Saturday, June 30, 2012

What to do About Pamela Geller?

Mike L.

There are certain high-profile individuals who, among progressives, it is mandatory to despise and dismiss. In the United States these include media people such as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin and on and on and on and on. We have a whole long list of individuals who it is absolutely mandatory to despise and dismiss if one wishes to think of oneself as a rational, liberal, progressive, enlightened human being... as opposed to the scum of the earth, which these figures allegedly represent.

Thankfully most of those people have little to do with the broad western conversation around the Arab-Israel conflict. The reason that I say “thankfully” is because although those people are usually friendly toward the Jewish state they are also maligned among large numbers of Americans and therefore their friendliness toward Israel is a questionable asset. However, while I disagree with these people on all sorts of issues, ranging from tax codes to gay marriage, I nonetheless recognize a friend when I see one.

Jews are a tiny minority in this world and we must accept our friends where we find them. Snubbing people who are friendly toward Israel because we disagree on social or economic issues is foolish. We can openly disagree with them and still thank them for their friendship. In fact, if we wish to have any influence with such people the only way to do so is with an open hand. We can hate these people from now until eternity, but that will give us nothing in return but their mutual loathing.

I recommend against it.

But what most concerns me at the moment are hated conservatives such as, among others, Pamela Geller and her colleague Robert Spencer. These two are entirely persona non grata on the Jewish left. Unlike people such as Coulter or Limbaugh, they particularly specialize in raising consciousness about radical Islam and they do so as people concerned about the well-being of Jews in Israel and the well-being of western society as a whole. Spencer is a scholar. Geller is an activist who screams bloody murder about such things as radical Islam, stealth Sharia, and Muslim honor killings in western countries.

So my question is, what do we do with someone like this? Geller is a gadfly who obviously has no intention of going away. I do not want her to go away, personally, but I know that most American Jews would be very happy if she would go back to wherever she comes from and just kindly shut the hell up. This is the kind of person who is seen as an embarrassment to the Jewish community among Jewish progressives who make up our majority.

So, the question, really, is are we being fair to Pamela Geller? That is my question. Is Pamela Geller a screeching racist of the worst sort or does she have something legitimate to say? It's a good question not because Geller is important in and of herself, but because the issues that she raises are important.

Is Islam a threat to the Jewish people, to the Jewish state of Israel, and to western civilization, more generally? That's a scary question, now, isn't it? But it is precisely the question that Geller and Spencer, and others, have the gonads to ask in public. These people are maligned and threatened on a more or less continuous basis. They receive death threats from anonymous crazy people and they can never really know when, or if, those threats will result in their own deaths. These are people with families who are quite literally risking their lives in order to get their message out.

It seems to me that we owe it to ourselves to give them a fair listen.  Geller and Spencer make the point that Islam is an aggressive and violent religious-political ideology. That may be true, or it may not be true, but slandering people who raise the question is far more dishonorable than giving it the thought that it deserves.

41 comments:

  1. Geller is too far right for me BUT in a mature society, voices like hers are as legitimate as any other. One can dismiss her, chastise her, ignore her etc but shutting her up? Well, not in the land of the free thank you very much. We wouldn't be free very long if we advocated that.

    One aspect of her work I admire is her work concerning honour killings. I do believe she has helped various victims and potential victims. If nothing else, she has raised awareness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know I actually got an email from her in which she corrected a few mistakes.

      Did you know that Spencer is not Jewish? I thought for sure that the guy is, but apparently not.

      The main point, though, is that we have to move beyond this thing wherein we simply dismiss out of hand people who we may disagree with because doing so strangulates thought.

      Delete
    2. Doodad,

      You wrote:

      "Geller is too far right for me..."

      What does that mean? Is there something that Pamela Geller has said about crucially important essential things that you believe is not true? If there is something that Pamela Geller has said about crucially important essential things that you believe is not true, what is it that Pamela Geller has said about crucially important essential things that you believe is not true?

      Delete
    3. For "self-identifying"-as-"Liberal" Jewish Americans, is Pamela Geller too passionate in her expressing the fact that there is currently a huge powerful intendedly genocidal anti-Jewish Islamic supremacist movement in the world, and that the liberal democratic very small nation of the Jewish people, Israel, is intendedly genocidally besieged and mortally imperiled, and that, as the main part of that, Western journalists, as a whole, and Western politicians, and Western academia, are colluding with, and, as part of that, obfuscating the actions, and words, and even the existence, of that intendedly genocidal anti-Jewish Islamic supremacist movement, and that the Western mass media is unanimously libeling the liberal democratic very small nation of the Jewish people, Israel?

      For "self-identifying"-as-"Liberal" Jewish Americans, is her New York Jewish accent too thick?

