DOUGLAS MURRAY: Warning to the US: Don’t Play by Islamic Rules

This is a truly excellent piece of work by a man who I grow more and more to admire as one of the great intellectuals of the day. Douglas Murray appeared with Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the IQ2 debate, ‘Is Islam a religion of peace’ and was excellent. But this piece is superb. If you read nothing else today, read this. Thank you Fred for sending it to me. This is nectar for a thirsty mind.

From Standpoint Mag

By Douglas Murray

What was your first reaction back in May when you heard of plans to build a mega-mosque near the site of the Twin Towers in New York? Did you assume it was a tasteless joke? Did your jaw drop? Or did you think: “What a good idea. No better place.”

My bet would be that most readers (including self-described liberal readers) had a touch more of the former reaction than the latter. Some people even said so at the time. A number of families of 9/11 victims spoke out against the building and for a few weeks the idea of a 13-storey mosque complex beside the World Trade Centre craters, due to cost £68 million yet with no known financial backer, seemed a dead duck.

So how was it that within a few months many of those same people, most notably the most loudly self-declared liberals, were not merely advocating the building of that same mosque but in many cases seemed eager to build it themselves, finally depicting its construction as the sine qua non of America’s survival? The distance between first and second instincts is always illuminating. But this one turns out to be more than usually so. Public debates in America tend to happen rougher, faster and more ferociously than they do in most of Europe. And so it was that a heated debate over one hot summer transformed a planning dispute into something far larger and more significant.

Daisy Khan: Wife of the Imam of the proposed Ground Zero mosque has claimed to be a victim

It was at the beginning of August that the Mayor of New York City Michael Bloomberg stood with the Statue of Liberty in the background to make a major announcement. The planning regulations surrounding the former Burlington Coat Factory on 45-51 Park Place, had already met opposition at the community board advisory level. National polls suggested that a majority of Americans were opposed to the building of what was then called Cordoba House, a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. But Bloomberg thought differently. Surrounded by the requisite collective of religiously-attired figures, Bloomberg declared that restrictive planning laws of New York would not be allowed to stand in the way of the planned mosque. The debate was not about a planning application any longer. It was about something more, he declared. It was about America.

In his often teary-eyed speech, Bloomberg exercised the now decade-long tendency to believe that al-Qaeda meant whatever you want them to have meant when they destroyed the Twin Towers. Bloomberg declared: “Three thousand people were killed because some murderous fanatics didn’t want us to enjoy the freedom to profess our own faiths, to speak our own minds, to follow our own dreams and to live our own lives.” The issue, he said, was “as important  a test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetime”. And it wasn’t a test he intended to fail. Expressing his support for the construction of the mosque, he said: “The community centre and mosque will add to the life and vitality of the neighbourhood and the entire city.”

President Barack Obama appeared to enter the debate on Bloomberg’s side when he raised the matter at a Muslim iftar (post-fast) dinner at the White House. “This is America,” he confirmed indignantly. The next day, he changed tack in the face of a popular uproar, and claimed that he had not in fact made the statement he appeared to have made, but had instead carefully avoided making any statements about the wisdom of building anything anywhere.

Despite Obama’s phantom U-turn, by the end of the summer the liberal consensus appeared to be with Bloomberg. After further negative opinion polls, Bloomberg declared that those opposed to the mosque “ought to be ashamed of themselves”, adding: “To cave to popular sentiment would be to hand a victory to the terrorists.” Al-Qaeda had attacked the World Trade Centre and as a result it was now vital that America reply by building a mosque.

Other politicians were not as distrustful as Bloomberg was of popular sentiment. In mid-August, Newt Gingrich, the former House Speaker, said on air: “Nazis don’t have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust museum in Washington…We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbour.” Gingrich’s intervention allowed mainstream politicians respectfully to oppose the construction. But by then another element of the debate had emerged. It was one which points to perhaps the largest difference between the European and American debate on this issue. Continue Reading →

Robert Spencer speaks at rally to support the Copts.

This is a very important issue. Robert Spencer is an expert on sharia law, and his speech here deals with a number of very important issues. Pay close attention. H/T my man FOOMF

Show #2 US TV, Is Islam a religion of peace?

This one seems to be a great deal better than the recent ABC one that was aired last week. Despite the all star cast, it fell somewhat short of expectations. This one which was recorded today in New York, although I have not seen it all in its entirety yet, seems much better and to the point. it also features Ayaan Hirsi Ali for the ‘not’ side as well as Douglass Murray.

ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE from Intelligence Squared US on Vimeo.

More on the financing of the Victory Mosque

Investigating America From Big Peace

Dueling investigations are underway on the Ground Zero Mosque.  Mustering on the Offense, in opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque: hundreds of citizen researchers, reporters, lawyers,  authors, elected officials, and scholars who are researching Imam Rauf and his Muslim Brotherhood colleagues and their funding.   An Army of Davids.

And playing Defense as best they can, supporting the Imam and his rapidly collapsing Cordoba House of Cards: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Daily Kos, Glenn Greenwald at Salon, ThinkProgress, Vet Voice, and now Politico, all “investigating” the groups and individuals who oppose the Ground Zero Mosque.


mosque protest

Best-selling author Robert Spencer captured the Politico style perfectly at Jihadwatch on August 19:

Cost of New York bus ads: $10,000

Cost of press release: $1,500

Cost of watching the lapdog media track the sources of these sums while ignoring the questionable funding of a $100 million dollar mosque: Priceless.

I just got a call from Kenneth P. Vogel of Politico, asking me a series of questions about donations to our efforts against the Ground Zero mega-mosque, and growing increasingly hostile and belligerent when I declined to answer.  Vogel even said to me at one point, “Look, you can make this hard, or you can make this easy” — apparently he has been watching too many Law and order reruns. Continue Reading →

Excellent graphic for the Victory Mosque

I have been dicking around making funny signs for the proposed Victory mosque at Ground Zero New York. Meanwhile, the Baron over at Gates of Vienna has done the graphic that really matters.

I hope that this becomes the symbol for this mocking tower of triumph for Islamic terror those bastards want to built in the former coat factory. By the way, Robert Spencer did a very good rebuttal to Mayor Bloomberg’s absurd non-reasoning for allowing, nay advocating, this project.

Robert Spencer on the NYC Mosque near Ground Zero

I have refrained from saying anything about this mosque as I have a lot of questions I want answered before I weigh in on this issue. For example, how long has the property been available? What other offers where made on it? Why is two blocks from the former WTC sacred and if so, how many blocks around an attack site is sacred? Frankly its that attitude that is costing us the win. Its been 9 years now since 911 and there is still no new building in one of NYC’ most important and expensive areas. Had 2 newer better higher buildings been built right away, it would have been a giant middle finger to Islam and a testament to the American people. As it is, each day that goes by with no new building and a constant sense of the sacred and a victim mentality, the Muslims win. They take our stuff down, it stays down.

Yes I understand the symbolism of a Mosque arguably near the attack site, but frankly it might, not saying it is, but might be a stretch. Of course I am opposed to the building of any mosques given what takes place in them. They are a beach head or a toe hold disguised as religion. However the arguments against this one raise more questions than they answer. Why is it a Mosque can build a 13 story building in an area that has to cost a fortune, and why not a commercial venture, which strikes me as more likely.

Where did the money come from to build this thing?

In any Case, Robert Spencer is an expert on Islam and Koran/sharia law, and should not be ignored in terms of his opinions on this. So here it is:

Allen West video about to break 500,000 views.

This is a good news, bad news, post. Vimeo, has taken down all my videos, hopefully temporarily which have all the translated and subtitled versions of Allen West’s brilliant and inspired speech at Pam Geller and Robert Spencer’s sponsored event February 19th 2010.

However for one reason or another, the abridged version which I cut down to 10 minutes to stuff on to my youtube channel seems to have gone viral. So I repost it as a kind of celebration, not just because so many are watching it, but if you read the comments, you see a genuine mix of admiration and relief mostly from Americans who know that at last there may be someone they can support who has rational values.

CAIR scores. freedom of speech loses.

The Irony is sick. If anything CAIR said in this article was true, then they would not have felt the need to have these adds pulled. They would instead say, ‘Yes, there are some people who misinterpret Islam based on tribal rules and those people should have a place to go or call if such a threat is issued’. What are the chances of hearing that from CAIR?

No, they out and out lied about Islam while simultaneously proving the truth of these adds. If you want to even talk about leaving Islam, large, well funded and influential groups will stop you.

From The Miami Herald:

Miami-Dade Transit to remove `offensive’ Islamic bus ads

BY JAWEED KALEEM

jk*****@*********ld.com

Miami-Dade Transit is pulling advertisements from 10 buses that South Florida Muslims have said are offensive to Islam.

The ads, which went up Tuesday, said “Fatwa on your head? Is your community or family threatening you?” and directed Muslims to a website encouraging them to leave Islam.

