to be built overlooking Ground Zero, the media (led by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann) focused on a misunderstanding that took place between a few attendees and two Coptic Christians from a California-based Coptic television station, The Way TV.
They did this in order to portray the rally, and any opposition to the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, as racist. But today, Joseph Nassralla, one of those two Copts, who traveled nine hours to attend the rally against the mega-mosque, sent this statement to SIOA executive director Pamela Geller and associate director Robert Spencer:
Dear Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer,
I am Joseph Nassralla, a Coptic Christian activist from Egypt and founder of The Way TV, a Christian Satellite TV station.
I attended the 10,000 person protest rally against the building to the ground zero mosque which took place at ground zero in NY on Sunday June 6th. We Coptic Christians wanted to express our full support to your initiative and to this important rally.
There was a minor incident at the rally that was blown out of proportion, when my partner, Mr. Karam El Masry, and I were distributing material with some Quran verses and we were also speaking Arabic thus we were mistaken by a few people in the huge crown, for being Muslims infiltrators trying to disrupt the event. This misunderstanding was clarified when we explained who we were and that we are there to support the crowd against the building of the mosque. I was a little frustrated initially for being identified as a Muslim infiltrator, but was glad that the issue was resolved later. My partner, Mr. El Masry, was even able to freely speak to the crowd after our identity was clarified. He explained how Christians are tortured, killed and oppressed in Egypt at the hands of Muslims who are encouraged to persecute Christians from the pulpit of mosques by Muslim preachers.
The reason I am writing to you, is because I am very disappointed in the mainstream media who used this minor incident to make a blanket generalization about all the attendees of the rally as Muslim haters.This kind of generalization was unfair to the good American people who legitimately stand against the building of a mosque next to ground zero and who are against Islamist agenda in the US. I am very well aware of such an agenda which has destroyed the Christian and Jewish existence in the Middle East.
The same mainstream media who denounces painting all Muslims with a broad brush, is doing the same thing they claim to stand against. They shamelessly use our incident to paint with a broad brush that everyone in the rally was a Muslim hater. I want to make it clear that we are not haters of Muslims, but we are against the Islamist agenda in America, the same agenda that drove us out of our homeland Egypt. We have the right to expose Muslim hate and oppression against us, the minorities in the Middle East who are oppressed on a daily basis by the Muslim majority. This mosque should never be built next to ground zero, it is an insult to the memory of the 3000 fellow Americans.
We did not mean to cause any misunderstanding at the rally, on the contrary, we came to support you and your organization. We come from a Muslim country where we suffered from Muslims and the Islamic Shariaa ourselves. That’s why we felt burdened to attend this rally and flew for 9 hours to be part of it.. We do support you with our heart and soul, and will always support you and everyone who is opposing Islam. We do honor Mr. Robert’s invitation to attend your next rally in September, God’s willing, and are looking forward to seeing you there.
We have come to America to seek refuge from the oppression of Islam and expose to the American public what kind of instigation we suffered at the hands of hateful Muslim preachers who incite the worshiping crowds to burn our homes, kidnap our girls and suppress our freedom to practice our religion. We will never allow media misrepresentation to stop us from our mission.
SIOA is one of America’s foremost organizations defending human rights, religious liberty, and the freedom of speech against Islamic supremacist intimidation and attempts to bring elements of Sharia to the United States.
Join SIOA’s Facebook page here.
For more information, contact Pamela Geller at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Gee, I wonder why? The full article (not reproduced below) hastens to assure us that Buddhists in Cambodia and Christians in Uganda do this sort of thing too, but that doesn’t account for the rise in such attacks in Britain. Buddhists aren’t streaming into the U.K. from Cambodia, or Christians from Uganda, are they? The best hint comes in this sentence: “The Taliban and fellow extremists have frequently resorted to throwing acid in women’s faces for even small transgressions.”
Of course, no Islamic law sanctions the disfiguring of those who besmirch the family honor. But with honor killing broadly tolerated — its perpetrators given light sentences at best in countries such as Jordan and Syria — this kind of thing is going to happen.
Why draw Muhammad? Why make fun of the man Muslims revere most? Why arouse their ire?
Precisely because they react with murderous rage when one does this.
Now that may seem odd — why would anyone want to provoke someone else’s murderous rage?
Because it is an object lesson in pluralism. Either we put up with being offended by one another, or we enact speech codes that establish one group as beyond criticism. The latter road is the path to authoritarianism and tyranny. To respond to speech one considers offensive without threats and murder is a cardinal element of a society that respects all its citizens enough to allow them a voice in the public square, no matter how despised and hated their opinions may be. So free speech is a key element of any society in which all people are equal before the law. read more…