      Pam Geller on the Michael Coren show:

      Pam Geller: LA Jewish Federation enforces sharia
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk5_wsHxA8M

      What Michael Coren says in this dialogue needs to be listened to by Jewish people and understood by Jewish people.

      Michael Coren:

      ...

      "Let's talk about the wider context here, because, obviously, people watching, most of you watching, are in Canada. This happened in Los Angeles. Now, I can tell you what happened in Canada -- and I don't want to give any names here -- but for quite a long time...one of the larger Jewish organizations -- the leadership [of that organization] -- was very "Liberal"...It thought 'Liberalism', the Left, 'Progressives', Labor movement, the Liberal Party, were all their natural friends. There's been a lot of growing up [among Jewish people] in this country [Canada] -- and I use that phrase advisedly.[Jewish] People [in Canada] have grown up. They've realized they ['Liberalism', the Left, 'Progressives', Labor movement, the Liberal Party] are not the friends of the Jewish community, and so you now... have a leadership that is far more Zionistic, understands where the threat comes from. It is, it is, it is, it is "Radical" Islam [authoritative Islam (orthodox Islam (Sharia-adherent, Sharia-proponent, Islam))]. Is this happening in the U.S.? Are Jews realizing it's not about Neo-Nazis, it's not about Skinheads...it's not about the Old Right -- [are Jews in the U.S. realizing] that the danger comes from somewhere entirely different?"

      ...

      "...I wish we had more time, but we've got just a minute or so. There are books written about this...: some within the Jewish community...this obsession about being liked. I mean I hate to make the...to even make any comparison but...there were [Jewish] people during the Holocaust who effectively said: 'Don't. Don't provoke them [the Nazis]...It'll still be okay.' It's amazing how many people reacted in this way [thinking, and saying]: 'It'll never happen here'. There are still people in the Jewish community, particularly in the United States I think, far less so in Europe, who are saying...: 'We want them to love us!...If we bend enough, and if we're nice enough, they'll love us in the end!'"

      Note: During the 1930's, the American Jewish leadership -- the leaders of so-called "Jewish groups" -- verbally attacked, and sabotaged the efforts of, people -- Jewish people and non-Jewish people -- who were trying to alert people in the U.S. of the danger of the Nazi regime of Germany. What's happening now is what happened then.

      Cowardice -- dishonesty in response to feeling fear -- is not a virtue. Cowardice -- dishonesty in response to feeling fear -- is not beneficial.

      Conceit is not a virtue. Conceit is not beneficial.

      "What to do About Pamela Geller?"?

      Listen to her. Listen to, and read, the speaking and writing of the facts that she is telling and writing.

      Delete
    4. Dear Doodad,

      I apologize if my comment to you was harsh. I didn't mean for my comment to you to be harsh.

      Delete
    5. Former Leftist Eric Allen Bell: What is right about Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/03/former-leftist-eric-allen-bell-what-is-right-about-pamela-geller-and-robert-spencer.html

      "...For so many who had known me for so long, I had become nothing more than an 'intolerant hate monger'... ...In the process of defending myself from all of these accusations, in a desperate attempt to distance myself from those names that had become synonymous with 'Islamophobia' at least in my circle, I made critical remarks about Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller – comments meant to distinguish myself from the real 'hate mongers' but comments that turned out to be uninformed and just simply just not true. I thought they were true at the time. But having only recently sipped from the well of knowledge, I had not yet flushed all of the Kool Aid out of my system. ..."

      Delete
    6. Daniel, no problems. It was not harsh. Her politics are more conservative than mine are. That's all I meant.

      Delete
    7. Ok, thanks, Doodad.

      BTW: Some of her politics could be categorized as being "more conservative" than mine too. :)

      ...in that, for example, I view the U.S. military invasion of Iraq as being as being a harmful wrong action, and in that, for example, I view all violent action as being harmful wrong action.

      Delete
    8. Stuart,

      I recommend that you watch the videos that I listed in my previous comments.

      Also:

      Resources of information about Islam by ex-Muslims:

      http://www.apostatesofislam.com

      http://www.faithfreedom.org

      http://www.youtube.com/user/AhmadsQuran5

      http://www.youtube.com/user/ExMuslimUK

      http://www.youtube.com/user/exmuslimNfree

      http://www.youtube.com/user/TXHalabi

      ====

      You wrote:

      "Daniel, I've read your posts here. Many of them over and over and over again. Some of them refer to things I read about before you were born. None of them, including what you've posted here today, about orthodox Islam, is proof or even evidence, that violent jihad is intrinsic to the religion, anymore than the text of the Torah is proof that Judaism is an intrinsically violent."

      Stuart,

      There are approximately ten times more words devoted to political violence in the Islamic texts than there are in the Torah.

      Moreover,

      The text in the Torah that refers to violence done by the Israelites are descriptions of what the Torah refers to as historical wars between the Israelites and other groups.

