At the crossroad of Islam, the West

Bonfire of the Pieties
Islam prohibits neither images of Muhammad nor jokes about religion.

BY AMIR TAHERI
Wednesday, February 8, 2006

[http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007934->http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007934]

A Voice of wisdon! Thank you for your thoughtful essay. God bless you.

I agree with your sentiments Br. Tariq but the question arises, how can Muslim masses express themselves other than these demonstrations? There is no outlet for their voices or opinions to be heard and bunch of Bathist/Alawites torching the embassies should not be confused for public outrage – torching of foreign embassies in Damascus and Beirut was a well-planned, government led order executed by the mobster.

Muslim masses can’t be blamed for the dirty politics of non-democratic regimes in the middle east. The cause was hyjacked by these political ‘thugs’ now championing Islam.

This reminds me of the message of Surah al-‘asr:
By time, mankind is at loss except for those who
1. believe
2. do righteous deeds
3. call one another to the TRUTH
4. and call one another to PATIENCE

may Allah reward you,
Faraz Khan
New Jersey, USA

Dear Mr Ramadan,
I’ve just red your article “At crossroad of Islam,The west”
You wrote:
“Muslims do not share this attitude, it is imperative that they learn to keep an intellectual critical distance when faced with such provocations”
What do you say about Mr Kotek article at Le Monde Feb/07 where he wrote:
“This would have to be the code of behavior of any ilustrador of the press, exactly of the Arab press, and over all Arab, since, for paradox, the caricature Arab contemporary is intolerante and partial of this new century….The judaism is represented, more frequently of the one than if it would desire, as a religion of the hatred, and the Jews, as drinking of blood and assassins of Christ…. these drawings had been never condemned by no important Arab intellectual?”
You are one of the most respected Islamic intellectual. What do you think about it?”

Yes, on the surface of it seems as though the protests are a clash of civilizations however both parties i.e. “the victims” and “culprits” both feel they are eventually disenfranchised in a way. This explains the unwielding positions held by both parties, evidently fellow Muslims persist in protesting (in the name of Religion) whilst the media claims to be “robbed” of freedom of speech, both of which can be exercised within the bounds of democracy- freedom of religion, freedom of speech without the necessity to violate. Therefore, though “the West” and Islam embody similar values(choice, liberty, equality, etc), dialogue can be a useful vehicle to reinforce understanding, tolerance, justice, etc whilst narrowing the misundersatndings and misconception (which we have seen are dangerous) that arise out of ignorance and naivety. So Brothers and Sisters alike, we have to be at the forefront of encouraging and propagating understanding and tolerance or else a clash of values and civilizations would be more imminent.

Rasheed Moseamo, South Africa, Tembisa.

Thank you for the article Mr. Ramadan. First of all I would like to say that the problem we are dealing with here is not a religious one. It is the politics of religion combined with inner state conflicts that have done the damage. I agree with you that we have to view the situation from a distance and analyse it first. We should avoid choosing one or the other side, because of the simple fact that we (especially European Muslims) have both sides as parts of our identities. But my point is that the people who are in the position to do this are a vast minority and they are not powerfull enough to end the situation. And of course (unequel) power is what it is about.

I also have a comment on your article:
In the sixth paragraph it seems like you divide the two sides in ‘Mulsims’ and ‘intellectuals, journalists, etc.’.
I think it is wise to avoid such a division. Because a person can be a Muslim and intellectual or journalist at the same time. Salaam u oalaykum.

The message we have to give the world (including our muslim brothers who resorted to violence)is that Islam is Peace. We,as muslims, have a responsibilty to project this view in all our actions. Allah says in the Quran :- “Only he will prosper that brings to God a heart full of peace” (Quraaan 26:89) “O you who believe ! stand out firmly for God, as witness to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just : that is next to piety.” (5:8) “Nor can Goodness and Evil be equal. Repel Evil with what is better : Then will he between whom and you was hatred become as it were a close friend” (41:34) “Help one another in virtue and righteouness” (5:2) “God does not forbid you with regard to those who do not fight you for your faith nor drive you out of your homes from dealing kindly and justly with them” (60:8) My brothers and sisters in Islam, Allah the All-Wise has sent us guidance in the Quraan, a solution to every problem, a way of life that would lead to a peaceful world, the only way – the righteous way – His way. Let us in our every step, follow his guidance. May Allah guide us all to the Straight Path. Assalamu Alaikum(may peace be upon you), Sausan Al Ayad.

ASsalamu’alaykum
With all respect and in agreeement with you Mr. Ramadan, my opinion:
About the cartoons “picturing” the Prophet (Saw) in Danish newspapers:

1.Media and individuals have unrestricted freedom of expression. State Governments or institutions can not be blamed or made accountable for the Media, which in Western societies is independent of the State. Muslims may therefore not request any legal or political consequences for the publishing of the Media. Moreover, I would say that the depicting-act is in the intension of the depicter, not in the viewer, who could see something completely different…
2.Here in West (Sweden) many people have reacted with understanding and respect of the Muslim population’s feelings and therefore argued in favour of condemning that publishing as an aggression to religious feelings, as something insensitive to do – nothing else. But instead, many Muslims have reacted demanding and talking about “rights” or “no rights”, as if our Islamic norms were everybody’s norms and all comprehensive!…Divine Message is for everybody, all embracing and all comprehensive, but in religion there is “free will” and choice; it’s the different States that make it – or not – into state-laws. There is no “Universal Islamic State Law”!
That is: while non Muslims react with respect of Muslims religion and feelings, Muslims react with prepotency and no respect for other’s – prevailing – norms and values!
3.Freedom of expression involves however responsibility. In every society, there are minorities and whole social stratus that don’t have access to neither state-power nor media-expression. Media’s responsibility lies also in succeeding to reflect and remark those groups’ standings; in giving the powerless a voice.
4.When ever Media attacks and defames such groups, it’ll be following the Power’s interest.

The publishing was a provocation. Western state-powers don’ miss any occasion to make polemics and polarise with Islam. That is because they want to be and remain secular.
The sad thing is that Muslims seem to always fall in the trap. Religious-political radical groups surf upon Muslims sensitivity, frustration and impotence. The conflict becomes inflated.
Muslims latest reactions and demands do precisely follow the Power’s interests and hurt Islam far more than the publishing itself did. And what’s worse: many Muslims expose once again their deep misunderstanding of modern society’s dynamics – the very same misunderstanding that is automatically (unavoidably?) risking polarising Islam towards Global World Culture.
Radical Muslims are riding on the same polarising-spirit.
Muslims can and should act secularly under the global circumstances. We are all embraced by the same dynamics.

Thank you! wassalam Khadidja

Comme je suis devenue ISLAMOPHOBE!

Au nom d’Allah, des musulmans s’envolent et tuent des milliers de personnes en fonçant directement sur les tours jumelles en 2001. Aucune révolte, ni aucune manifestation.

En 2005, des musulmans bloquent la sortie d’une école alors que des jeunes filles tentent de fuir un feu dévastateur. Ils ont mis le feu car ces jeunes filles n’étaient pas voilées. Six mortes. Aucune révolte, ni aucune manifestation.

À Paris, une famille musulmane assassine sa fille qui refuse de vivre selon les lois musulmanes. Dans le monde musulman, aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

En Indonésie, des musulmans tranchent la tête de 3 adolescentes chrétiennes qui se rendaient à l’école. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

Des musulmans iraquiens assassinent des profs qui n’enseignent pas le Coran selon la méthode classique. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

En Égypte, des musulmans assassinent 80 touristes en utilisant des bombes à proximité de quelques cafés et en bordure des hôtels. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

Un musulman attaque une école tenue par des missionnaires en Inde.Six morts. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

Il y a plus d’un an, des musulmans attaquent une école à Breslan, Russie. Des centaines d’enfants périssent. Ils les abattent à la mitraillette dans les classes. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

Des musulmans tirent des roquettes dans les écoles israéliennes et tuent des enfants sans distinction. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

Au pays de Tony Blair, des musulmans tuent 50 passagers qui empruntent le métro de Londres. Plus de 700 blessés. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

À Bali, les musulmans tuent plus de 200 personnes. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

Dans les journaux musulmans, on publie des dessins antisémites, anticatholiques, antiprotestants, antimaçons, des dessins mutl-anti, à profusion.Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

Au nom d’Alllah, des musulmans tuent, pillent, massacrent, lapident, surtout les femmes, les possèdent, les violent, les couvrent, les réduisent à l’indigence, les cadenassent, les enferment… pour ne les libérer que lorsqu’elles sont à l’agonie. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

Des musulmans sont impliquées dans plus de 54% des conflits mondiaux qui sévissent sur la Planète. Aucune révolte, aucune manifestation.