Robert Spencer, associate director of New York-based Stop the Islamization of America, which purchased the ads for one-month as the first leg of a national campaign, said they were “offered in defense of religious liberty.”

But on Thursday, Miami-Dade Transit spokeswoman Karla Damian said that after reviewing the ads, the department decided they “may be offensive to Islam” and would remove them before the buses ran on Friday.

Damian said the ads were able to initially go up because Miami-Dade Transit has an outside company sell ad space and does not routinely review ads before they run.

The South Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations had critiqued the ads as promoting “bigotry” and making false statements about Islam.

“Islam guarantees freedom to and freedom from religion. . . . [We] reject as un-Islamic any extremist interpretation that sanctions the killing of any individual because she decided to `leave Islam,” said director Muhammed Malik.

The Miami Herald

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/04/16/1581903/miami-dade-transit-says-it-will.html#ixzz0lR67eaHv

Western Civilization on Trial: Why We Should Be Watching Geert Wilders

From The National Review

As the Geert Wilders case goes into pre-trial, National Review Online asked our experts: Is there any legitimate reason he’s in court? What are the implications of such a trial being held, nevermind its outcome?

BAT YE’OR
Geert Wilders is a hero for those countless Europeans who cherish a free and democratic Europe — a Europe proud of its Judeo-Christian and humanistic values, its civilization, and its achievements in the field of human rights. But this is not today’s Europe. In today’s Europe, synagogues, Jewish schools, clubs, and cemeteries need to be guarded — as if going to a Jewish school or praying in a synagogue were a crime punishable by death as in Nazi-occupied Europe. Intellectuals, scholars, and those who protest the creeping Eurabization of culture and society are threatened, boycotted by their colleagues, thrown out of their jobs, forced to leave their families and go into hiding, or obliged to live with bodyguards. Wilders has devoted his life to freeing Europe from Eurabia’s clutches. To this titanic struggle he has sacrificed the security of his life and the joys of family. Threatened by a desert whirlwind blowing hatred upon Europe from the south, spending days and nights shielded by bodyguards, persecuted and tormented by his feckless Eurabian opponents, Geert Wilders incarnates the free soul of an unbending Europe.

— Bat Ye’or is author, most recently, of Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis.

PAUL MARSHALL
The American media’s silence about the Geert Wilders trial is puzzling — the trial is explosive, much more so than most of America’s perennial “trials of the century.” Wilders, leader of the Freedom party, is arguably the Netherlands’s most popular politician, but for years he has had to live in safe houses, including on military bases. He now faces the possibility of imprisonment on charges of “group insult” and “incitement to hatred,” as defined by articles 137 (c) and (d) of the Dutch penal code, for his public speeches and op-eds criticizing Islam. Continue Reading →

Speeches from Rifka Barry Rally

A rally for Rifqa Bary held in Dorrian Commons Park in Columbus, Ohio, on November 16, 2009. Speakers included Pamela Geller, Simon Deng, Nonie Darwish, James Lafferty, Robert Spencer, and Jamal Jivanjee.

Some excellent speeches here by some people who the western world needs to pay a lot more attention to than they are. Simon Deng, Nonnie Darwish and others are amongst this illustrious group of speakers who deal with very important issues of apostasy in Islam and Islam and Western Civilization.

Personally I do not have an opinion on the Rifka Barry case, other than of course she has the absolute right to change her belief howsoever she likes and should be safe from the state, her family and community. There is much I do not understand however about the details. But I do know the people who have chosen to rally behind her and offer her massive support in many ways are far wiser and more experienced than I on these matters so I post this also for that reason. These speakers are excellent. The community represented here in this video is significant so in solidarity also I post this video, even if I have not been a strident voice on this particular individual and issue. One hopes that she turns 18 soon, and becomes a free agent within the US to live her life with the same rights and responsibilities as all Americans. If she is one.

Eeyore for Vlad.

Major Hassan and his pen pals.

Here are a couple of videos from an article on Tundra Tabloids. I rearanged them a bit but go over and have a look he has some other great stuff there as well. The man can photoshop what can I say.

In any case it appears that Hassan gave a lot of zakat, or charity money for Islamic terrorist groups, and had for years before he decided to go out in a blaze of murder. Quite the choice of pen pals. It must be getting hard for leftist defenders of Islam to claim he was acting against the peaceful intentions of the faith and was really just some nut.

