He was not allowed to read a particular book in the presence of his co-workers. On a campus in the United States. Unbelievable.
Will those of us teaching about Islamic supremacism be suppressed? Will people READING it be suppressed?
This is a 17-minute talk by Chris Simcox, the founder of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (citizens helping patrol the Mexico-U.S. border to prevent illegal entry). His talk is full of surprising facts about who is coming across the border and why, and what it has to do with the third jihad.
The talk below is pretty long (33 minutes) and he gets a slow start. But he gives some great examples of stealth jihad. The second video (below) is a question-and-answer session that is really worth listening to (16 minutes):
It takes him a bit to get going, but this is a speech worth listening to (12 and a half minutes long):
Robert Spencer, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), speaks at a recent event in Florida for a very productive fifteen minutes:
In just over one hundred years following the death of Mohammed in 632, the Arab followers of the Prophet had subjugated a territory with an east-west expanse greater than the Roman Empire, and they accomplished it in about half the time. By the mid-eighth century, Arab armies had conquered the thousand-year-old Persian Empire, reduced the Byzantine Empire to little more than a city-state based around Constantinople, and destroyed the Visigoth kingdom of Spain. The cultural and linguistic effects of this early Islamic expansion still reverberate today.
I just read something that surprised me. I was reading the excellent book, The New Concise History of the Crusades when I came across this passage:
Over the course of the previous six centuries, Islam had conquered three-quarters of the Christian world.
By the time of the crusades, Islam had conquered three-fourths of the Christian world. The crusades were an attempt by the separate European states to set aside their differences to defend themselves from a common enemy — an enemy that sought to subjugate the whole world (and still does). Several times the Byzantine empire — the last remnants of Roman empire, and ostensibly the Christian allies of the European crusaders — were sometimes at odds with crusaders and resisted them or allied with the Muslims.
In 1204, the crusaders were attacking Constantinople, the enormous walled capital city of the Byzantine empire (the Byzantines had become an enemy of the defense of Europe). The following is a quote from the excellent book, The New Concise History of the Crusades:
The crusading army boarded its vessels and attacked Constantinople again on April 12, 1204. The battle raged most of the day with the crusaders gaining very little. By the early afternoon, they had captured a few towers on the harbor walls, but they were so surrounded by Byzantine forces that they dared not advance farther. A small group of about ten knights and sixty sergeants led by Peter of Amiens landed on a narrow strip of ground outside the wall near the shore. There they discovered a postern gate [a small, rear gate] that the defenders had walled up. They fell upon it zealously with whatever implements they had on hand. It was hard going and dangerous, for from above the Greeks (Byzantines) rained down on them immense stones and boiling pitch, which they deflected with their shields. At last, they succeeded in making a small hole. Peering through, they saw a huge crowd of soldiers inside. Surely, it was suicide to enter. One man, an armed priest named Alleumes of Clari, insisted on the honor of being the first to enter Constantinople. No amount of pleading from his comrades would dissuade him. His brother, Robert of Clari, was particularly upset and even tried to prevent him from crawling through the whole by grabbing his legs. It was no use. Alleumes scrambled through to the other side, where he was faced with an armed multitude.Read more...
Then an amazing thing happened. With enormous confidence, Alleumes drew his sword and ran toward the Greek troups. They scattered. Once again, the poorly trained Byzantine troops proved themselves unwilling to fight unless the danger to themselves was minuscule. Because most of them were provincials [that is, they were not from Constantinople], they saw no reason to risk their lives for the sake of the capital. Alleumes called to his companions, who now crawled through the hole, drew their swords, and kept their backs to the wall. When Greek troops at other locations saw the flight of those stationed near the walled gate, they panicked and abandoned their positions along the walls. Soon there was a snowball effect as the imperial army abandoned the length of the fortifications in a mad dash to escape the city — all because of the entry of fewer than a hundred crusaders. Mourtzouphlus [the emperor of Constantinople], who watched the debacle with horror, spurred his horse and single-handedly charged the small party. When he saw that they would not retreat, he stopped and returned to his command station. With no one to stop them, Alleumes and his comrades opened the city gates, and the entire crusading army swarmed in.
That evening, the crusaders camped in the open region in the north city that had been burned by the Venetians nine months earlier. Strict orders were given to the host that no one was to venture farther into the city itself. In the winding streets and back alleys of the megalopolis, the mobs could pick off crusaders easily. They resolved to call for the surrender of the city on the morrow. If that was refused, they would begin burning the place down.