Au Danemark, un éditeur publie UNE caricature qui dépeint le Prophète avec une bombe en guise de ciboulot. Des musulmans éclatent! Allah est grand et Mahomet est son Prophète. Quelle insulte! Ils n’en peuvent plus, la communauté internationale offense Mahomet. Révolte, manifestation, assassinats, pillages, incendies.

Arab Fantasies
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Excerpts: Israeli plot: cartoons.Cartoon plot. 12 Februry 2006

Excerpts: Israeli plot: cartoons.Cartoon plot. 12 Februry 2006

+++ JORDAN TIMES 12 Feb.’06:” ‘Who stands to gain?’ ” by Musa Keilani
QUOTES FROM TEXT:
“stepped-up Israeli efforts to single out Islam as the next enemy of the
West”
“I don’t think that it is an exaggeration to assert that there indeed
could be a link between Islamaphobia and the cartoons.”
“violence that some of us employed to express our pain and sense of
humiliation … has done serious damage to our image”
“Muslim mindset has become a perfect breeding ground for resentment
against the West’s approach to Islam and Muslims”
“freedom of expression is only a screen”

We hate you because of your behaviour. We will purge you out of Europe and the UK . You are a plague like cockroaches. Only you stink more.

Bloody Moslem savages:
Hamas Video:
We will drink the blood of the Jews
By Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook

The Hamas website this week presented the parting video messages of two Hamas suicide terrorists. One message was for Jews, whose blood Hamas promises to drink until Jews “leave the Muslim countries,” and the second to a mother, as she helps dress her son for battle prior to his suicide terror mission.

To view the Hamas’ Drink
Jew’s blood video : http://www.pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_Hamas_suicide.asx

Each terrorist had a separate message for Jews. This first said,
“My message to the loathed Jews is that there is no god but Allah, we will chase you everywhere! We are a nation that drinks blood, and we know that there is no blood better than the blood of Jews. We will not leave you alone until we have quenched our thirst with your blood, and our children’s thirst with your blood. We will not leave until you leave the Muslim countries.”
The second terrorist said the following:
“In the name of Allah, we will destroy you, blow you up, take revenge against you, [and] purify the land of you, pigs that have defiled our country… This operation is revenge against the sons of monkeys and pigs.”
One of the terrorists saw his death as a wedding with the Maidens of Paradise:
“I dedicate this wedding [i.e. death for Allah] to all of those who have chosen Allah as their goal, the Quran as their constitution and the Prophet [Muhammad] as their role model. Jihad is the only way to liberate Palestine – all of Palestine – from the impurity of the Jews.”
The message to one of the terrorist’s mother was instruction for her to be joyous over his death and his “wedding” with the “Maidens of Paradise.”
“My dear mother, you who have cared for me, today I sacrifice my life to be your intercessor [on Judgment Day]. O my love and soul, wipe your tears, don’t be saddened. In the name of Allah, I’ve achieve all that I’ve aspired. Don’t let me see you sad on my wedding day with the Maidens of Paradise. So be happy and not sad, because in the name of Allah, after death is merciful Allah’s paradise.”
Included in the clip is the farewell scene between the mother and terrorist son while she helps him don his military vest. In the background one can hear the lyrics, “My dear mother, don’t cry over us.”

view: http://www.pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_Hamas_suicide.asx

No sweet talk Ramadan the era of “Takiya” is over:
Here is your favourite Imam:
Radical sheikh makes his return

‘Hatred will reign forever’

Sheikh Omar Bakri back online, slams anti-Muslim alliance of ‘pigs’, says Hizbullah ‘is not real’
Yaakov Lappin

Extremist Islamist leader Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, banned from Britain after encouraging young Muslims to become suicide bombers, has broken his radio silence and reestablished contact directly with his UK followers from his new home in Beirut, Lebanon.

Muslim Threat

London Islamists target Israel, Denmark /
Radical groups call on supporters to wage holy war against Israel and Denmark, slam Muhammad cartoons

Six months before the July 7, 2005 London bomb attacks, Syrian-born Bakri told followers on an Internet chat room to join al-Qaeda, and instructed his listeners to commit acts of terrorism “wherever you are,” citing the end of a “covenant of security” with Britain.
On February 13 and 14 of this year, Bakri returned to the same chat room. “The covenant (of security) has been restored,” Bakri said on Tuesday evening, February 14. “Now tomorrow, there could be a change of the situation of the reality in Britain and you can do the jihad physically. It’s not something rigid. The situation keeps changing,” he warned.

Bakri said British Muslims should refrain from carrying out terror attacks on Britain, due to the British government’s decision not to implement a number of anti-terror laws, but made it clear the ‘ceasefire’ was very fragile.

“I can see nowadays, they (the UK government) back down on a lot of things, and they are really giving a sense of security to the Muslim community in Britain. But now, if tomorrow (the British government) issues another new law, if they start to arrest you, and start to attack Muslims, this immediately is another situation,” he said.

Bakri also called for Danish cartoonists who drew images of Islam’s prophet Muhammad to be killed.

‘Hatred will reign forever’

The sheikh’s followers appeared excited by Bakri’s online return. One user, with the screen name al-Ghurabaa, the name of the group formed by Bakri’s British followers, said that sending petitions against the cartoons was useless. “Unless the petition is gonna have anthrax on it then forget about it,” he wrote.

Barki spoke of an “alliance of kuffars (unbelievers),” between the “pigs of the Jews and Christians.”

“The animosity of the Jews and Christians is going to be always there. And in particular the Jews,” said Bakri.

Quoting the Koran, Bakri said: “Verily, you will find the strongest among men in enmity to the believers (Muslims) the Jews and those who are al-Mushrik (unbelievers).”

Speaking of the struggle between the “two camps” of Muslims and non-Muslims, Bakri declared: “The kuffar are one nation all of them together, communists, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, and Jews, Christians, and we are so happy to see them all gathered together against us, because that shows us that we are on the right path. Therefore we should declare day and night to those kuffar, who worship the cow and those who worship the cross declare to them: We reject you. We disbelieve in you. We completely distance ourselves from you. And between us there is going to be animosity and hatred forever until you worship Allah exclusively.”

Bakri then slammed British Muslim organizations, “those who claimed to be Muslims,” describing them as “the fifth column who live among us who puts his fingers with the hands of the kuffars,” naming the Muslim Council of Britain, and the Muslim Association of Britain, among others.

‘Hizbullah just a propaganda machine’

Turning his attention to his new home country of Lebanon, Bakri, who promotes a fundamentalist Sunni Islamist interpretation, attacked Hizbullah as an Iranian puppet designed to promote Shiite Islam. He expressed frustration with what he said was Hizbullah’s “propaganda” and “monopolization” of southern Lebanon.

“The reality is, Hizbullah, it is in my opinion, besides that it is Shiite and has allegiance to Iran and has alliance with Syria what people do not know, Hizbullah is a media platform. It is not a real organization that has a real military objective to liberate anything,” he said.

Bakri, who participated in an Islamist attempt to overthrow the secular regime of Syria, once again attacked the Syrian government, saying: “Syria, the one that guarantees the security of Israel in south Lebanon, by not letting mujahadeen (holy warriors) go from there to attack. Because they put on the border Hizbullah, and Hizbullah prevents everybody, they don’t want anyone there except for them, in order to monopolize the issues of so called resistance in jihad in south Lebanon they lose all credibility. I’m witnessing that in Lebanon now.”

