Saturday, March 29, 2008

Fitna and Freedom Of Speech

The latest on the Live Leak video of Fitna is that they have succumbed to the threats of the Islamists. The most ridiculous thing of all is that these religious criminals do not see that Live Leak's admitting to shutting down a video to protect staff from them is only a verification of the very subject of the film. While YouTube simply pulls a video, Live Leak's bravery is duly noted.

This is not at all unlike the retarded cartoon riots where public perception of the Prophet Mohammad was satirized resulting in similar reaction and censor, proving the satire correct. Does anyone see the pattern here?



Amboy Times does!




On CNN Wilders explains his position and the report, once again proves the point.

Labels: , ,

Socialize this! Personalize this! Radicalize this!

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Dr Walid Phares, is a leader of the March 14 movement and the Director of Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington, a visiting scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy and the author of the War of Ideas. Dr Phares was one of the architects of UNSCR 1559. He is also a Professor of Middle East Studies at Florida Atlantic University and a contributing expert to FOX News. He makes the following points about the current situation and dangers in the Middle East:

The US Government is considering a new gigantic arms sale to the Saudi Kingdom, up to 20 billion dollars’ worth of complex weaponry. The proposed package includes advanced satellite-guided bombs, upgrades to its fighters, and new naval vessels, as part of a US strategy to contain the rising military expansion of Iran in the region. The titanic arms deal is a major Saudi investment to shield itself from the Khomeinist menace looming at the horizon: an Iranian nuclear bomb, future Pasdaran control in Iraq, and a Hezb’allah offensive in Lebanon.

The real Iranian threat against the Saudis materializes as follows:

1. Were the US led coalition to leave Iraq abruptly, Iranian forces — via the help of their militias in Iraq — will be at the borders with the Kingdom. Throughout the Gulf, Iran’s Mullahs will be eyeing the Hijaz on the one hand and the oil rich provinces on the other hand.

2. Hezb’allah threatens the Lebanese Government, which is friendly to the Saudis. Hezb’allah, already training for subversion in Iraq, will become the main trainer of Shia radicals in the Eastern province of the Kingdom.

3. Finally Syria and Iran can send all sorts of Jihadis, including Sunnis, across Iraq’s borders, almost in a pincer movement.

In the face of such a hydra-headed advance, the Wahhabi monarchy is hurrying to arm itself with all the military technology it can get from Uncle Sam. Riyadh believes that with improved F 16s, fast boats, electronics and smarter bombs, it can withstand the forthcoming onslaught.

I believe the Saudi regime won’t. For, as the Iraq-Iran war has proved, the ideologically-rooted brutality of the Iranian regime knows no boundaries. If the US withdraws from the region without a strong pro-Western Iraq in the neighborhood, and absent of a war of ideas making progress against fundamentalism as a whole, the Saudis won’t stand a chance for survival. For the Iranians will apply their pressure directly, and will unleash more radical forces among the neo-Wahhabis against the Kingdom. The Shiite Mullahs will adroitly manipulate radical Sunnis, as they have demonstrated their ability to do in Iraq and Lebanon.

Simply throwing money at a problem, without a vision as to how to properly spend it, has never been an effective solution. More often than not, money only exacerbates the problem it is meant to solve.

So what should the US advise the Saudis to do instead of spending hugely on arms?

First, if no serious political change is performed in Arabia, the 20 billion dollars’ worth of weapons would most likely end up in the hands of some kind of an al Qaeda, ruling over not only over Riyadh, but also Mecca and Medina. That package of wealth, religious prestige and modern arms, at this point of spasms in the region, is simply too risky strategically.

But there are better ways to spend these gigantic sums in the global confrontation with Iranian threat and in defense of stability. It needs a newer vision for the region. Here are alternative plans to use the 20 billion dollars wisely but efficiently; but let’s not count on the far reaching mainstream of Western analysis at this point:

Dedicate some significant funds to support the Iranian opposition, both inside the country and overseas. Establish powerful broadcasts in Farsi, Kurdish, Arabic, Azeri and in other ethnic languages directed at the Iranian population. That alone will open a Pandora’s box inside Iran. Realists may find it hard to believe, but supporting the Iranian opposition (which is still to be identified) will pay off much better than AWACS flying over deserts.

Slate substantial sums to be spent in southern Iraq to support the anti-Khomeinist Shiia, the real shield against the forthcoming Pasdaran offensive. Such monies distributed wisely on civil society activists and on open anti-Khomeinist groups, would build a much stronger defense against Ahmedinijad’s ambitions.