Here is the video from ABC News on his pen pals. Click over for more info if you like.

Now after watching this, it may be worth noting that he could have spared himself a lot of time and trouble if he just watched a few Robert Spencer lectures. Hell most of us in the anti-jihad could have answered his questions with chapter and verse. Spencer would be who I would go to first though:

Two campus events of note. Nonie Darwish and Robert Spencer silenced.

US universities need to be redefined. This is a fairly urgent matter. it is one thing for the universities to become fundamentally different things than they have traditionally been, but it is quite another to allow them to be thought of and treated as bastions of intellectual freedoms and debate, of places where unfashionable ideas are allowed to be examined and debated for their actual merits, and most importantly, of the inheritors of our Greek intellectual heritage.

Please see these two examples of the new agenda and modus operandi of American Universities from this week alone.

From Socialists at the gate:

This evening at NYU I witnessed an act which was both disturbing and appalling. Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, an erudite scholar on Islam and patriotic defender of our freedom was giving a talk on the ever-growing threat to the West of Islamists. In the midst of describing the ends of Jihad as promulgated by one of the foremost radical Islamic scholars of the 1970s, a grungy looking fellow stood up and yelled at Spencer “Should we just go bomb all the Muslims!?” and attacking him with other vitriolic and hysterical words. In creating this diversion, a couple members of the audience ran up and threw pies at Mr. Spencer and another panelist. The campus authorities quickly intervened, and as the officers dragged the cowards away from the stage, another (presumably accomplice) student filmed the the officers on his phone. Luckily, Spencer and his fellow panelist Elan Journo ended up largely unscathed.

This whole scene characterizes where we are in America today. A man gets attacked for merely repeating the words of a Muslim radical. Worse, American students are planted in auditoriums all across this country ready to quash any free speech that is not to their liking. This is especially dangerous when it comes to matters of Islam, because as Spencer later argued in his speech, by not allowing criticism of the religion, and worse censoring free speech, we are elevating Islam above our own culture. This plays right into the hands of the people who wish to impose Sharia law over us. How ironic that the leftists in this country are the useful idiots for a Jihad movement that wishes to crush all tolerance. Finally of course, it is most likely the police who will be in trouble because of a video probably bound for YouTube as we speak which will show the officers violently hauling out the innocent and naive college hippies.

For the rest of this article please click here:Here is a speech by Robert Spencer just so we all know who he is and what he might of said at NYU

And at least as insidious, perhaps more perhaps less, the difference is merely tactical. Is it worse to allow someone to speak to a degree then attack them in the manner above, or to make sure at the last minute that they do not get to speak at all:

From Phylis Chesler at Pajamas Media on the cancellation of Nonie Darwish:

In our time, a speaker must face a gauntlet of hostility and a menacing crowd if she wishes to speak in favor of Israel or to tell the truth about Islam.

That’s if she’s lucky. Most such speakers never get invited or when they do, their invitations are canceled.

Nonie Darwish, the author of Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law and Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror, has faced on-campus hostility and disruption before. Over the years, I have interviewed her about this a number of times. Like many of us, she has also sometimes been forced to have security guards with her when she speaks.

Nonie DarwishPhyllis Chesler and Nonie Darwish

This time, Nonie, who is the founder of Arabs for Israel, was invited to speak at both Columbia and Princeton. The official invitation at Columbia came from the very distinguished CAMERA, Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME), and from a new student organization there: Campus Media Watch, a group which is not yet quite up and running. Darwish flew from the West Coast, and was already all dressed up and ready to travel to Columbia when she got word that she’d been canceled.

“How humiliating is that? To come all this way, to be almost out the door, only to be told that they had to cancel my speech because campus security felt they could not protect me. Everyone is trying to blame someone else. Even the campus Republicans were afraid to sponsor me. SPME kept trying to fix it, but in the end, they could not.”

True, in 2006, President Ahmadinejad of Iran was not able to speak at Columbia because the notice given was too short. However, in 2007, Columbia University was able to provide security for him. And yet they could not provide it for Darwish. In 2006, Holocaust-denier Norman Finkelstein spoke at Columbia and in 2009, anti-Zionist, Israeli journalist Amira Hass spoke at Columbia–both without incident. Neither speaker was canceled. Next week, Noam Chomsky is speaking there. In Darwish’s view, “I doubt Chomsky will even need any security.”

For the rest of this article please click here:

Also, more can be read at Pam Geller’s site here where I found a lot of this

Thanks to SolsticeW13 for hipping me to the Darwish story