“I found it (Hizbullah) just people who want to promote Shiism and promote their own views and ideas, and make the Muslims weaker and weaker. They call for democracy, they call for secularism, they make alliance with the Kuffar. I don’t feel Hizbullah has any agenda to liberate any land,” he lamented.

‘Hizbullah exaggerates attacks on Israel’

“Why is it allowed for Hizbullah to bomb Tel Aviv and to bomb Israel but it’s forbidden for others?” Bakri asked. “I can tell you why. Simply because all the rockets Hizbullah launch is part of the framework of normal military exercise between Hizbullah and Israel. This is a necessary tool for propaganda in order to say that Shiites in Lebanon are fighting and to promote Shiism, which is really led by Iran,” he said.

“Nasrallah said, you see, we throw at Israel 500 rockets; 500 rockets?! What are you talking about. You see, they throw two missiles, and they say 500 missiles. You can see how they exaggerate things achieving nothing. Hizbullah leaders say they have obedience, to whom? To Christian Maronites, to Lebanese government. Which itself is another tool, to implement kuffar (infidel) law, and alliance with the Syrian regime.” Bakri added.

Bakri also mocked Hizbullah’s claim that the disputed Sheba farms area, currently under Israeli control, is in fact Lebanese territory.

“All that they are talking about is they want to liberate Lebanese land. And by the way brothers, I can tell you something, don’t say it to anyone, there is none of the Lebanese land under occupation left. Sheba farms, the Lebanese people say it belongs to Syria.”

Publié dans le journal danois EXTRABLADET (lettres de lecteurs),

Désolés pour vous donner l’abri.

Désolés pour vous donner une éducation gratuite.

Désolés pour vous aider avec des subventions.

Désolés pour vous laisser pratiquer votre propre religion dans notre pays Chrétien !

Désolés pour avoir envoyer d’aide à votre pays.

Désolés pour ne pas exiger la vengeance en sang pour les meurtres des nos compatriotes par des musulmans.

Désolés pour ne pas courir autour avec des ceintures explosifs sur nos corps quand nous nous sentons bousculé et poussé.

Désolés pour ne pas faire juste ce que votre religion indique, mais pas des excuses pour la pratique de la liberté d’expression dans Notre propre pays avec des lois qui nous indiques que nous sommes libres de parler et de s’exprimer.

Cette excuse vous n’obtiendrez jamais!

Il doit y avoir un élément de folie dans l’Islam quand l’annonce des mutilations et de décapitations ne provoque aucun tollé dans la communauté musulmane. Douze dessins ridicules dans un journal méconnu ont tiré la voile — sur la vraie nature de la menace islamique. Le fait est qu’ils ont pétés les plombs complètement. Des bannières : “tuez celui qui insulte le prophète” et “la seule manière ceci sera résolue, est si ceux qui sont responsables seraient extrades ainsi ils peuvent être punies par loi d’Islamique, et être exécutées”.
Une religion de paix ? C’est la culture la plus malade qu’existe sur la face de la terre. Le fait qu’elle est soutenue par des gauchistes séculaires en Europe et Amérique indique la maladie terminale de ceux que mène une croisade au nom “de justice social.” Les racines de cette maladie Musulmane sont une haine pour l’Occident pour le crime d’être une réussite, démocratique et tolérante. Et au coeur de cette maladie est l’haine de soi. Haine de soi pour les 1.000 ans d’échec de la culture musulmane\ arabe. Le Danemark un pays pacifique, tolérant de 4 millions d’habitants- 162 musulmans violentes arrêtés. Danemark doit regretter le droit d’asile si facilement accordé par “les idiots utiles”. Le Danemark subit un refroidissement du discours libre parce que leurs 3% sont offensés par les dessins publié et, naturellement, ont menacé les vies de tout intéressé.
Le monde islamique nous continue montrer comment peu de tolérance ils ont pour n’importe quoi. Ils aiment tuer, détruire, et ils aiment encourager les massacres, certains même élèvent leurs enfants dans cet esprit. Mais par ailleurs, Dieu protége n’importe qui ose offenser ces âmes délicates et leurs susceptibilités sensibles….. Je ferai une question de principe d’acheter des produits danois disponibles dans mon pays. J’espère que chacun fera la même chose. Par ailleurs, le Guide suprême iranien l’ayatollah Ali Khamenei a dénoncé la publication des caricatures de Mahomet dans la presse européenne comme étant « une conspiration sioniste ». « Il s’agit d’une conspiration planifiée des sionistes pour provoquer une confrontation entre musulmans et chrétiens », a-t-il déclaré dans un discours retransmis par la télévision.
La liste des pays témoins de manifestations parfois violentes contre la publication des caricatures de Mahomet ne cesse de s’allonger.

Sorry Sorry Sorry,
Sorry Saudi-Arabia
Sorry for being a woman
Sorry I don’t wear a scarf
Sorry I am not submissive to my sons.
Sorry that I believe in freedom of speech.
Sorry that I walk the street without a male escort.
Sorry that I drink alcohol
Sorry that I drive a car.
Sorry that I eat pork.
Sorry that I keep a dog.
I’m sorry that I thought danish law was applicable in Denmark.
Sorry sorry sorry sorry, where is the emergency exit?
– Lone Noergaard, Danish Writer in <http://www.politiken.dk> S aturday 04 Febr. 2006

Et si on avait fait un dessin de ce genre pour le noble prophète, j’aurais compris , mais là vraiment ! Il n’y a pas de quoi fouetter un chat !!
Alors que le Coran, lui, est une insulte à notre dignité de juifs et de chrétiens.
Nous sommes traités de singes dégoûtants(abjects), de porcs et de chiens.
Nous sommes qualifiés de ” corrupteurs ( mufsidîna), de polythéistes(muchrikîna).
Nous sommes traités de chiens d’infidèles, de Kouffars,
Nous sommes réduits , dans le droit musulman , à l’état de dhimmitude, c’est-à-dire des esclaves, des sous-hommes, des protégés , des minus, des moins que rien , des merdes.
Pour toutes ces insultes contenues dans le coran nous demandons réparation , [i]surtout pour la sourate 48, : verset 29/30 , la VICTOIRE ECLATANTE .

JE SENS QUE JE VAIS M’ENERVER !!

Muslim outrage?. let’s do a little historical review. Just some lowlights:

Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City. No, Muslim outrage.
Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt. No Muslim outrage.
A Muslim attacks a missionary children’s school in India. Kills six. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia. Muslims shoot children in the back. No Muslim outrage.
Let’s go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali. No Muslim outrage.
Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons. No Muslim outrage
Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge. No Muslim outrage.
Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed. Muslims are outraged.

Dead children. Dead tourists. Dead teachers. Dead doctors and nurses. Death, destruction and mayhem around the world at the hands of Muslims .. no Muslim outrage … but publish a cartoon depicting Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and all hell breaks loose.

Come on, is this really about cartoons? They’re rampaging and burning flags. They’re looking for Europeans to kidnap. They’re threatening innkeepers and generally raising holy Muslim hell not because of any outrage over a cartoon. They’re outraged because it is part of the Islamic jihadist culture to be outraged. You don’t really need a reason. You just need an excuse. Wandering around, destroying property, murdering children, firing guns into the air and feigning outrage over the slightest perceived insult is to a jihadist what tailgating is to a Steeler’s fan.

I know and understand that these bloodthirsty murderers do not represent the majority of the world’s Muslims. When, though, do they become outraged? When do they take to the streets to express their outrage at the radicals who are making their religion the object of worldwide hatred and ridicule? Islamic writer Salman Rushdie wrote of these silent Muslims in a New York Times article three years ago. “As their ancient, deeply civilized culture of love, art and philosophical reflection is hijacked by paranoiacs, racists, liars, male supremacists, tyrants, fanatics and violence junkies, why are they not screaming?”

Indeed. Why not?
Something is Rotten in the Kingdom of Denmark
A Muslim group, Hizb U Tahrir, in Denmark announced some time ago that a $30,000 bounty would be paid for the murder of several prominent Danish Jews, a threat that garnered wide international notice. Less well known is that this is just one problem associated with Denmark’s approximately 200,000 Muslim immigrants. The key issue is that many of them show little desire to fit into their adopted country.