Lavish funding should be granted to the Syrian liberal opposition to pressure the Assad regime into backing off from supporting Terrorism. Without a Mukhabarat regime in Damascus, the bridge between Tehran and Hezb’allah would crumble. Hence, the Syrian opposition is much worth being backed in its own home than for Saudi Arabia to fight future networks in its own home.

Allocate ample funding to the units of the Iraqi army that show the most efficiency in cracking down on terrorists, and which prove to be lawful and loyal to a strong central Government, pledging to defend its borders, particularly with regard to Iran. That would include the moderate Sunnis in the center and the Kurdish and other minority forces in the North. A strong multiethnic Iraq, projecting a balance of power with Iran’s regime, is the best option for the Peninsula.

Grant abundant aid to the Lebanese Government, the Cedars Revolution NGOs and the Lebanese Army to enable them to contain Hezb’allah on Lebanese soil. Earmark some of these grants to the Shia opposition to Nasrallah inside his own areas. When Hezb’allah is isolated by Lebanon’s population, Arab moderates around the region can sleep much better at night.

Spend real money on de-radicalization programs inside the Kingdom and across the region. With dollars spent on moderate Imams and not on the radicals, Riyadh can shake off the radical Salafi clerics, and have an impact the Jihadists’ followers. By doing so, it will prevent Jihadism from becoming (as it has already) the only other option on the inside, if the Iranian axis will put pressure on the country.

Forward meaningful sums to support the current Somali Government against the Islamic Courts and help the moderates in Eritrea and Sudan. The best defense against radicalism coming from the horn of Africa is to support the moderates in East of the continent.

Invite the US military to abandon Qatar as a regional base and to relocate to the Eastern provinces of the Kingdom, with as many billions of dollars as required to help in reinstallation and deployment facing Iran’s threat. A military attack by the Iranian regime on Saudi Arabia would then become a direct attack on the United States.

With the remaining billions, the Saudi Government would renew, remodel, and retrain its forces so that along with its allies, the US, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Gulf states, they would deter an Iranian regime, which will be defeated by its own people.

That of course, presumes radical reforms take place, quickly, in the Peninsula. But isn’t such a hope just a desert mirage?

Indeed, the points I suggested in this article, although logical in terms of counter-radicalism strategy, have very little chance of being adopted or even considered in Riyadh. The Kingdom, sadly, wants to confront the Islamic Republic only with classical military deterrence, not with a war of ideas. Which perhaps is why the region’s “friendly” regimes have preferred not to endorse “spreading democracy” as a mean to contain Terrorism. The reason is simple: Democratic culture will also open spaces in their own countries, a matter they haven’t accepted yet.

Dr. Phares is quite rights when he notes that we cannot count on the far reaching mainstream of Western analysis at this point. Why? Because of the unrealistic and failed policies of the Realpolitik practitioners at the State Department. Not only are past Realpolitik policies directly responsible for America’s current imbroglio in Iraq, but their further pursuit will only add dangerous new fuel to the existing problem while creating many more.

It is high time for a drastic change, time to bring in people who are true experts on the Levant’s mentality. People who recognize that what works in the West does not work with IslamoFascism. Not only is there a different mentality at work, the political logic is entirely different, unless we in the West are willing to engage the IslamoFascists onIslamoFasciststhey simply perceive as weakness. Unless we nurture their own opposition within, we cannot hope to stop their growing advance.

While IslamoFascism poses as a religion, it is no such thing!!! It is merely a political idea of world conquest, which adapted some trappings of religion as a convenient disguise. It is absolutely incapable of coexisting with the West, since its underlying philosophy is in direct opposition to the West. The sooner we understand that, the sooner we get rid and bury Realpolitik and its practitioners, the better the chances of stemming the advance of totalitarianism in the form of a future One World Caliphate.

But as Dr. Phares says at the end of his article: Indeed, the points I suggested in this article, although logical in terms of counter-radicalism strategy, have very little chance of being adopted or even considered in Riyadh. The Kingdom, sadly, wants to confront the Islamic Republic only with classical military deterrence, not with a war of ideas. Which perhaps is why the region’s “friendly” regimes have preferred not to endorse “spreading democracy” as a mean to contain Terrorism. The reason is simple: Democratic culture will also open spaces in their own countries, a matter they haven’t accepted yet.Will the West wake up to the looming dangers in time? Riyadh will not likely accept Dr. Phares sensible suggestions. As long as Democrats like Nanci “The most powerful woman in the world” Pelosi continue to cuddle up to the likes of Baby Assad, we are heading the wrong way down the political pike. As long as the House of Saud’s main Consigliere, James Baker, continues to hold sway on America’s foreign policy, neither will the State Department take any action to move away, even one iota, from its bankrupt path and it certainly won’t listen to Dr. Phares’ advice. Will we in the West change our stance and deal with IslamoFascism in the only decisive language they unequivocally understand?