      The text in the Islamic texts that describe violence are open-ended direct commands to do violence to non-Muslims.

      ====


      "If violent jihad was intrinsic to the religion, how do you explain the relatively peaceful Muslim community in Detroit?"

      David Wood of ACT 17 Apologetics @ the Jessica Mokdad Human Rights Conference
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li_LdZhPjZo

      Arab Festival 2010: More Lies Mayor? A Response to Dearborn Mayor John C. O'Reilly
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhUJ7ujOWBA

      ----

      Audio-Video recorded at the 2010 Dearborn Arab Festival; Audio-Video recorded by members of ACT 17 Apologetics:

      Arab Festival 2010: False Accusations and Shoddy Police Work
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bo51z7DORQg

      Arab Festival 2010: Double Standards in Dearborn
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm8NdH9BInI

      Arab Festival 2010: Harassing Muslims? Nabeel Dialogues with Hakeem
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU-J3pNaSgk

      Arab Festival 2010: Dearborn Police Defending Islam against the Constitution
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Smw9QuH1xkA

      Arab Festival 2010: David Wood's Arrest in Dearborn
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID1_Sc7lZ2w

      ====

      Stuart, you wrote:

      "...Or many of the peaceful Muslim communities in SE Asia?..."

      Indonesia: Aceh authorities misunderstand Islam, close and plan to demolish 20 churches
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/indonesia-aceh-authorities-misunderstand-islam-close-and-plan-to-demolish-20-churches.html

      Indonesia: Publisher burns copies of book that Islamic supremacists claimed insulted Muhammad, apologizes for publishing it
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/indonesia-publisher-burns-copies-of-book-that-islamic-supremacist-claimed-insulted-muhammad-apologiz.html

      Indonesia's Sharia province to ban sales of tight clothing
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/indonesias-sharia-province-to-ban-sales-of-tight-clothing.html

      Malaysian government views LGBT community as a 'spreading problem' to be stopped
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/malaysian-government-views-lgbt-community-as-a-spreading-problem-to-be-stopped.html

      'Moderate' Malaysia: where (non Muslim) tradition is prohibited
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/moderate-malaysia-update-the-country-where-non-muslim-tradition-is-prohibited.html

      Indonesian jihadist asks Muslims not to commit jihad at home: "If you want to do jihad, do it in another country such as Palestine, where Islamic people need help"
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/indonesian-jihadist-asks-muslims-not-to-commit-jihad-at-home-if-you-want-to-do-jihad-do-it-in-anothe.html

      (continued)

      Delete
    9. (from continued)

      Stuart, you wrote:

      "...The argument is incompatible with the hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims..."

      Stuart, you are still missing the point.

      Again:

      3 Things You Should Know About Islam ما يجب أن تعرفه عن الإسلام
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHdMlT3E7cg

      Raymond Ibrahim: The Muslim Perspective
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-MXrGjujjo

      And:

      Civilization Jihad in America: Andy McCarthy
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E50Vb0soil0

      Taqiyya - Islamic Deception
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbIrWj6gDDk

      A brief talk by the late Tashbih Sayyed, who was a truly "moderate" Muslim (a non-orthodox Muslim (a non-proponent-of-Sharia Muslim)):

      Warning from the grave: Islamists mask as moderates to subvert society from within - Tashbih Sayyed
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5xRm_o9Hro

      Delete
  2. Replies
    1. The core question is whether violent Jihad is intrinsic to Islam or or is merely an anomaly. Geller and Spencer would argue that it is intrinsic to Islam and therefore to talk about "radical Islam" or "Islamism" is a false framing of the problem.

      I have yet to draw a hard conclusion on this, but the question is not an unreasonable one and it is one that we need to think about. On the progressive-left we cannot think about it, because to do so is socially verboten.

      Delete
    2. Since I'm not limited by what anyone else thinks I should think about, I have. Given that there are hundreds of millions of Muslims who don't participate in violent Jihad, I think it's not intrinsic. Anymore than asshat stupidity is intrinsic to being American, Pamela Geller notwithstanding.

      Delete
    3. Yes, well, I think that you're kinda hot, Stuart.

      :O)

      Delete
    4. Mike,

      I find this a vaguely disturbing revelation. Any room in this bro-mance for me?

      Delete
    5. Stuart,

      You wrote:

      "Since I'm not limited by what anyone else thinks I should think about, I have. Given that there are hundreds of millions of Muslims who don't participate in violent Jihad, I think it's not intrinsic."

      So:

      In the 1930's, could it have been accurately said that the German National Socialist (NAtionalsoZIalistische (Nazi)) Party which was founded and led by Adolf Hitler was not intrinsically violent nor supremacist, and that the ideas that were expressed by Adolf Hitler in his book "Mein Kampf" were not intrinsically violent nor supremacist, because, in the 1930's, there were millions of Germans who supported Adolf Hitler and who voted for Adolf Hitler's German National Socialist Party but who didn't participate in violence?