For years, Danes lauded multiculturalism and insisted they had no problem with the Muslim customs – until one day they found that they did. Some major issues:

* Living on the dole: Third-world immigrants – most of them Muslims from countries such as Turkey, Somalia, Pakistan, Lebanon and Iraq – constitute 5 percent of the population but consume upwards of 40 percent of the welfare spending.

* Engaging in crime: Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark’s 5.4 million people but make up a majority of the country’s convicted rapists, an especially combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are non-Muslim. Similar, if lesser, disproportions are found in other crimes.

* Self-imposed isolation: Over time, as Muslim immigrants increase in numbers, they wish less to mix with the indigenous population. A recent survey finds that only 5 percent of young Muslim immigrants would readily marry a Dane.

* Importing unacceptable customs: Forced marriages – promising a newborn daughter in Denmark to a male cousin in the home country, then compelling her to marry him, sometimes on pain of death – are one problem.

Another is threats to kill Muslims who convert out of Islam. One Kurdish convert to Christianity, who went public to explain why she had changed religion, felt the need to hide her face and conceal her identity, fearing for her life.

* Fomenting anti-Semitism: Muslim violence threatens Denmark’s approximately 6,000 Jews, who increasingly depend on police protection. Jewish parents were told by one school principal that she could not guarantee their children’s safety and were advised to attend another institution. Anti-Israel marches have turned into anti-Jewish riots. One organization, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, openly calls on Muslims to “kill all Jews . . . wherever you find them.”

* Seeking Islamic law: Muslim leaders openly declare their goal of introducing Islamic law once Denmark’s Muslim population grows large enough – a not-that-remote prospect. If present trends persist, one sociologist estimates, every third inhabitant of Denmark in 40 years will be Muslim.

Fabricated cartoons worsened Danish controversy

The controversy over the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed is expanding, as more Muslims join the boycott and protests against Denmark and various European newspapers decide to publish the cartoons, mostly out of solidarity with Jyllands Posten and to make a strong political stand. One issue that puzzles many Danes is the timing of this outburst. The cartoons were published in September: Why have the protests erupted from Muslims worldwide only now? The person who knows the answer to this question is Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, a man that the Washington Post has recently profiled as “one of Denmark’s most prominent imams.”

Last November, Abu Laban, a 60-year-old Palestinian who had served as translator and assistant to top Gamaa Islamiya leader Talaal Fouad Qassimy during the mid-1990s and has been connected by Danish intelligence to other Islamists operating in the country, put together a delegation that traveled to the Middle East to discuss the issue of the cartoons with senior officials and prominent Islamic scholars. The delegation met with Arab League Secretary Amr Moussa, Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Sheikh Mohammad Sayyed Tantawi, and Sunni Islam’s most influential scholar, Yusuf al Qaradawi. “We want to internationalize this issue so that the Danish government will realize that the cartoons were insulting, not only to Muslims in Denmark, but also to Muslims worldwide,” said Abu Laban.

On its face, it would appear as if nothing were wrong. However, the Danish Muslim delegation showed much more than the 12 cartoons published by Jyllands Posten. In the booklet it presented during its tour of the Middle East, the delegation included other cartoons of Mohammed that were highly offensive, including one where the Prophet has a pig face. But these additional pictures were NOT published by the newspaper, but were completely fabricated by the delegation and inserted in the booklet (which has been obtained and made available to me by Danish newspaper Ekstra Bladet). The delegation has claimed that the differentiation was made to their interlocutors, even though the claim has not been independently verified. In any case, the action was a deliberate malicious and irresponsible deed carried out by a notorious Islamist who in another situation had said that “mockery against Mohamed deserves death penalty.” And in a quintessential exercise in taqiya, Abu Laban has praised the boycott of Danish goods on al Jazeera, while condemning it on Danish TV.

Stop being retarded !
Sunday, January 29, 2006
A message to those who demand a Denmark boycott

STOP BEING RETARDED!

http://egyptiansandmonkey.blogspot.com/2006/01/message-to-those-who-demand-denmark.html
Ok, now that I have got that out of the way, let me inform you the reason why I am giving out this message. I am guessing some background to the issue is necessary after all. Here is a very brief one:

A danish newspaper published 12 cartoons depicting Prophet Mohamed, which in turn pissed off the islamic community in Denmark and caused an outbreak of outrage against the printing of those cartoons, since it is forbidden to draw the prophet in any way. The arab governments, eager to appease the growing islamist undercurrent, decided to jump in on the action and demand an apology from the Danish government and some sort of punishment exacted against the newspaper over the cartoons. The Danish Prime minister naturally thought the delegation that met him was retarded, since Denmark is a country where there is Freedom of speech, and the Prime minister can not just reprimend people for printing a cartoon. This came as a shock to the delegation, who thought the PM of Denmark was going to throw the reproters and cartoonists in jail like they do in our countries, and only encoruaged the outrage apparently: Death threats have been made against the cartoonist of course, and calls to avenge the “honor of the prophet” started to pile up all over the world.

Now, the jordanian parliament just called for the punishment of the cartoonists who drew the cartoons, The International Union for Muslim Scholars threatend to call for a world-wide boycott of danish goods unless the Danish government “does something”, and apparently some people went ahead with the boycott anyway, drafting a website for it and providing a list of danish products that no allah-fearing-muslim should buy. This naturally sparked a debate between the egyptian bloggers: there are those who think that Islam and the prophet need us to defend them, those who think that boycotting danish goods is fairplay if they are offended and those- like me- who think the whole thing is freaking retarded. And since I am dealing with retards here, let me try to break my reasons down in simple sentences for them to understand. So bear with me, ok?

Ok, reasons why a boycott is retarded:

1) You are boycotting the wrong people: The people who published those cartoons work in a danish newspaper. They do not own danish factories, make danish cheese or toys, or any of those nifty products that they have on that list. In essence you are punishing everyone and everything danish because what one newspaper printed, and yet, you are not really punishing the newspaper. Not really. Unless they are exporting their newspaper to Egypt, which they are not, you have less than 0% of actually affecting them, hurting them or punishing them. In short, you are preventing yourself from eating some really good cheese for no reason at all. You want to hurt the people who did this? Sue the newspaper. Sue them everywhere, for any reason you like. That should affect them directly. This boycott won’t.

2) This will accomplish nothing, except getting more people pissed at muslims: Given that the ” we are outraged” movement has decided to go all out with their speeches, it was inevitable that some crazy hotheads decided to issue death threats against the newspaper and the cartoonists. Yes, cause nothing says we are peacefull tolerant people like death threats and boycotting a whole country. I’ve yet to see a single christian group get mad at the Rolling Stones for having Kanye West depicting Jesus on their cover, and you know why? because they understand that there is something called free speech and freedom of expression. That it’s not always pleasant. That some people will try to provoke a reaction out of you by offending you with something like this. And you know what? Muslims fall for it every single time and then the crazy bastards amongst them go all the way and do something stupid. Like the Van Gogh murder in 2004. Remember how good that made us look in Holland? What? You want to go through that whole thing again, and drag us with you for the ride? Thanks but no thanks moron. Our reputation is already bad as it is, and we don’t need anymore help sullying it.

3) The Prophet doesn’t need your defense: If you truly believe that the Mohamed is god’s prophet and that god exhalted him beyond all other prophets, then do you really think anything that anyone will say about him will make an ounce of difference? Will the sun rise from the west because someone said it does, or will it rise from the east regardless? Do you get my point here? Do you understand that cartoons depicting the prophet will not hurt him in any way, not will they harm his image? What is it you are afraid of? Someone looking at the cartoon depicting him and going “Ohh, that Mohamed fella really doesn’t look pleasant. He must suck as a person if a cartoon shows him with bombs on his head. There is no way I will convert to Islam now, and from this day forward I will fully support the bombing of its followers.”? What, cause cartoons hold so much power over people? Or are you afraid that muslims will look at those cartoons and go “Gee, our prophet doesn’t look good here. I am done with Islam. I am going to turn Hindu and worship a cow instead”? Or is it his reputation that you are afraid will get tarnished because oif that cartoon? That somehow, someone will make an uneducated and totally ignorant judgment on the prophet and the religion because of 12 cartoons in a newspaper? Well, if that’s the case, answer this question for me: What is more likely to tarnish the reputation of Islam: 12 cartoons in a newspaper, or calls for punishment and death threats to the people who penned those cartoons? Which damages our reputation more? Are you getting the point or do I need to draw it out for you?