With the imperial army in full retreat, Mourtzouphlus could rely only on the Varangian Guard [Viking mercenaries]. It was not enough. Desperately, he rode through the streets exhorting the people of Constantinople to rise up and defend their city from the invading westerners. No one would listen. From their perspective, it was not their city that was at stake, but Mourtzouphlus's crown. They would not suffer further damage to the capital to save his reign [he wasn't very popular]. Instead, they made plans to offer the city peacefully to Boniface of Mohtferrat [a crusader], who they assumed would be the new emperor. Once he had the imperial throne, they expected that Boniface would restrain his army, since it was not in his interest to have his city destroyed. At least that is the way it had worked in all the other armed coups in Constantinople's long history. Without the support of the people or the army, Mourtzouphlus fled the city.
Citibank
HSBC
Dow Jones
Standard & Poor's
UBS
Barclays
Goldman Sachs
Deutsche Bank
Wachovia
Lloyds of London
Morgan Stanley
JP Morgan Chase
Blackstone
Blackrock
Millennium Hedge Fund
Ospraie Capital Hedge Fund
Paulson & Company
Arcapita, Inc. (previously Crescent Capital)
BNP Paribas
Guidance Residential
Zweig-DiMenna
I got this list in an article that also explains what SCF is: Sharia Finance.
The following is an excerpt from Daniel Pipes' Still Asleep After Mumbai:
Read more...The fact that terrorist fish are swimming in a hospitable Muslim sea nearly disappears amidst Western political, journalistic, and academic bleatings. Call it political correctness, multiculturalism, or self-loathing; whatever the name, this mentality produces delusion and dithering.
Nomenclature lays bare this denial. When a sole jihadist strikes, politicians, law enforcement, and media join forces to deny even the fact of terrorism; and when all must concede the terrorist nature of an attack, as in Mumbai, a pedantic establishment twists itself into knots to avoid blaming terrorists.
I documented this avoidance by listing the twenty (!) euphemisms the press unearthed to describe Islamists who attacked a school in Beslan in 2004: activists, assailants, attackers, bombers, captors, commandos, criminals, extremists, fighters, group, guerrillas, gunmen, hostage-takers, insurgents, kidnappers, militants, perpetrators, radicals, rebels, and separatists – anything but terrorists.
And if terrorist is impolite, adjectives such as Islamist, Islamic, and Muslim become unmentionable. My blog titled "Not Calling Islamism the Enemy" provides copious examples of this avoidance, along with its motives. In short, those who would replace War on Terror with A Global Struggle for Security and Progress imagine this linguistic gambit will win over Muslim hearts and minds.
Post-Mumbai, Steven Emerson, Don Feder, Lela Gilbert, Caroline Glick, Tom Gross, William Kristol, Dorothy Rabinowitz, and Mark Steyn again noted various aspects of this futile linguistic behavior, with Emerson bitterly concluding that "After more than 7 years since 9/11, we can now issue a verdict: Islamic terrorists have won our hearts and minds."
The following is a section of a larger article called Taqiyya: How Jihadis Deceive the West.
There are many modes of taqiyya which has developed as an art form of deception, including:
Outwitting
Islamic spokesmen commonly use taqiyya in the form of "outwitting." The matter under discussion is not to be debated or discussed; the opponent is "outwitted" through taqiyya, by diversion of the subject through the tactical use of honor (feigning "offense") and disparagement of the speaker and religious obfuscation, aided at times by a mystical reference to God or Allah, which is irrelevant to the topic under discussion. Outwitting is regarded as a skill, worthy of praise, often accompanied by smiles and laughter.
An Australian Example of "Outwitting": Sheikh Hilaly's Lebanon visit, 2004
In early February 2004, the Australian media reported that the controversial Mufti of Australia, Sheikh Hilaly of the Lakemba Mosque, New South Wales, had met with notorious terrorist Hezbollah leader, Hasaan Nasrallah, the leader of Lebanon's "Party of God"— the Syrian-Iranian-sponsored terrorist organisation — and on 13 February delivered a "sermon" at the Al Quds mosque in Sidon, Lebanon, calling for jihad and praising the 11 September terror attacks.
The controversy raged. The Sheik was the Mufti of Australia's Muslims, and a mufti by definition can issue fatwas, that is, a considered opinion ranging from an issue of community interest or religious law to peace, war and jihad.