      Islam -- authoritative Islam -- orthodox Islam -- Islam as defined by, and as constituted by, the official texts of Islam -- the Qur'an, the Hadith, and the Sira -- is a supremacist imperialist totalitarian -- supremacist imperialist-violence-mandating -- religious and political ideology and system of government.

      The contemporary Islamic supremacist movement is a revival authoritative Islam -- orthodox Islam -- Islam as defined by, and as constituted by, the official texts of Islam -- the Qur'an, the Hadith, and the Sira.

      The contemporary Islamic supremacist movement began in the 1920's.

      There are many people (millions of people) who have been born into Muslim societies and who have been born as being defined as being Muslim by those Muslim societies according to the tenets of Islam, yet who have not been indoctrinated with the basic tenets of authoritative Islam, and who have not read the texts of Islam - the Qur'an, the Hadith, and the Sira - and who don't even know the basic tenets of authoritative Islam.

      However, throughout the past 1400 years that Islam has existed, the adherents of authoritative Islam, orthodox Muslims, in accordance with authoritative Islam, have attacked and annihilated many civilizations, and have killed over one hundred million members of those civilizations.

      Furthermore, the culture of peoples upon whom Islam has been imposed, and who have adopted Islam, has evolved as a culture whose members' qualities of mind, and who members' type of behavior, are largely detrimental unwholesome qualities of mind, and detrimental unwholesome types of behavior, which are promoted by, and produced by, the imposition of Islam upon any society.

      Raymond Ibrahim: The Muslim Perspective
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-MXrGjujjo

      Delete
    6. Daniel, I'm going to pretend that you didn't just compare all of Islam to the Nazis. If you had, I'd have to include you asshat idiocy party that includes Pamela Gellar.

      Beyond that, Michael likes you, so I'll leave it at that. I think you're ill equipped to pursue this discussion.

      Delete
    7. Stuart,

      You wrote:

      "Daniel, I'm going to pretend that you didn't just compare all of Islam to the Nazis. If you had, I'd have to include you asshat idiocy party that includes Pamela Gellar."

      Authoritative Islam -- orthodox Islam -- original Islam -- Islam as defined by the official texts of Islam -- is an ideology and system of government that, in fact, is similar to, and comparable to, Nazism. Furthermore, the totalitarian tenets and nature of authoritative Islam are similar to the totalitarian tenets and nature of Marxist Soviet Communism. Furthermore, throughout the past 1400 years that Islam has existed, the adherents of authoritative Islam, orthodox Muslims, in accordance with authoritative Islam, have attacked and annihilated many civilizations, and have killed over one hundred million members of those civilizations. Moreover, there is currently existing in the world a huge revival of authoritative Islam, which is a revival of authoritative Islam that began in the 1920's, in response to the abolishment of the Islamic Caliphate by Kemal Ataturk in 1924.

      I compared the religious and political ideology and system of government authoritative Islam -- orthodox Islam -- original Islam -- Islam as defined by the official texts of Islam -- to the ideology and system of government Nazism.

      My comparing the religious and political ideology and system of government authoritative Islam -- orthodox Islam -- original Islam -- Islam as defined by the official texts of Islam -- to the ideology and system of government Nazism was appropriate.

      Your expressing belief that my comparing the religious and political ideology and system of government authoritative Islam -- orthodox Islam -- original Islam -- Islam as defined by the official texts of Islam -- to the ideology and system of government Nazism is wrong, and your expressing antipathy toward me for having done so, and your doing so at this particular time in the world when there is existing in the world a huge global genocidally anti-Jewish totalitarian Islamic supremacist political movement, is wrong, and demonstrates ignorance that you are in.

      "I think you're ill equipped to pursue this discussion."

      You have demonstrated that you lack knowledge that is required to competently engage in this discussion. Moreover, you, apparently, have refused to seek out such knowledge.

      Delete
    8. Wafa Sultan: Islam Is Incompatible with Western Law
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8n-JYdpxU4

      Faith Under Fire: Clare Lopez - Islamic Persecution of Religious Minorities in Doctrine and History
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSHUhzAyZCc

      Ayaan Hirsi Ali at AAI 07: Part 1 of 2
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuaMHiMsRuY

      Ayaan Hirsi Ali Responds to Questions at Ohio University
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmIBFTEUqz4

      Islam penalty for apostasy (The answer to the question: "What is the punishment for leaving Islam?"; the answer: death)
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XRCYlZ4XOQ

      3 Things You Should Know About Islam ما يجب أن تعرفه عن الإسلام
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHdMlT3E7cg

      Delete
    9. Daniel, I've read your posts here. Many of them over and over and over again. Some of them refer to things I read about before you were born. None of them, including what you've posted here today, about orthodox Islam, is proof or even evidence, that violent jihad is intrinsic to the religion, anymore than the text of the Torah is proof that Judaism is an intrinsically violent. If violent jihad was intrinsic to the religion, how do you explain the relatively peaceful Muslim community in Detroit? Or many of the peaceful Muslim communities in SE Asia? The argument is incompatible with the hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims.