So please, will all of you pious fuckheads who think you will score brownie points with God over your boycott stop being retarded? A danish boycott will do nothing, the same way the american products boycott did nothing, and any future boycott will do nothing. Grow up. Accept other people’s opinion even if they disagree with yours, the same way you want them to accept your opinions. And next time you see something that offends your muslim sensibilities, whether it’s a movie, a cartoon, or a piglet mug, do us all a favor and just look the other way. And if you are really mad, then take a xanax or count to 10 or something. Or even better, go get laid. Find a danish woman and sleep with her. Now that’s revenge.

Just whatever you do, don’t do something stupid, or encourage people to do something stupid, or use big words such as “demanding the Mohamed’s Ummah would rise up to defend his honor” when you don’t undertsand them or their consequences. And remember, prophets exhalted by God do not get tarnished by humans, nor do they need human defenders, especially ones that are as stupid as you.

Thank you, and have a pleasant evening,

Negative Islamic and Jewish Cartoons!

Here are 2 interesting articles. The first one is a disgusting reaction of a Moslem group to the anti-Islamic cartoons by showing anti-Jewish cartoons. The next article appeared in a Jewish newspaper, condemning these Moslem cartoons….Fair enough, but why hasn’t there been a reaction to the anti-Jewish

cartoons from the western world? …..At least from our own enlightened people? Such cartoons have been appearing in the Moslem newspapers and magazines without hardly a whimper from the western world for years.

PROTEST CARTOON SHOWS ANNE FRANK IN BED WITH HITLER

“Islamic group posts anti-Jew cartoons” (AP, February 5, 2006)

A Belgian-Dutch Islamic political organization, the Arab European League, posted anti-Jewish cartoons on its website in response to the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that appeared in Danish papers last year and offended many Muslims…

One of the AEL cartoons displayed an image of famed Dutch Holocaust victim Anne Frank in bed with Adolf Hitler, and another questioned whether the Holocaust actually occurred…

Dyab Abou Jahjah, the party’s founder and best-known figure, defended the action on the Dutch television program Nova Saturday. “Europe has its sacred cows, even if they’re not religious sacred cows,” he told the program…

The AEL stood in Belgian elections in 1999 and 2003 under different names but failed to get more than one percent of the vote…

Even more striking has been the reaction of Palestinians in Gaza:

An imam in Gaza City told 9,000 worshippers that those behind the drawings should have their heads cut off. Protesters in Ramallah chanted: ‘Bin Laden, our beloved, Denmark must be blown up.’ About 10,000 demonstrators, including Hamas gunmen firing in the air, marched through Gaza City to the Palestinian legislature, where they climbed on to the roof and waved Hamas banners.

‘We are ready to redeem you with our souls and our blood, our beloved Prophet,’ they chanted. ‘Down, down Denmark.’ Before dawn, Palestinian militants threw a pipe bomb at a French cultural centre in Gaza City and many Palestinians started boycotting European goods, especially those from Denmark.

Foreign diplomats, aid workers and journalists began pulling out of Palestinian areas because of kidnapping threats against some Europeans. Gunmen in Nablus briefly kidnapped Christopher Kasten, 21, a German teaching English at a local school. Palestinian police rescued him unharmed.

Suddenly, the veil has lifted. Denmark of course has no form whatsoever in the Middle East dispute. Now the Palestinians are suddenly revealed as part of the Islamic jihad against the infidels. Well, there’s a surprise. The canny guys in Hamas have spotted this particular elephant trap and are taking steps to avoid it. The Times reports:

In demonstrations in the West Bank and Gaza yesterday a preacher told 9,000 worshippers at one mosque: ‘We will not accept less than severing the heads of those responsible [for the cartoons]’ But as thousands converged on the Palestinian parliament building, Mushir al-Masri, a Hamas spokesman, told the crowd that, whatever their anger, they should not disgrace their religion.
Let us remind ourselves again – the cartoons were not an attack on Islam. They were instead a protest against the violent intimidation being practised in its name after the author of a (totally inoffensive) children’s book about Islam had difficulty in finding an illustrator because artists feared they might be attacked. Since then, the violence that has erupted across the world has more than proved the cartoonists’ point. This was noted by Philippe Douste-Blazy, the French foreign minister, who in striking contrast to his British straw counterpart said in the Telegraph:

‘It is not normal to caricature a whole religion as an extremist or terrorist movement.’ But the extreme reaction to the cartoons ‘would suggest the caricaturists were right,’ he added.
The problem is that the perpetrators of aggression, suffering from a pathological inferiority complex about the weakness of Islamic culture and firmly believing the lies and libels with which they have been indoctrinated about Jews and the west, invert their own aggression as attack upon Islam by their victims.

Thus the Times reported remarks by Liaqat Hussain, the secretary of the Bradford Central Mosque, who although adding as a postscript that any protest should be peaceful nevertheless turned the cartoons from a defence against Islamist intimidation into evidence of a world-wide attack upon Islam.

‘This is clearly a demonstration by the Christian world of hostility towards the Muslim community,’ he said. ‘This has come from all the nations of Europe and it reflects an ongoing campaign against Muslims by the Western powers. You can’t differentiate between the Western world and Christianity; you can’t separate what’s happened from the people of those countries and their governments. I blame all of the Western population because these cartoons reflect the opinion of the people.’ He said that the publication of the cartoons across Europe was a deliberate act of provocation. ‘We have already seen the genocide of Muslims in Bosnia and we’ve witnessed the support by Christians and the West for Israel and its atrocities against the Palestinians,’ he said. ‘Now we’re seeing the early stages of creating a suitable environment for a Muslim holocaust in Europe.’
The madness of this protest deepens when one considers that the claim at its heart, that pictorial representations of the Prophet are forbidden in Islam, is not true. Like so much else, it is all a matter of interpretation; but the fact remains that there have been many representations of the Prophet in Islamic art over the centuries. This website shows many images of the Prophet in medieval Islamic paintings and illuminated manuscripts, some showing his face in full, others with it blanked out.

In the Telegraph, Charles Moore makes an excellent point:

There is no reason to doubt that Muslims worry very much about depictions of Mohammed. Like many, chiefly Protestant, Christians, they fear idolatry. But, as I write, I have beside me a learned book about Islamic art and architecture which shows numerous Muslim paintings from Turkey, Persia, Arabia and so on. These depict the Prophet preaching, having visions, being fed by his wet nurse, going on his Night-Journey to heaven, etc. The truth is that in Islam, as in Christianity, not everyone agrees about what is permissible. Some of these depictions are in Western museums. What will the authorities do if the puritan factions within Islam start calling for them to be removed from display (this call has been made, by the way, about a medieval Christian depiction of the Prophet in Bologna)? Will their feeling of ‘offence’ outweigh the rights of everyone else?
Obviously, in the case of the Danish pictures, there was no danger of idolatry, since the pictures were unflattering. The problem, rather, was insult. But I am a bit confused about why someone like Qaradawi thinks it is insulting to show the Prophet’s turban turned into a bomb, as one of the cartoons does. He never stops telling us that Islam commands its followers to blow other people up.

Moore also asks a very pertinent question. Since the cartoons were actually published last autumn and protests at the time were confined to demonstrations in Denmark, why have they only now erupted across the world?