Chaim

RELATED POSTS

Twenty Billion, Thirty Billion

Crossposted at: Freedom's Cost

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Socialize this! Personalize this! Radicalize this!

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Overstaying their Welcome?

Naharnet has the following about how public opinion is starting to turn against the Palestinian “refugees” in Lebanon:

Nahr al-Bared Battle Fuels Anti-Palestinian Sentiment
As the list of dead soldiers grows, anger mounts in villages of north Lebanon where the army has been locked in a deadly showdown with Islamist militants for more than two months.

Black-clad women shout angrily as men in sombre mood sit in heavy silence next to portraits of the “martyred” soldiers in impoverished villages in the remote north — a main reservoir for the country’s armed forces.

Elite unit soldier Bassam Jawhar, 29, was killed on July 14 during the ongoing battles around Nahr al-Bared refugee camp where Fatah al-Islam militants have been under army siege since May 20.

He was killed when a booby-trapped building collapsed on a patrol in Nahr al-Bared and it took the army six days to retrieve his body from under the rubble due to the intensity of the battles.

Like Jawhar, six other soldiers from Bebnin fell in combat in Nahr al-Bared in two months.

At his family home in the village, his widow Mariam, wearing a black dress and an embroidered headscarf, sits near the giant portrait of the “Shahid” (martyr in Arabic) standing proudly in full combat gear and holding a rocket-launcher.
“I delivered our baby the day he left, 50 days ago exactly,” said Mariam, 23. “He only saw the baby twice.”

Why was Jawhar killed? Because pro Syrian/Iranian militias from within the refugee camp decided to flex muscle, to flaunt how little they care for Lebanon… or for their own people, for that matter.

In another room, the grandfather holds his newly-born granddaughter in his arms as an endless queue of men flock in to present their condolences.

The procession takes place in silence, but anger is boiling.

“Don’t say Fatah al-Islam, it is an insult to Islam. Say ‘the criminal gang of Shaker al-Abssi,’” the Islamist group’s commander, said Mohammed Jawhar, a cousin of the slain soldier.

Across the dusty villages of the impoverished northern province of Akkar, the men enroll in the country’s armed forces by local tradition but mostly by necessity.

“There is not a single house where there is no soldier,” explained 42-year-old Zeina Sufain, who lost her 19-year-old son Firas on May 22.

“There is no work here. Even for those who go to school,” she said.

The list of soldiers killed in Nahr al-Bared has painfully reached 116, including 27 servicemen on the first day of the clashes when the Islamist extremists attacked most of them in their beds.

116 soldiers died defending their country from the enemy… within. Yes… the enemy is within Lebanon, within the refugee camps which for about 40 years now have been independent enclaves where neither the Lebanese police nor the Lebanese Army were allowed to go in, by mutual agreement, and this is their show of gratitude…

Reports of “massacres” against off-duty soldiers by Fatah al-Islam, including harrowing stories of servicemen executed at gunpoint or slaughtered with knives seemed to have at least momentarily ended decades of good relations with the Palestinian refugee camp.

“Let them go to hell,” shouted Sahar, Bassam’s aunt.
“We will never let the camp be rebuilt. We will never accept that the Palestinians come back. We used to buy from their shops, but they are traitors. They harbored these criminals, they helped them,” Mohammed Jawhar said.

“Some of them even married their girls to the terrorists” from Fatah al-Islam, shouted another man.

But despite their grief and great losses, Akkar villages continue to back the army and its military campaign on Nahr al-Bared.

“In Akkar we love the army,” said a cousin of one of the slain soldiers in Bebnin.

But in a poor house further down the street, Zeina Soufain voices rare criticism of the army.
“They sent them (soldiers) there (to Nahr al-Bared) like cannon fodder. They had no experience, and they only had a Kalashnikov,” she said.

Back at the Jawhar reception hall, a soldier came to present his condolences before returning to Nahr al-Bared after a six-hour leave, his first in 14 days.

“Morale is high, even the wounded soldiers want to return” to the battlefront, the soldier who did not wish to be identified told Agence France Presse.