      Delete
    10. How should those of us who are not Muslim interact with people who are Muslim and who are not adherents of authoritative Islam? With compassion and skillful teaching.

      How should those of us who are not Muslim respond to people who are Muslim who are adherents of authoritative Islam (whether or not they are practicing Taqiyya)? With firmness and non-tolerance -- with non-violent beneficial skillful action.

      Delete
    11. Stuart, you wrote:

      "Daniel, I've read your posts here. Many of them over and over and over again. Some of them refer to things I read about before you were born. None of them, including what you've posted here today, about orthodox Islam, is proof or even evidence, that violent jihad is intrinsic to the religion, anymore than the text of the Torah is proof that Judaism is an intrinsically violent."

      Stuart,

      There are many more words devoted to political violence in the Islamic texts than there are in the Torah.

      More importantly,

      The text in the Torah that refers to violence done by the Israelites are descriptions of what the Torah refers to as historical wars between the Israelites and other groups.

      The text in the Islamic texts that describe violence are open-ended direct commands to do violence to non-Muslims.

      Stuart, I recommend that you watch the videos that I listed in my previous comments.

      ----

      Also:

      Resources of information about Islam by ex-Muslims:

      http://www.apostatesofislam.com

      http://www.faithfreedom.org

      http://www.youtube.com/user/AhmadsQuran5

      http://www.youtube.com/user/ExMuslimUK

      http://www.youtube.com/user/exmuslimNfree

      http://www.youtube.com/user/TXHalabi

      ====

      Stuart, you wrote:

      "If violent jihad was intrinsic to the religion, how do you explain the relatively peaceful Muslim community in Detroit?"

      David Wood of ACT 17 Apologetics @ the Jessica Mokdad Human Rights Conference
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li_LdZhPjZo

      Arab Festival 2010: More Lies Mayor? A Response to Dearborn Mayor John C. O'Reilly
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhUJ7ujOWBA

      Audio-Video recorded at the 2010 Dearborn Arab Festival; Audio-Video recorded by members of ACT 17 Apologetics:

      Arab Festival 2010: False Accusations and Shoddy Police Work
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bo51z7DORQg

      Arab Festival 2010: Double Standards in Dearborn
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm8NdH9BInI

      Arab Festival 2010: Harassing Muslims? Nabeel Dialogues with Hakeem
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU-J3pNaSgk

      Arab Festival 2010: Dearborn Police Defending Islam against the Constitution
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Smw9QuH1xkA

      Arab Festival 2010: David Wood's Arrest in Dearborn
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID1_Sc7lZ2w

      ----

      Stuart, you wrote:

      "...Or many of the peaceful Muslim communities in SE Asia?..."

      Indonesia: Aceh authorities misunderstand Islam, close and plan to demolish 20 churches
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/indonesia-aceh-authorities-misunderstand-islam-close-and-plan-to-demolish-20-churches.html

      Indonesia: Publisher burns copies of book that Islamic supremacists claimed insulted Muhammad, apologizes for publishing it
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/indonesia-publisher-burns-copies-of-book-that-islamic-supremacist-claimed-insulted-muhammad-apologiz.html

      Indonesia's Sharia province to ban sales of tight clothing
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/indonesias-sharia-province-to-ban-sales-of-tight-clothing.html

      Malaysian government views LGBT community as a 'spreading problem' to be stopped
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/malaysian-government-views-lgbt-community-as-a-spreading-problem-to-be-stopped.html

      'Moderate' Malaysia: where (non Muslim) tradition is prohibited
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/moderate-malaysia-update-the-country-where-non-muslim-tradition-is-prohibited.html

      Indonesian jihadist asks Muslims not to commit jihad at home: "If you want to do jihad, do it in another country such as Palestine, where Islamic people need help"
      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/06/indonesian-jihadist-asks-muslims-not-to-commit-jihad-at-home-if-you-want-to-do-jihad-do-it-in-anothe.html

      (continued)

      Delete
  3. Well, we need to draw a distinction between what is in the Koran and the hadiths and the behavior of most Muslim people.

    We first need to recognize the fact that the vast majority of Muslims are absolutely not engaged in the violent Jihad.

    But it remains undeniably true that the Koran and the hadiths contain elements which call directly for the submission, by force if necessary, of the dhimmis.

    This is why I am opposed to Sharia as the basis of government anywhere, because it makes of us second and third class citizens.