One possible if dismaying answer, which should receive more attention, is suggested by David Conway on the Civitas website yesterday:

But who wanted or caused the heat to become so turned up and why at that this particular moment? The clue to the answers to this second question lies in a second event almost certain to occur to today, if it has not already happened by the time this blog gets posted. This is the likely decision today in Vienna by the International Atomic Energy Agency to report Iran to the UN Security Council for continuing with its programme of nuclear research. If that decision should occur, when the UN Security Council gets round to considering what form of sanctions to impose on Iran, guess to whom chairmanship of the Council will have passed. You’ve got it… plucky little Denmark.
Suddenly, the pieces fall into shape. The rumpus suddenly escalated, complete with fabricated offensive cartoons, to so enflame Muslim opinion that Denmark could be intimidated directly through a threatened Muslim boycott of its goods, or indirectly by the EU fearful of a wider boycott, into voting in favour of Iran.
Whatever the Security Council eventually may decide over sanctions against Iran, it is unlikely to deter that country from continuing to develop the technology needed to manufacture nuclear weapons, Prospect of its acquisition of them is likely to trigger a nuclear arms race in the region, as well as, sooner or later, oblige Israel or the US to make some pre-emptive strike against it to prevent its programme from reaching completion.

At best, such a strike will succeed, but not without precipitating a conventional war in the Middle East the repercussions of which will not escape Europe in the form of suicide bombings. At worst, pre-emption will fail, Iran will acquire nuclear weapons, and, with a President of that country as gung-ho as its current one, we all receive tickets for a one-way trip to oblivion.

It is not a thrilling prospect for sure. But that is all the more reason why the West needs to remain strong, united, and resolved to resist the challenge of militant Islam. If Europe has recently been made more so than it has been of late, it has to thank for that, paradoxically, the malicious militancy of the mullahs and imams whose fabrication of the grounds of the current crisis has given the West a second wake-up call to the true scale and nature of the current danger that it faces to which all too many Europeans failed to have become alerted by the first wake-up call given on September 11th.

Whether or not Conway is right about this, the cartoon jihad has made one thing crystal clear. No more alibis. The roots of global terror do not lie in Iraq, nor in Israel/Palestine, nor in Chechnya, Kashmir or any of the other iconic conflicts which are said to be its cause. They lie instead in the Islamists’ rage that their religious culture is not in power across the world, their determination to subordinate that world to its tenets and their truly pathological belief that it is they who are under attack if their victims dare defend themselves. Twelve scribbled drawings have lifted the veil — on both the nature of the threat and the disarray that greets it.

The storm over the Danish cartoons has been mistakenly described as a debate over the limits of free speech. One of the milder posters carried during a Londonistan anti-cartoon protest read “FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IS WESTERN TERRORISM.” The coverage in the mainstream American press has ranged from the banal to the bizarre, depicting broad-minded Danes and Dutchmen as raving xenophobes for refusing to tolerate Muslim intolerance.

But the controversy is actually about a struggle for power involving Muslim intimidation and the mandatory multiculturalism of the European political class. Flemming Rose, the Jyllands-Posten editor who published the cartoons in response to ongoing self-censorship by a cowed European press, has explained that what the rioters and their politically correct apologists are demanding is not “respect” but “my submission.”

Judging by the craven response of the British government and most of the European political class, they are succeeding. The Islamist leadership across Europe seems now to have largely achieved veto power over the press – except in Denmark – while in the name of multiculturalism, Muslims are subject to no such restraints.

“They think they have won the debate,” a British researcher and a convert to Christianity who attended a madrassa as a child in his native Guyana, Patrick Sookhdeo, said. “They believe that the British Government has capitulated to them, because it feared the consequences if it did not.” The lesson for Europe’s Muslims, he said, is that violence and the threat of violence work.What will follow, according to ICM Research, well-respected pollsters of British Muslims, is a demand in England (and elsewhere) for Islamic extraterritoriality, granting official government recognition to Shariah law in predominantly Muslim areas.

In practice, Shariah has already been partly imposed by Islamic thugs in sections of the British Midlands, as well as the suburbs of Paris and Stockholm. Since women walking in these neighborhoods are subject to stoning and rape, even non-Muslim women have donned the chador as a way of protecting themselves. And in the Netherlands, the upper-middle-class response to aggressive Islamism has been migration to the United States, Canada, and Australia.

Fortunately, two new commanding and readable books illuminate the landscape of Europe’s constricting future. Bruce Bawer’s “While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam Is Destroying the West From Within” (Doubleday, 256 pages, $23.95) and Claire Berlinski’s “Menace in Europe: Why the Continent’s Crisis Is America’s, Too” (Crown Forum, 288 pages, $25.95) are remarkably complementary. Mr. Bawer, who is an American from Queens, and fluent in both Dutch and Norwegian, is best on Scandinavia and Denmark. Ms. Berlinski, an American who now makes her home in Paris and Istanbul, covers Britain, France, and Germany.

They both make it clear that part of the problem of the European welfare states is not so much that Muslim integration has failed but that it has never really been tried. Immigrants to Britain, notes Ms. Berlinski, don’t need to learn English. Social-service pamphlets are translated into their languages by an already large and growing social-service bureaucracy that lives well off the failure to incorporate the newcomers. For his part, Mr.Bawer describes the numerous methods by which Muslims have actively resisted integration. There is the practice known as “dumping,” in which Muslim parents send their children back to the home country to be “educated” at schools where the Koran is virtually the only text. Similarly, women accused of leading a “European life” are sent back by their families or clans to their native lands for re-education. In their place, brides steeped in Islamic tradition are imported from the old country. The effect is that growing populations are in Europe but not of it. To make matters worse, the rigid structures of the European economies make it difficult to get work while an easy access to welfare makes it unnecessary, so that the newcomers aren’t even integrated into the workplace.

Still, despite Europe’s slow growth and generous benefits for not working, many thousands of dark-skinned Hindus in England, Armenians in France, and Poles in Germany are climbing the European ladder. But Muslims are different, notes Mr. Bawer: They see themselves as having a God-given authority that has “made them superior to infidels.”

The job of turning Muslims in the Netherlands into Dutch Muslims, both Mr. Bawer and Ms. Berlinski argue, is made all the more difficult by the European loss of identity. First nationalism replaced Christianity, notes Ms. Berlinski, and now, in reaction to the memories of the two world wars, the European Union has, with some success, hollowed out the idea of distinct national characters. Today, for the European political class, nationalism, or any form of populism, carries a distinctly fascist odor. But membership in the European Union is not an identity with any emotional resonance.

Even more significant is the sense, which both authors discuss at length, of European self-loathing. The “spice” of multiculturalism is seen as a welcome addition to the bland European stew. When a Swedish integration official was asked, “Is Swedish culture worth saving?” she replied, “What is Swedish culture?” Her assumption and that of the E.U. political class is that Europeans have to adapt to Muslims, not the other way around. And indeed Sweden, in the wake of the Danish cartoon affair, now seems to have given its imams veto power over what’s said about Islam in the Swedish press. Behind the self-loathing is the sense that after World War I, totalitarianism,and World War II, there is only a botched civilization that can provide the security of the welfare state but not much more than a bureaucratic identity.

Still, there is one part of what was once the West that Europeans loathe more than their own: the United States. Europe’s largely unaccountable political class and the Islamists are brought together by a shared hostility to the United States. In fact, they tend to fear America far more than Al Qaeda. Western Europe’s left-wing lumpen-intellectuals, Mr. Bawer notes, are “half in love with tyranny.” The British House of Commons even gave a minute of silence for the memory of the slain Hamas leader Sheik Yassin. Anti-Americanism, Mr. Bawer and Ms. Berlinski note, is increasingly the political glue that holds Europe together,if only to repudiate the American cowboys who had the bad taste not only to liberate the Continent repeatedly but to surpass it in the process. Thus Europeans invariably defend antiquated labor practices that restrain job creation as an alternative to “the American [read: savage] condition.”

Worse yet, criticism of Muslims – even when they engage in female genital mutilation, honor killings, or attacks on gays and Jews – is almost invariably defined as “Islamophobic.”This has led the Danish journalist Helle Brix to comment bitterly, “If at some time in the not-too distant future fundamentalist Muslims began rounding up Jews, it would be racism to resist.”

But then again the Danes are different.They were the one who saved their Jews in World War II, and it was the Danes, remembering Sweden’s collaboration with the Nazis, who quipped, “What is a Swede? But a German in human form.” The question for self-destructive Europe now is whether Danish courage will spread or remain merely an anomaly.