On 18 February, Keysar Trad, the Sheikh's translator, told A.B.C. radio:
"I believe these people have been far too selective in taking information somewhat out of context. The Mufti is a proponent of peace and peaceful solutions to any conflict and his message was in a completely and entirely different context. I spoke to him yesterday and he assured me that the context in which he made his message was not in the way that it was reported by these people."
On 19 February, Keysar Trad affirmed that the remarks about Israel and Hezbollah had been taken out of context. He said he spoken to the Sheikh and his remark about jihad was a rhetorical question.
On 29 February, Keysar Trad also resorted to the Arabic poetic defence, reportedly claiming that the Sheikh had taken "bits from poems which he had incorporated into his sermons." On 1 March Trad used the "lost in translation" defense:
"I believe the context has been lost in the translation ... He's not praising it by any means, he's really condemning these atrocities."
In Australia, the Sheikh's speech was widely reported and criticized by the Prime Minister in Parliament. On 3 March 2004, in an unusually frank interview, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer commented:
"He talks out of both sides of his mouth. When there was initially a suggestion in the media that he had said — at least he had called for a jihad, a spokesman for Al-Hilaly said that his words had been taken out of context."
The journalist responded to Downer: "That's not true." Downer replied: "Exactly. That did not turn out to be true. We got a copy of the speech, we translated the copy ... and it's pretty obvious that he's been calling for jihad and suicide bombers ... He's been praising September the 11th as God's work."
THE "ARABIC IS POETRY" DEFENSE
Featured on the A.B.C.'s Religion Report on 3 March, Dr. Amir Ali, President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils stated:
"Therefore unless I can see this transcript and unless I get it cleared by Sheikh Hilaly [an infidel cannot judge a Muslim] whether he has said the same thing, I will not be able to comment on what he has said. This sermon was not given in English, it was in Arabic. Now who made the transcript? What's the whole source of this transcript? So unless I see the transcript and I see what he has--listen to this man what he has said, I will not be able to make any comment."
The obviously frustrated interviewer asked:
"Hasn't the time come when the Muslim community has to stop saying that his comments have been misinterpreted or taken out of context?"
Dr. Ali replied frankly: "Yes, it is definitely happening all the time," but disingenuously continued that "this was started by the Middle Eastern Institute from Washington, which is known for twisting and turning what the Muslims say in order to create a bad image."
On 6 March 2004 the chief executive officer of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, Amjad Merhoud, warned he would be seeking an urgent meeting with the Sheikh to clarify his views, and the Federation could discuss stripping his title and claimed: "He could have in hindsight probably used different words to describe what he was trying to say or not used some of the poetry that he was trying to recite." Interviewed on A.B.C. radio on 7 March, Sheikh Hilaly replied to the criticism that he was "saying one thing in English in Australia and something else in Arabic in Lebanon." The Sheikh replied: "Of course, you are talking about two different environments ... I agree with you I am addressing two different environments I'm addressing them differently, it's be (sic) two different environments."
On 8 March 2004, the Sheik reiterated his themes and insisted the terrorist group Hezbollah was misunderstood and that his speech contained poetry that was misinterpreted. Previously he had condemned the Federal Government for proscribing Hezbollah as a terrorist organization:
"What is truth? Actually it was a poetry and in poetry we go a little bit into the imagination of presentation."
However Sheikh Fehmi Naji al Imam, interviewed on 10 March 2004, placed the Sheikh's translation problems in context. The interviewer pointed out:
"Sheikh Hilaly only really speaks Arabic. We hear this talk about flowery, poetic language and him being misunderstood. Do you accept that?"
Sheikh Fehmi responded, laughing: "I don't buy that."
On 10 March 2004 Sheikh Fehmi Naji, one of Melbourne's most senior clerics, claimed Sheikh Hilaly's comments were not misinterpreted and called on A.F.I.C. to withdraw Sheikh Hilaly as the Mufti. However, Trad claimed A.F.I.C. had already met with the Sheikh and they believed his version of events and "they understand that they believe the Mufti, and they will not make any judgment until they see something different in the Arabic tapes themselves."
On 19 March, the Sheikh cleverly criticised Al Qaeda as "a bunch of crazy people" and insisted in a declaration that he did not support the action of terrorists, and in the same context he claimed:
"I can understand why some people would mistranslate my comments because to them they cannot understand my high level of expression and they might feel my words have some ambiguity to them."
Asked if he would choose his words more selectively in the future, the Sheikh, in a humorous example of outwitting, replied: "Of course, mate."