“With our meagre means, we are combating a very well-trained enemy that kills with unbelievable savagery,” he said.

The soldier said the army was surprised by the “very sophisticated arms” of Fatah al-Islam which he said had “high-precision rifles, infra-red goggles and remote-controlled landmines.”

He said the soldiers “stay three days in the camp. They take turns to sleep. Then they leave and others replace them.”

Over the last few months we saw not only Palestinians fight savagely, ruthlessly, against Palestinians (Hamas vs. Fatah), we see them fight with the same hatred and ferocity against Lebanon, a country that extended its hospitality… Yes, gentle reader, you may argue that Lebanon, like Syria, like Jordan, like Saudi Arabia, like Egypt, did everything possible to keep them poor and unable to integrate into regular society. Let’s not forget however that only Lebanon gave the Palestinian camps sovereignty over their own land, and to what results?

Naharnet also reported today:

Army Seizes Explosives during Raid on Militants’ Shelter
The Lebanese army on Tuesday continued to tighten the noose around diehard Fatah al-Islam militants, pounding the northern Palestinian refugee camp of Nahr al-Bared with heavy artillery barrages. It The army’s guns bombarded the remaining Islamists’ pockets at the camp with long range artillery fire.

It said troops occasionally fought fierce house-to-house battles with the militants.

The state-run National News Agency said the Lebanese army on Tuesday also seized explosive materials as well as weapons, detonators and electronic devices during a raid on a shelter inside the camp on the outskirts of the northern port city of Tripoli.

It said a number of militants were killed in the attack.

NNA said troops also blocked most exits to a sanitary sewer system after they discovered that it had been used as routes of escape by the terrorists

There was no word on casualties from Tuesday’s fighting. NNA said the army’s guns bombarded the remaining Islamists’ pockets at the camp with long range artillery fire.

It said troops occasionally fought fierce house-to-house battles with the militants.

They do not let up, they are intent in dying and killing. Bloodshed seems to be all they care about! Can a people that embraces such a culture, endure long?

The only Arab country that actually welcomed them and gave them everything necessary to integrate them into their own society was Kuwait. What happened in Kuwait during Saddam’s invasion on August 2, 1990? Who turned out to be Saddam’s greatest cheerleaders in Kuwait? Those same Palestinians that had been received with open arms… such gratitude!

Unless the Palestinians choose a leadership that truly represent the healthy aspirations of the average man on the street, unless they are willing to lay down their weapons, get rid of their hatred against all and everyone they are destined to forever remain a world pariah. Will the plight of Palestinians continue to be dismal or will they succeed in bettering themselves and their future? The choice is theirs!

Chaim

Crossposted at: Freedom's Cost

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Socialize this! Personalize this! Radicalize this!

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Politically Correct Speaking

No one but a most reprehensible bigot would claim that every Muslim is a terrorist. Such a generalization would not only be untrue but it would also be undeniable proof of the speaker’s despicable racial prejudices. Neither can it be denied, however, that in every major terrorist event around the world over the last few years… the perpetrators were all Muslims!!! Today’s International Herald Tribune reprints an article by Jeff Jacoby from The Boston Globe, where he decries Political Correctness and the incorrectness of its results:

Is radical Islam connected to terrorism? Notable British voices spoke out on that subject after Britain’s recent terrorist near-misses - the two unexploded car bombs in London’s West End and the fiery SUV rammed into the main terminal at Glasgow’s international airport.

Consider what four of those voices had to say:

One declared that the word “Muslim” must not be used in connection with terrorism, and insisted that even the phrase “war on terror” should be scrapped.

The second likewise cautioned against pointing a finger at Islam, contending that in London, “Muslims are . . . less likely to support the use of violence to achieve political ends than non-Muslims”

The third, asked whether Muslim extremists might be responsible for the attempted atrocities in London and Glasgow, counseled: “Let’s avoid presumptions. . . . It can be the work of Muslims, Christians, Jews or Buddhists.”

Obviously the one who made the first statement has never learned that a disease can only successfully be cured if the treatment deals with the full disease rather with one or two of the symptoms. The second statement, is even more idiotic! There are no Christian priests, no Jewish Rabbis, or Buddhist heads of ashrams preaching violence on British society, or on any elements of that society. Preaching violence is a daily occurrence, however, for some radical Muslim Imams.