It’s hard to do full justice to the rich material in these two books. Ms. Berlinski, for instance, has a fascinating chapter on the Nazi aesthetic of Rammstein, Germany’s most popular band. But if the books have any weaknesses it is the lack of a historical framework. In 1979, the combination of Khomeinei’s revolution in Iran, the second oil shock, which gave Saudi Arabia even more money to fund Wahhabi mosques in Europe, and the victory of mujahedeen in Afghanistan changed the way European Muslims defined themselves. Their sense that Islam was once again on the march is the essential backdrop to these books.

Europe, smug in its certainty that its vast sophistication – as opposed to American “militarism” – would pave the way to the future, has been slow to react to the problems posed by Muslim immigration. When there is rioting, the answer is always more dialogue. But then again, Europe’s insistence on dialogue as the solution to all problems is often difficult to distinguish from appeasement.

what is going on here!
I am stunned by the comments posted following the article of Tariq Ramadan : all these comments goes in the same islamophobic direction :this will have the effect of closing doors to dialogue and mutual respect which are the only conditions to leave together in good understanding and peace. These comments are from the camp of extremists in the western world; where is the reasonable and wise camp?

Religion of Peace?Here it from the mouth of Youssef Al Qasrdawi, the official preacer of Al Jazeera ( his daughters study where? In America).
Monday, February 27, 2006
MEMRI: Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi: “There is a Jew Behind Me, Come and Kill Him”

Special Dispatch – Jihad & Terrorism Studies Project/Antisemitism
Documentation Project
February 28, 2006
No. 1102
Leading Islamist Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi: We are Fighting in the Name of
Islam…This Jihad is an Individual Duty of the Entire Muslim Nation…They
Fight Us With the Torah…We Should Fight Them With the Koran: “There is a
Jew Behind Me, Come and Kill Him”

The following are excerpts from a television program with Sheikh Yousef
Al-Qaradhawi, aired on Qatar TV on February 25, 2006. Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi is head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research, president of the International Association of Muslim Scholars (IAMS), and the spiritual guide of many other Islamist organizations across the world, including the Muslim Brotherhood.

TO VIEW THIS CLIP, VISIT: http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1052 .

Yousef Al-Qaradhawi: “Our war with the Jews is over land, brothers. We must understand this. If they had not plundered our land, there wouldn’t be a war between us.”

[…]

“We are fighting them in the name of Islam, because Islam commands us to fight whoever plunders our land, and occupies our country. All the school of Islamic jurisprudence – the Sunni, the Shi’ite, the Ibadhiya – and all the ancient and modern schools of jurisprudence – agree that any invader who occupies even an inch of land of the Muslims must face resistance. The Muslims of that country must carry out the resistance, and the rest of the Muslims must help them. If the people of that country are incapable or reluctant, we must fight to defend the land of Islam, even if the local [Muslims] give it up.

“They must not allow anyone to take a single piece of land away from Islam. That is what we are fighting the Jews for. We are fighting them… Our religion commands us… We are fighting in the name of religion, in the name of Islam, which makes this Jihad an individual duty, in which the entire nation takes part, and whoever is killed in this [Jihad] is a martyr. This is why I ruled that martyrdom operations are permitted, because he commits martyrdom for the sake of Allah, and sacrifices his soul for the sake of Allah.

“We do not disassociate Islam from the war. On the contrary, disassociating Islam from the war is the reason for our defeat. We are fighting in the name of Islam.”

[…]

“They fight us with Judaism, so we should fight them with Islam. They fight us with the Torah, so we should fight them with the Koran. If they say ‘the Temple,’ we should say ‘the Al-Aqsa Mosque.’ If they say: ‘We glorify the Sabbath,’ we should say: ‘We glorify the Friday.’ This is how it should be. Religion must lead the war. This is the only way we can win.”

[…]

“Everything will be on our side and against Jews on [Judgment Day]; at that time, even the stones and the trees will speak, with or without words, and say: ‘Oh servant of Allah, oh Muslim, there’s a Jew behind me, come and kill him.’ They will point to the Jews. It says ‘servant of Allah,’ not ‘servant of desires,’ ‘servant of women,’ ‘servant of the bottle,’ ‘servant of Marxism,’ or ‘servant of liberalism’… It said ‘servant of Allah.’

“When the Muslims, the Arabs, and the Palestinians enter a war, they do it
to worship Allah. They enter it as Muslims. The hadith says: ‘Oh Muslim.’ It says ‘oh Muslim,’ not ‘oh Palestinian, Jordanian, Syrian, or Arab
nationalist.’ No, it says: ‘Oh Muslim.’ When we enter [a war] under the
banner of Islam, and under the banner of serving Allah, we will be
victorious.”

A small study of the Qoran of which I do not have the French translation, shows to what extent Moslem Imams and scholars have distorted or concealed the scriptures.

Acoording to the Qoran the Land of Israel is promised to the Jewish People
Here are the Suras stating it:

Sura 5,24
Sura 7, 133
Sura 10,93
Sura 17, 106, 105

Suras stating that the Bible is the Source:
Sura 2, 81
Sura 6, 156, 155
Sura: 10,94
Sura 46,11
Sura 4, 135
Sura 8, 46

Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Qoran

but the Qoran states that subjects which are not clear, should be resolved by the Bible as a source
Sura 10, 94

The Bible states that Jerusalem is Holy to the Jewish People

The stupid gullible and “useful idiots” brought Tariq Ramadan to Oxford.

The alliance of the British Left with extreme Islam does not cease to amaze me.

The alliance of the British Left with extreme Islam does not cease to amaze me. The Comparison with the IRA does not hold water. Being nice to Islamists will not solve the problem- the pro Arab French and Spaniards tried- it failed.
Radical mosques are the spark lighting the fuse that can kill Britons other Europeans and Americans. That has killed Britons That will kill more if we let it. Such killing sprees, moreover, are plotted by young, male, Muslim militants who often enter Britain on student and other visas from places known to sponsor or export terrorism. One should not minimize the, already proven home grown terrorism. None of this is news.One should not be impressed by the a cacophony of activist Muslim organizations (Sacranie, Banglawala, and company) whose knee-jerk approach to “opposing” terror is indignant spewing at every effort made to prevent it.

Muslim Council of Britain launches incident hotline!
At last! A Muslim group in a Western country has set up an anti-terror hotline! Now, finally, peaceful Muslims in Britain will have an easy, anonymous way to give authorities tips about jihadists in their midst, and Muslims will be able to shed once and for all lingering suspicions that more of them in the West are in sympathy with jihadists than authorities would have us believe, or would like to believe themselves.

What’s that? It’s not a hotline for reporting jihad terrorism? It’s a hotline for reporting incidents of “Islamophobia”?

La Gauche anglaise diffère de l’Islam sur presque tous les domaines: La condition des femmes, les droits des “gays”, la laïcité. Les droits humains.
L’attitude Dhimmi envers le terrorisme, envers le fanatisme, envers l’Etat d’Israël est en plaine contradiction avec leurs valeurs, soit disant, universelles.

Le groupe islamiste nommé Hizb ut-Tahrir aspire à placer le monde sous la loi islamique et défend la pratique des attentats-suicide contre Israël. Frappé d’interdiction en Grande-Bretagne, il implanta une représentation clandestine dans les universités britanniques baptisée «Arrêter l’islamophobie», comme l’a révélé le Sunday Times.

Arrêter quoi, demanderez-vous peut-être?

Créé en Grande-Bretagne il y a une dizaine d’année, le néologisme islamophobie fut lancé officiellement en 1996 par un organisme nommé «Commission d’étude sur les Musulmans britanniques et l’islamophobie». Littéralement, le terme signifie «crainte injustifiée de l’Islam», mais il est utilisé pour désigner un «préjugé contre les Musulmans» et vient s’ajouter à plus de 500 autres phobies couvrant quasiment tous les aspects de l’existence.