    Thus we have to oppose the imposition of Islamic religious law upon sovereign states.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You say:

      'We first need to recognize the fact that the vast majority of Muslims are absolutely not engaged in the violent Jihad."

      First, I sincerely appreciate that recognition.

      Additionally, I think it answers your question above. If the majority of Muslims are not engaged in violent Jihad, then, by definition, it is not intrinsic to the religion.

      Delete
  4. I'm pretty comfortable opposing theocratic law of any kind. I've heard quite a few rabbis calling current world figures Amalek. The Quran is hardly unique in it's call for violence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, but there is, whether we like it or not and whether we acknowledge it or not, an exceedingly large and dangerous Islamist movement throughout the Middle East taking over governments.

      This is not a few fringe crazies, like American skin-head types. These are governments emerging in Turkey and Tunisia and Egypt and God only knows wherever else.

      We cannot be blase about this because the stakes are just huge, particularly for the Jews of the region and all non-Muslims there.

      Stuart, I do not think that we need to run around like chickens without heads because of this, but I am exceedingly dissatisfied with the progressive-left failure to even discuss the matter.

      And it is an important matter.

      Delete
    2. I don't always disagree with you. This is one of those times. It is a clear and present danger.

      Delete
  5. I also do not think there is anything in Islam that makes it inevitable that its followers will be violent haters of non-Muslims, and of other Muslims, and indeed of human life itself. Nor was it inevitable that the Muslim world would be swept by competing lunatic revolutionary religious/nazi ideologies and that the communists, dynastic autocrats, secularists, nationalists, Ba'athists and other assorted fascists and dictators that ruled that part of the world half a century ago would largely be brushed aside.

    Religion is religion. Of course it can go rotten. At the end of the day it is what its self appointed gatekeepers make of it. The most important prophet in Islam after Mohammed is Moses. Moses is mentioned in the Koran over a hundred times. You would have to be a seriously jaundiced and determined denier of the Jews to take the position on Israel that the Islamists do but they manage it without raising a sweat. Religion allows you to do that.

    The murder of innocents and the subjection of free people to violent rule by ignorant, ugly, sexually perverted men in the name of a hateful prophet of a hateful murderous God is not Islam. Not unless Muslims choose to make it so.


    The critical thing is not to allow the clerics to take the reins of government. The great gift to human progress is the separation of church and state. Men (and it is always men) who rule by the law of God are always a catastrophe for the people and it should come as no surprise how often they have a taste for blood.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. geoffff,

      Yes, of course, any religion can become detrimental.

      However, Islam, as defined by the official texts of Islam, is, in itself, detrimental.

      Please see my two comments that I posted in reply to Stuart here: http://israel-thrives.blogspot.com/2012/06/what-to-do-about-pamela-geller.html?showComment=1341111643560#c3895726431826592066

      I posted those comments in the wrong thread by accident -- in reply to Doodad instead of in reply to Stuart. I've been having trouble posting comments. Comments that I've posted have been automatically deleted immediately after I've posted them.

      ----

      But just to summarize briefly here:

      According to the official texts of Islam, the Qur'an, the Hadith, and the Sira:

      O The Qur'an was written by the deity of the religion Islam, Allah, and was transcribed by one person, Mohamed, and cannot be altered in any way; and altering the Qur'an in any way is a crime punishable by death

      O The Qur'an was written in parts, and according to what the official texts of Islam refer to as the principal of abrogation, the early parts of the Qur'an, which are the parts which contain peaceful passages, are abrogated by -- are annulled by and replaced by -- the later parts of the Quran, which contain violent passages such as passages which command Muslims to fight against, and kill, all non-Muslims in the world (Note: According to the official texts of Islam, the chapters of the Qu'ran are layed out not in the order in which they were written. According to the official texts of Islam, the chapters of the Qur'an are layed out in the Qur'an not in sequential order of the earliest written chapter to the last written chapter)

      O An effort -- called "Jihad" (which literally means "effort" in Arabic) -- is mandated, for all Muslims, to establish Islamic law -- Sharia -- as the governmental system for the whole world.

      O The engaging in the use of deception as tactics -- tactics called Taqiyya and Kitman -- in the effort of Jihad is sanctioned and mandated. Taqiyaa is the telling of a complete untruth in effort of Jihad; The tactic of Kitman is the telling of a half-truth in the effort of Jihad

      O Criticizing Mohamed, the founder of Islam, is a crime to be punished by death

      O Leaving Islam is a crime to be punished by death

      O Islam is "a religion and a state"

      Furthermore, about the comparison between the words in the Torah that are devoted to political violence and the words in the Qur'an that are devoted to political violence:

      There are many more words devoted to political violence in the Islamic texts than there are in the Torah.

      More importantly:

      The text in the Torah that refers to violence done by the Israelites are descriptions of what the Torah refers to as historical wars between the Israelites and other groups.