Two of the Sheikh's daughters blamed the complexities of the Arabic language for the controversy. "You cannot just interpret it, just word by word", they said.
An anonymous associate of the Sheikh also pointed out in The Australian:
"We know he [the Sheikh] speaks English quite well, but a translator gives him time to think about his responses and gives him that 'out' if what he says provokes an angry response. And he thinks that if he gives a sermon in his native tongue no one's going to bother to translate anyway."
On 21 April 2004, the A.F.I.C., at its 40th Annual Congress, voted for the Sheikh to retain his position as Grand Mufti of Australia. On A.B.C. Radio, the President, Amir Ali, was asked if the issue of the Sheikh's dismissal had been put to a vote but he assured the interviewer that Sheikh Hilaly was not the main issue:
"Ali: 'In fact we said that the government did not submit the tape, the original tape that was taken. Still we are waiting for the tape to come, so they didn't send the tape.'
Interviewer: 'Oh ... When you told me on this programme that you intended to investigate the matter and get to the bottom of it ...'
Amir Ali: 'Yes, we investigated it and then we saw the translation was wrong.'
Interviewer: 'You never actually got the tape from the government?' Amir Ali: 'No, not the tape, we only got the transcript ... It just died down. Why (would) you want to bring it back?'"
The Muslim worldly and religious community leaders (with the notable exception of the courageous Sheikh Iman of Melbourne) must have known that no government would have exposed its information sources. Significantly, the government transcript of the Sheikh's speech in Lebanon was never accepted by Sheikh Hilaly or his spokesmen, a position which implied that the government was deceitful. The various tactical claims that the Sheikh's sermon was "taken out of context", was a "faulty translation", was "a sermon that could not be translated from Arabic to English", and involved the use of "poetry," raise the inevitable question: Did taqiyya prevail in this controversy?
Role-playing as Victim
A content analysis of Islamic media reveals an unremitting theme: Muslims in Western countries are a victimized minority and allegedly and supposedly victims of racism, xenophobia, "Islamophobia" and religious discrimination.
Terrorist counter-measures, such as specific anti-terrorist legislation and racial profiling, are vehemently opposed by Islamic organizations who would seemingly be content to have no monitoring of their activities at all. Even the most limited counter-terrorist measures enacted by legitimately elected democratic governments add to the Islamic self-image of imputed victimization and are widely misinterpreted as "a war against Islam."
False Claims of Torture
False claims of torture by terrorist suspects generally follow the instructions set down in the Al Qaeda training manual, Declaration of Jihad against the Country's Tyrants Military Series, in its 18th lesson, "Prisons and Detention Centres", which contains precise instructions to suspected terrorists [brothers] concerning [false] allegations of torture.
The manual instructs each Islamic brother to:
"(1) insist on proving that torture was inflicted on them by state security before the judge
(2) complain to the court of maltreatment while in prison
(3) ... do his best to know the names of the security officers who participated in his torture and mention their names to the judge (these names may be obtained from brothers who had to deal with those officers in previous cases)
(4) take advantage of visits to communicate with brothers outside prison and exchange information that may be helpful to them in the work outside the prison ... The importance of hiding messages is self-evident here."
Tauriya
Tauriya, or manipulated ambiguity, involves the use of double entendre, using a word which has an obvious meaning whilst alluding to another more "concealed meaning." The story of the Negus is illustrative. According to bin Ishaq, Islam's earliest biographer of Mohammed, the Negus was compelled by Christians to provide an account of his beliefs in case he had forsaken Christian beliefs. The Negus placed a statement of Islamic faith in his pocket and "outwitted" them, pretending to agree with their beliefs about Christ.
Claiming Harassment
False claims range from accusing law-enforcement organisations of ignoring Islamic customs (interviewing a woman without a female present), stealing money, damaging property and showing disrespect to Islamic women. False reports of harassment and threats are often framed by recourse to a family photograph opportunity to a receptive and often gullible media.
The Flight into Illness
A variation of the "victim of torture" claim is the "flight into illness" made by terrorist suspects involved in legal proceedings. Some law enforcement organizations have defined the condition humorously as "Post-Arrest Islamic Disorder." The most common claims are depression due to unlawful interrogation or incarceration, posttraumatic stress disorder and the most popular Islamic clinical artifact, "the heart attack."