In spite of anti Christian, anti semitic, anti Buddhist cartoons constantly appearing in British publications there never were demonstrations (violent or otherwise) against said publications or their cartoonists. Nobody has asked for the heads of the culprits, while Muslims demonstrators have violently demanded just that. No Christians, Jews or Buddhists have ever requested that Britain replace its laws with laws approved by any of these religions, Muslims have in the past and are now violently demanding that Sharia law replace British law. Muslims are . . . less likely to support the use of violence to achieve political ends than non-Muslims?!?!? Methinketh, the particular speaker has seriously misspoken. Don’t you think so, gentle reader? As for the third statement it is disingenuous at best, another blatant attempt at clouding the true facts!

By contrast, the fourth noted the resemblance of the latest terror attempts to “other recent British Islamic extremist plots,” pinpointed “Islamic theology” as “the real engine of our violence,” and described British jihadists as “mindless killers” who have “declared war upon the whole world.”

The first three statements, disingenuous but quite politically correct, were made respectively by 1) Britain’s new prime minister, Gordon Brown; 2) London Mayor Ken Livingstone, and 3) Daud Abdullah, deputy secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain.

Just days before the second anniversary of the deadly 7/7 London transit bombings, and less than a year since 24 British Muslims were arrested for plotting to blow up passenger jets over the Atlantic, the three men spoke as if they had no inkling that Britain is a battleground in militant Islam’s global jihad - as if only a boor or a bigot could imagine that Muslims might somehow be linked to the car bombs in London and Glasgow.

And the fourth statement? Those were the blunt words of Hassan Butt, a onetime spokesman for the radical Islamist organization al-Muhajiroun, who has renounced his former life.

In an essay published last week in the Daily Mail, Butt emphasized that jihadists are motivated not by opposition to British or U.S. foreign policy but by a fundamentalist theology that seeks to subject the entire world to “Islamic justice.” Radical Imams teach their followers that they must fight for Dar al-Islam (the House of Islam) against Dar al-Harb (the House of War - i.e., infidels to be defeated). And “in Dar al-Harb, anything goes, including the treachery and cowardice of attacking civilians.”

By turning a blind eye to the radical theology of the jihadists, Butt says, mainstream Muslim institutions make it easy for the extremists to recruit new followers. His words apply equally to political leaders like Brown and Livingstone: “They refuse to broach the difficult and often complex truth that Islam can be interpreted as condoning violence against the unbeliever - and instead repeat the mantra that Islam is peace, and hope that all of this debate will go away.”

Wars cannot be won through denial and willful blindness. Yet in ways large and small, Western leaders and institutions deliberately avert their gaze from the reality of the Islamist threat.

The fact remains that most of these Islamic preachers of hatred and violence and most of these violent felons (yes, gentle reader, they use the excuse of religious teachings and extremist interpretations to commit violence and rejoice in it!), came to the West to better their lives, to find opportunities unavailable in their countries of origin. They came to live on the public dole! Ah, what gratitude! Extremist Imams who use every means of emotional and psychological pressure to mold their flock into unthinking robots that can be mobilized for whatever nefarious deed these preachers deem necessary, happen to be also Muslims in spite of what London’s laughingstock Mayor Ken Livingstone may claim.

The UN secretary general, Ban Ki Moon, blames global warming, not Sudan’s jihadist regime, for the genocide being carried out in Darfur. A leading candidate to succeed President George W. Bush, Illinois Senator Barack Obama, maintains a lavish campaign Web site, complete with detailed position papers that have nothing to say about radical Islam’s aggressive war.

For a politician who is running for public office to conveniently ignore an inconvenient truth is, sadly, a part of the political game. For the Secretary General of the UN, to refuse to call it as it is, to refuse to acknowledge the racial cleansing being practiced in Sudan by ethnic Arabs, is criminal. Not only does it in no way alleviate the plight of the victims but his is merely an attempt at grandstanding, by pushing fashionable (though highly questionable) pseudo science as the excuse for unspeakable violence. Shame on you, Ban Ki Moon! UN Secretary Generals may come and go, but things stay the same…

Another candidate, former senator John Edwards, prepares a 5,200-word speech to the Council on Foreign Relations - and devotes just 19 of them to the menace of Islamic extremism.

The obfuscation is sometimes almost comical. The New York Times, reporting the Glasgow attack on Page 1, carefully avoided using the M-word to identify Britain’s Muslim terrorists. Instead it attributed the 7/7 bombings to Britain’s “disenfranchised South Asian population” and reported that the terrorists in Glasgow “were South Asian.” (As Joel Mowbray pointed out for Powerline, Indian Hindus are Britain’s largest South Asian demographic.)