      The text in the Islamic texts that describe violence are open-ended direct commands to Muslims to do violence to non-Muslims.

      Note: the word "islam" is an Arabic word, and literally means "submission". The Arabic word "islam" not mean "peace". The Arabic word that means "peace" is "salam".

      Delete
    2. Furthermore,

      The supposed FOUNDER of Islam, Mohammed, who, according to the official texts of Islam, is "THE PERFECT MAN", and who according to the official texts of Islam, is, therein, the person whose behavior is the ideal on which all Muslims* are to model their behavior, was, according to the official texts of Islam, a liar, a thief, a rapist, a slaver, and a mass-murderer, and who, according to the official texts of Islam, instructed his followers to lie, and commanded his followers to steal, and to rape, and to enslave others, and to mass-murder others. Does a person such as that person who supposedly is the founder of Islam sound like a spiritually highly developed person? Does such a person sound like a person who would found a "peaceful religion"? Would a religious and political ideology and system of government founded by such a person be a "peaceful religion"?

      Note: * all Muslims: all Muslim men; according to the official texts of Islam, women are, in essence, chattel

      Delete
    3. Again, listen to what ex-Muslims say about Islam. They know Islam, and they're trying to warn others.

      http://www.apostatesofislam.com

      http://www.faithfreedom.org

      http://www.youtube.com/user/AhmadsQuran5

      http://www.youtube.com/user/ExMuslimUK

      http://www.youtube.com/user/exmuslimNfree

      http://www.youtube.com/user/TXHalabi

      Wafa Sultan: Islam Is Incompatible with Western Law
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8n-JYdpxU4

      Ayaan Hirsi Ali Responds to Questions at Ohio University
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmIBFTEUqz4

      ----

      Again:

      Islam penalty for apostasy (The answer to the question: "What is the punishment for leaving Islam?"; the answer: death)
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XRCYlZ4XOQ

      3 Things You Should Know About Islam ما يجب أن تعرفه عن الإسلام
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHdMlT3E7cg

      Raymond Ibrahim: The Muslim Perspective
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-MXrGjujjo

      Delete
  6. The bottom line question is whether or not non-Muslims, Jews, women, and Gay people are under a significantly disproportional threat in, or around, Islamic land compared to most of the rest of the world.

    It seems to me that the obvious answer to that question is "yes."

    The Jews of the Middle East have been under siege for 1,400 hundred years because of Arab-Muslim religious bigotry against us.

    Women are a subjugated class, despite however much western feminists assure as that the burka is liberating.

    And Gay people? Fuggedaboutit. They don't even exist in Iran accord to Ahmadinejad.

    And these tendencies are not decreasing, but increasing in recent decades, since Iran fell to the mullahs.

    I think that my strongest, most fundamental problem with the western left is their failure to take this seriously.

    It should be taken seriously and I would thank people like Geller and Spencer for warning the public... because somebody has to, dammit.

    We need not agree with them on all things, but we must stop burying our heads.

    Oh, and I would thank Dan Bielak, as well. The man is vigilant. We need not agree with him about everything, either, but he's definitely a curious and not unfair mind on an essential issue.

    {Karam has spoken!}

    :O)

    ReplyDelete
  7. When I read the daily news, there is only one religion each and every single day at the centre of some new atrocity. I know it; you know it; everyone knows it. That much is clear. What it means may not be, but that much is clear and that it must stop is also clear. Ignoring it; refusing ti talk about it and say its name will not solve anything.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "What it means may not be"

      What it means is clear to those who know the tenets of Islam, and who know the 1400 history of Islam.

      -----

      I realize that some people may perceive me as not being a knowledgable nor intelligent person and as, therein, not being a credible person -- because of certain ways that I have posted and because of certain ways that I have written. However those ways that I have posted, and those ways that I have written have been because I suffer from severe OCD. And I realize that the expressing, in the past, of the fact that I suffer from OCD may also have caused people to perceive me as as not being a knowledgable or intelligent or credible person. However: I am knowledgable and intelligent and I strive to communicate that which I know and understand to be true and I strive to not communicate that which is not true.

      OCD is not a derangement, and is not an impairment of intellect.

      I hope that what I am trying to communicate about the crucial issue of Islam will be listened to.

      Please read what I have written about Islam in my comment with which I replied to geofff here: http://israel-thrives.blogspot.com/2012/06/what-to-do-about-pamela-geller.html?showComment=1341117570804#c1868804250522801347

      Please listen to the following discourse on Islam and Muslim culture by Raymond Ibrahim:

      Raymond Ibrahim: The Muslim Perspective
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-MXrGjujjo

      Please listen to the following summary overview of the tenets of Islam:

      3 Things You Should Know About Islam ما يجب أن تعرفه عن الإسلام
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHdMlT3E7cg

      Delete
    2. Typo correction:

      ...1400 year history of Islam...