Diversion
Questions relating to the morality of the September 11 terrorists attacks are commonly diverted by counter reference to the plight of the Palestinians, the role of Israel and U.S. foreign policy and support for Israel as "causes" of terrorism. The Islamic hatred of Israel predates the formation of the State of Israel. Islamic anti-Semitism dates back to the Prophet Mohammed himself. The "root causes" of terrorism — allegedly poverty, marginality of youth, lack of opportunities and resources which are adduced as a "cause" of terrorist acts — overlook the fact that the "roots of terrorism" are found in Muslim countries.
Evasion
Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Fadlallah, the so-called "Oracle of Hezbollah", whom some claim to be the spiritual leader and /or youth leader of Hezbollah but who has reportedly traveled in disguise for Hezbollah operational purposes and "blesses" suicide bombers before their missions, is a master of taqiyya in the form of evasion.
Martin Kramer, the distinguished Middle East scholar, has pointed out that "his elusiveness could drive journalists to distraction. Fadlallah perfected two methods of evasion. When it suited him, he delivered long and winding monologues to the simplest question, wearing down the resistance of the most persistent journalists. At other times he spoke in Delphic telegraphy... [A reference to the Delphic oracle who always gave an answer that could be interpreted in two ways]."
Asked if he was the "spiritual guide" of Hezbollah and the Islamic student movement, he replied: "I am all of these and none of them at the same time."
A similar instance was seen when Australia's controversial Sheik Omran, of the Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jamaah, was questioned by a leading Australian journalist:
"Interviewer: 'You are following the "Salhafi" tradition?'
Sheikh Omran: 'I could say yes and I could say no. But this is why we didn't call ourselves Salhaffi, we called ourselves Ahlas-Sunnah wal Jamaah, so we don't have a special flag or banner for us, different to the rest of the Muslims.'
Interviewer: 'Do you think that some Muslims in Australia are uncomfortable with your tradition?'
Sheikh Omran: 'Well, I don't think maybe. I don't want to say no. It could be yes ...'
Interviewer: 'Have any supporters from your group gone and trained in camps overseas, military camps?'
Sheik Omran: 'Maybe, yes, maybe. But this has nothing to do with the group.'"
Demanding "Evidence"
Islamic spokesmen and their legal advisors practice a form of taqiyya by repetitive and extreme requests for "evidence" and impossible standards of "proof" of alleged terrorist acts, which they know cannot be disclosed without revealing intelligence sources and methods. The demand for evidence is an attempt to identify intelligence sources and methods and personnel and obtain official documents for counter-intelligence purposes.
Tactical Denial
Admitting that a critical proposition concerning Islam may be even partly true would involve a loss of honor and invoke shame and reveal true intentions. For example the platitude: "It is impossible to be a Muslim and a terrorist", is clearly false. "Islam forbids suicide", is true, but irrelevant as suicide martyrdom attacks are not forbidden in the Koran or by the Prophet as they are believed to provide rapid entry to paradise and are an integral element of the history of Islam and are currently conducted in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon and against Israel. The fact that Islam forbids personal suicide, as do all major religions, did not impede the September 11 Islamic terrorists who launched four coordinated suicide martyrdom attacks.
EXPLOITING COGNITIVE DISSONANCE
The constant repetition of taqiyya themes induces a state of cognitive dissonance. The target audience attempts to resolve the claim that Islam is a peaceful religion with the dissonant reality of Islamic terrorist acts and operations. Christians and other participators seeking dialogue "with our Muslim brothers" are reminiscent of the "peace pastors" who, during the Cold War , believed that meeting with representatives of the Soviet Union somehow promoted peace.
THE HIJACKING OF ISLAM
The platitude that small groups of fundamentalists have "hijacked a great religion" is a masterly example of taqiyya. The timely, skilful, misleading and diversionary theme of the "hijacking" of Islam was introduced into public, political and media discourse by Islamic spokesmen in the United States shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks.
The claim that the September 11 terrorist attacks were "un-Islamic" and contrary to the teachings of Islam is taqiyya. As Bernard Lewis observed in his recent study, The Crisis of Islam: "Most present-day terrorists are Muslims and proudly identify themselves as such."
'Taqiyya': how Islamic Extremists Deceive the West
Original source: National Observer - Australia and World Affairs
ON 19 NOVEMBER 2003, in the United States District Court Eastern District of Michigan Southern Division, Judge Steven Whalen concluded a four-page indictment against Mahmoud Youseff Kourani.