Similarly, seven reporters contributed to AP’s story on the arrested jihad-doctors (”Diverse group allegedly in British plot”), yet somehow missed the radical theology they presumably shared.

Political correctness is no strategy for victory. Islamic fascists will not hate us less if we avoid all mention of the theology that inflames them. Winning the war the jihadists have declared - the war of Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb - begins with moral clarity. Denial is a luxury we cannot afford.

Edwards, the “$400 haircut, working man’s candidate” is too vacuous and too much of an airhead to seriously tackle an issue that might alienate some potential voters. Frankly, his chances of being the next Democrat candidate for president are less than mine… and I’ve already made it very clear that I’m not even running!

As for the New York Times risible attempts at journalism… well… a rapidly plunging readership is a very eloquent statement as to that publication’s political slant is worth! Talking about the AP’s Political Correctness… you can rest assured that had the terrorists been Jews or Christians, their religion would not have been omitted. I guess that is because as Jews or Christian we would have been appalled, dismayed and enraged for our co-religionists to have turned to terror and we would waste no time in demanding swift punishment. That is so unlike the M people, isn’t it?!?!?

The word Islam is not derived from salaam - peace, it is derived al-silm which means submission or surrender. Let’s call it like it is gentle readers, Islam is not the religion of peace, Islam is the religion of submission! Between the useful idiots (who in their fashionable hatred and total ignorance reject all the West represents) and the taqiya - deception perpetrated by the IslamoFascists, truth and facts are laid by the wayside, discarded as inconvenient.

Political correctness is no strategy for victory. Islamic fascists will not hate us less if we avoid all mention of the theology that inflames them. Winning the war the jihadists have declared - the war of Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb - begins with moral clarity. Denial is a luxury we cannot afford. That is so true! Will any of the politicians in the West, have the courage to stop obfuscating the truth? Hasn’t the time come to eradicate this cancer within, before the whole Western body perishes?

Chaim

Cross-posted at: Freedom's Cost

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Socialize this! Personalize this! Radicalize this!

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Islam: Is Shari'a Law justice

From Memri:
Why Isn't There a Single Muslim Who Hasn't Heard About the Muhammad Cartoons - While a Belgian Paper's Publication of the Koran is Taken for Granted?

"[The London daily] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat [recently] reported that 'a Belgian paper distributed to its readers free copies of the Holy Koran in French, along with a coupon for [a copy of] the Koran in Flemish, which is the language spoken in the part of Belgium close to the Dutch border. For 15 days, the paper also ran a supplement in which it published a book called Islam Now, presenting the history of Islam up to the modern era. The paper plans to run [a series] of articles on the Islamic faith and its practices: prayer, fasting, charity and the pilgrimage [to Mecca]…'

"When the offensive cartoons of the Prophet [were published], we responded by damaging buildings and campaigning to boycott products. Most [Muslims] continued to purchase these products in secret, or [went on buying them] because they were not aware of their origin. The whole affair [produced nothing more than] slogans which were meant to support [Islam], but which in practice only damaged its reputation.

"When we wanted to explain the value of our faith, [why didn't we launch] social initiatives... or harness our economic resources to inform the world about the noble nature of Islam and shari'a? Nothing [of this sort] was done, except for a few conferences organized by Muslim preachers - and even this came only after the situation had deteriorated.

"These conferences did not have as much impact as the actions of the rabble... the bombing of buildings, the abduction of innocent people, and the murder of peaceful individuals. These spread more quickly and made a greater impression than lectures aimed at changing [the Western perception of Islam]...

Read more »

Labels: , ,

Socialize this! Personalize this! Radicalize this!

Contributors

Jihadi Du Jour is actively looking for contributors who are concerned about America's future and are willing to research and post about the fight against Islamic Jihad. If you are interested email us at jihadidujour@yahoo.com

RASTAMAN
MEDIAN SIB
CAREN E
OBADIAH
U. INFIDEL
LAYLA
TODD
BERNIE
DEBBIE

HEIDI

JAY
JAMES
KATHY
JOHN
JOE S.

BETH
ROBERT

DARRELL
CHAIM

Guests: Stan Smith | Leonard Magruder | Random Thoughts @ TROP | Brigitte Gabriel | Annaqed The Critic | Miss Kelly | CENTCOM

Courtesy of Gabrielle--download and use freely

Blogroll Buzz! | Sponsored Buzz!

Featured video


And Blip.TV

Most wanted





Member:
NowPublic