      Delete
    3. Sorry to hear of the OCD, Daniel. I have it, too. Mine manifests itself mostly in the form of my having to check (and quite often, re-check and three-check) about a dozen things in a very specific order, and in a very specific way, before I leave my apartment, every single time, even if I'm only walking down the block to the corner deli to pick up a roll of paper towels or something.

      Also when I'm out, I have to put my subway pass or my bank card back in my wallet, or my cash back in my pocket, etc etc, a very specific way, and then after that's done I have to 'pat my pockets down,' so to speak, to make sure everything's still all there, and where it should be. Ideally, I try to quickly and casually do the pat-down thing five times, but never eight. Never eight times. If I think there's even a slight chance I've done it eight times, I'll do it two or three more times just to be 'safe.'

      I have it down to an art so I don't look (at least, I don't think I do...) too obvious in public, but in the end I care more about the peace of mind it brings me than what some random stranger thinks of what I'm doing.

      Mine ultimately isn't too debilitating, but I've definitely missed a few buses and a train or two before, because of it. Specifically the 'taking at least five minutes to leave the house' thing. I know, intellectually, that my patterns are ridiculous, but damned if I know how to break them. Anyway, yeah. Just wanted to let you know you're not alone on that, even here.

      Delete
    4. Thank you very much, JayinPhiladelphia. Thank you for your kind sharing that about yourself. Thank you very much for your kind support to me. Your kind sharing that about yourself and your kind support to me is a comfort to me and a support to me.

      The OCD that I have is debilitating to me. The OCD that I have makes me feel that with almost every volition action that I do (such as opening window shades; typing words on the computer keyboard; walking in any particular direction when trying to go somewhere in the house from room to room and from any place in any room to any other place in that room; etc.; saying something; not saying something; thinking something) I am causing metaphysical harm to whomever person or people pop up in my mind at the time when I am doing that volitional action, and that feeling that I feel is very distressing to me, and I feel that I need to re-do, and re-do with a certain intent, that volitional action to "neutralize" or "undo" the metaphysical harm that I feel that I have caused to whomever person or people who popped up in my mind at the time when I initially did that volitional action. However, when I re-do that volition action, I usually feel that I have caused metaphysical harm to whomever I am thinking about at the time when I re-do that volition action, and that feeling that I feel is very distressing to me, and I feel that I need to re-do that volitional action again, and I sometimes keep repeating that volitional action; and feeling the feeling that I feel that I am causing metaphysical harm to whomever I am thinking about when I am doing that volitional action makes me feel remorse and guilt, and makes me feel distressed; and repeating that volitional actions makes me feel frustrated; and I always eventually stop repeating that volitional action, and sometimes I don't repeat that volitional action at all, and I almost always end up feeling that I have caused metaphysical harm to someone, and I almost always end up feeling guilt and remorse, and I almost always end up feeling frustration, and I almost always end up feeling distressed.

      However, I hope that someday I will be able to overcome this affliction that I am currently experiencing.

      Delete
  8. Daniel I am pretty much with you on what you say. Islam has a vicious past and in a lot of places in the present (perhaps not Dearborn,perhaps not yet) a vicious present.

    Nonie Darwish tells us that over 75% of AMERICAN Egyptians voted for the Muslim Brotherhood compared to Egyptians actually living in the country voted about 50/50. WTF???????

    Houston, we have a problem!

    http://frontpagemag.com/2012/06/21/over-75-of-egyptian-americans-voted-for-islamist/

    ReplyDelete
  9. Pam Geller has a decision to make. She can

    1) Either separate her pro-Israel activism from her hardline right-wing Randianism and thereby become a highly effective leader in the defense of Israel; or

    2) Fuse the two causes together as she does now on her blog, thereby thoroughly pissing off liberals and lefties who mostly agree with her Middle East efforts but who will not tolerate having her libertarian swill jammed down their throats.

    And that's where I am now.

    Last week she apporvingly quoted Mitch McConnell's crap about Obama being the worst threat to free speech evah due to his opposition to the Citzens United decision. I made a rude comment about how money is NOT speech, and it was deleted.

    Fair enuf. It was indeed a rude comment.

    A few days ago she huffed that health care is not a right. I commented, "Health care IS a right. hose who feel otherwise can move to Somalia."

    That comment was also deleted.

    My position here is this: Those who espouse corporatism and its handmaiden, libertarianism, are dead to me. Her blog used to be a favorite stop of mine. Now I won't read it, link to it, or take part in any discussion involving it (after this one). Life is too short.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Randall, therein too lies my problems with her...a lot of her politics. However, I don't take politics too seriously anymore so I remain still open to those things she says that are correct IMO. But I can perfectly understand your position on this.

    ReplyDelete