The indictment described Kourani as a dedicated member of Hezbollah who had received specialized training in radical Shiite fundamentalism, weaponry, spy craft and counter-intelligence in Lebanon and Iran and a dedicated member/fighter/recruiter and fundraiser for Hezbollah: (1)
Here is an example of CREATING an event that allows Muslims to claim they are "oppressed" and "persecuted." Read more here about why they would want to do such a thing: The Use Of Pretext in Justifying Hostilities:
Six imams were denied access to a U.S. Airways flight in 2006. CAIR, which represented these imams, claimed this was a clear case of discrimination against Muslims. Yet the imams were prevented from flying not because they were Muslim or held a prayer session directly outside the gate (and again on the plane, which is peculiar since even devout Muslims do not pray this frequently), but because they were behaving like hijackers.Read more...
The imams demanded to board at the same time even though only two had first-class tickets and then attempted to reseat themselves on the plane in a suspicious formation (two in the tail, two in the mid-section, and two in first class). They muttered loudly in Arabic about jihad and cursed the United States for its involvement in Iraq. They requested seat belt extensions (which can be used as makeshift weapons) even though none was large enough to need it.
Other Muslim passengers on the flight were not harassed. Given their blatantly suspicious behavior it has been suggested by many that the imams were deliberately trying to provoke their removal from the airplane. (source: here)
Police have arrested 49 people this week in a northern Iranian city during a crackdown on "satanic" clothes, IRNA news agency reported Thursday.
The measures are the latest in a country-wide campaign against Western cultural influence in the Islamic Republic, where strict dress codes are enforced.
"Police confronted rascals and thugs who appeared in public wearing satanic fashions and unsuitable clothing," Qaemshahr city police commander Mahmoud Rahmani told IRNA.
What is satanic? "men sporting spiky 'Western' hairstyles or women wearing tight trousers and high boots."
Read the whole story: Police detain 49 for "satanic" clothes.
(LOS ANGELES, CA, 12/3/08) - The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today called on American Muslims and other people of conscience to thank the Fox television network and the creator of "The Simpsons" for a recent episode that used comedy to challenge Islamophobia.
The episode, which aired Sunday evening and is titled "Mypods and Boomsticks," highlights anti-Muslim sentiment by featuring a young Muslim character named Bashir and his family who face prejudice after moving to Springfield. In the program, Homer Simpson wrongly suspects that Bashir's family is involved in a terror plot. Bart Simpson befriends Bashir and defends him from bullies.
To view the entire episode, click here.
CAIR's Greater Los Angeles Area office (CAIR-LA) sent a letter today to the show's creator Matt Groening thanking him for challenging anti-Muslim prejudice.
The letter said Sunday's episode "brought to light how Americans can work toward mutual respect and inclusion by getting to know their neighbors." It went on to state: "The episode also builds on the values that have made America the great nation it is a nation in which citizenship is about finding common ground and building a better society. American Muslims have been doing just that by making daily contributions to our society that often go unrecognized."
"Because of its acceptance in popular culture, comedy is often one of the best vehicles for challenging stereotypes and intolerance," said CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad. "Fox and Matt Groening are to be congratulated for tackling the disturbing phenomenon of Islamophobia."
THIS IS CAIR'S REQUESTED ACTION FOR ITS MUSLIM CONSTITUENTS:
Send a message expressing appreciation for highlighting both anti-Muslim attitudes and the need for mutual respect and inclusion in our society.
E-Mail: peter.liguori@fox.com (Peter Liguori, Chairman, Entertainment, Fox Broadcasting Co.); dana.walden@fox.com (Dana Walden, Chairman, Twentieth Century Fox Television); gary.newman@fox.com (Gary Newman, Chairman, Twentieth Century Fox Television) COPY TO: info@losangeles.cair.com
Citizen Warrior says: I suggest we do just the opposite. Muslims don't need any more politically-correct coddling. They already get far too much special treatment and they do not deserve it. Action requested: Write to those people and tell them a little about Islam. Ask them to read the Qur'an and quit being dhimmis. Ask them to please stop cooperating with taqiyya. Aks them to read up on CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Holy Land Foundation trial, and then try again.Read more...
Posted on Wed, Dec. 03, 2008 by Cal Thomas
THOMAS: Radical Muslims’ goal is total domination
You’ve got to be taught to hate and fear
You’ve got to be taught from year to year
It’s got to be drummed in your dear little ear
You’ve got to be carefully taught.
— South Pacific, music and lyrics by Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein
On the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, he does a good three minute bit. Check it out:
Live from Mumbai
© Free Blogger Templates Columnus by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008
Back to TOP