Le terme a atteint entre-temps un niveau de réel intérêt linguistique et de reconnaissance politique, à tel point que le secrétaire général des Nations unies présida un séminaire, en décembre 2004, intitulé «Affronter l’islamisme» et qu’en mai dernier un Sommet du Conseil de l’Europe condamna l’«islamophobie».

Mais ce terme présente plusieurs problèmes. Premièrement, qu’est-ce exactement qu’une «crainte injustifiée de l’Islam» à l’heure où des Musulmans agissant au nom de l’Islam constituent la plus importante source mondiale d’agression, tant verbale que physique et aussi bien contre des non-Musulmans que contre des coreligionnaires? Quel est donc le degré de crainte approprié?

Deuxièmement, s’il existe certainement des préjugés contre les Musulmans, l’«islamophobie» fait un amalgame trompeur entre deux phénomènes distincts: la peur de l’Islam et la peur de l’Islam radical. Je dois moi-même subir ce problème: bien que je condamne encore et toujours l’idéologie qu’est l’Islam radical, et non la religion qu’est l’Islam, on m’a présenté comme un nominé pour le fort douteux «Prix de l’islamophobie» en Grande-Bretagne, comme le «principal islamophobe» d’Amériqueet même comme «l’islamophobie incarnée» (ce que je suis en fait est un «Islamismophobe»).

Troisièmement, les promoteurs de la notion d’«islamophobie» exagèrent généralement le problème:

• Application de la loi. Les Musulmans britanniques sont supposés souffrir de discrimination policière, mais une étude statistique réalisée par Kenan Malik réduit en bouillie ce «mythe islamophobe».

• Culture. Les Musulmans «sont confrontés à une avalanche de littérature anti-islamique qui prêche la haine contre l’Islam», prétend le président de la Haute école de sciences islamiques et sociales de Virginie Taha Jabir Al-‘Alwani: «des romans, des films, des livres et des études – parmi les seuls bestsellers on compte près de 1000 romans de ce type.» Un millier de romans calomnieraient l’Islam? Certainement pas. En fait, à peine une poignée de livres le font (par exemple The Haj, de Leon Uris).

• Science linguistique. Un professeur d’études islamiques de l’université George Washington, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, fit état (dans un discours prononcé lors d’un événement organisé par l’ONU, «Affronter l’islamophobie», comme le relate Alexander Joffe) de tentatives inexistantes de dissimuler l’origine arabe des termes anglais tels que adobe – lequel provient en fait de l’ancien égyptien, et non de l’arabe.

• Histoire. Le terme antisémitisme aurait été utilisé à l’origine à l’encontre des Arabes en Espagne, prétendit Nasr dans ce même discours, et il n’aurait pas désigné des Juifs avant la Première Guerre mondiale. Absurde: l’antisémitisme ne date que de 1879, date à laquelle il fut inventé par Wilhelm Marr, et il a toujours servi à désigner les Juifs.

Quatrièmement, la manipulation de Hizb ut-Tahrir avec «Arrêter l’islamophobie» trahit par elle-même le caractère frauduleux de ce terme. Comme l’explique l’article du Sunday Times, «la campagne tente visiblement de contrer le préjugé antimusulman résultant des attentats à la bombe perpétrés à Londres», mais il cite également Anthony Glees, de l’université Brunel de Londres, pour relever que l’intention réelle consiste à répandre des comportements antisémites, anti-Hindous, anti-Sikhs, anti-homosexuels et sexistes ainsi qu’à susciter du ressentiment contre l’influence occidentale.

Enfin, le fait de qualifier d’islamophobes des Musulmanes et Musulmans modérés (comme Irshad Manji) ne fait que révéler au grand jour l’aspect offensif de ce terme. Comme l’écrit Charles Moore dans le Daily Telegraph, les Musulmans modérés, «alarmés à la vue de ce que les islamistes font de leur religion», sont ceux à qui l’Islam fait le plus peur (rappelons-nous de l’Algérie, du Darfour, de l’Irak, de l’Iran, de l’Afghanistan). Ainsi, «ils ne trouvent pas le courage et les mots nécessaires pour affronter l’énorme problème auquel l’Islam doit faire face dans le monde moderne.» Les accusations d’islamophobie, ajoute Malik, sont destinées «à faire taire les critiques de l’Islam, voire les Musulmans qui luttent en faveur de réformes dans leurs communautés». Une autre Musulmane britannique, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, discerne là un objectif plus ambitieux encore: «Trop souvent, l’islamophobie sert à exercer un chantage sur la société.»

Les Musulmans devraient éviter ce terme discrédité et prendre plutôt la voie d’une introspection approfondie. Au lieu de faire des reproches aux victimes potentielles qui craignent leurs bourreaux autoproclamés, ils feraient mieux de se demander comment les islamistes ont bien pu transformer leur foi en une idéologie célébrant le meurtre (Al-Qaida: «Vous aimez la vie, nous aimons la mort») et de développer des stratégies permettant de sauver leur religion en combattant ce totalitarisme morbide.
–

Dans une démocratie, modèle que nous produisons tout en en consommant avec beaucoup de modération mais exportons sans pondération en l’imposant par la force aux autres, la vox populi est une constante sinon le principe même, voire le fondement, de cette forme de pouvoir qui nous est si chère… que nous pratiquons si mal, mais trop arrogants et imbus de notre supériorité pour le voir !

C’est, du moins le croit-on par vanité, suffisance, et condescendance, la seule expression civilisée… toutes les autres n’étant que barbares même si elles se rapprochent de la nôtre, même si elles lui sont antérieures comme le socialisme des Incas dans lequel aucun citoyen ne mourrait ni de faim ni de froid, la Sunna des Musulmans dans laquelle l’avis de chacun est une obligation. Mais peut-on dire que la liberté existe chez les Indiens ou en terre d’Islam ? Surtout pas… ce serait blasphématoire car de civilisé… il n’y a que l’Occident !!!

Bref… la démocratie, cher lecteur, c’est le pouvoir du peuple que ce dernier exprime à travers la sanction fondamentale qu’est le vote !

A ce sujet…
… le Hamas vient de remporter les élections en Palestine !

Fait contre nature pour l’Occident « civilisé » !
Cela signifie clairement que le parti du Cheikh Yacine émane du peuple et en est le représentant tout comme le général Sharon avait été élu par les Israéliens et en était le mandaté !

Mais j’entends encore le fameux et sempiternel : « Ce n’est pas la même chose ! ».
Non ! Certainement… ce n’est pas la même chose car le Hamas n’a pas assassiné en masse, il n’a pas « la glorieuse épopée » de Sabra et Chatila à son passif !
Non ! C’est différent car le Hamas n’a pas commis les massacres de Dir Yassine
Non ! Ce n’est pas comparable car le Hamas n’a pas commis les massacres de Djenine !!!
Non ! C’est à l’opposé car le Hamas n’utilise pas de chars d’assaut contre des enfants, pas d’hélicoptères pour abattre des infirmes, pas de M16 pour tirer sur des adolescents qui jettent des pierres, pas de bulldozers pour détruire des maisons ou des édifices publics !

En outre, quels que soient les termes que l’on veut utiliser pour définir leur action… il faut comprendre que les Palestiniens ne font que se défendre comme le feraient des civils face à une armée suréquipée, super entraînée, éminemment agressive, sans foi, ni loi qui veut leur destruction et qui le prouve tous les jours, toutes les heures, toutes les secondes que diable fait !!!

Et si, défendre sa liberté équivaut aujourd’hui à un acte de terrorisme… alors nous en commettant de pareils tous les jours !!!

Nous sommes, en effet, tous des terroristes…
… et souhaitons l’être :

… si d’aventure on nous imposait la mise à genoux alors que nous voulons vivre debout,
… si d’aventure on essayait de nous faire courber l’échine alors que nous optons pour la défense de notre fierté
… si d’aventure on tentait de nous asservir alors que nous voulons mourir libres… du moins pour ceux qui ont de l’honneur et de la dignité !

Dès lors, la sémantique n’a plus d’importance, c’est le principe qui compte, car nous savons que l’écriture de l’histoire n’est qu’une question de date comme disait Talleyrand et nous savons aussi que celui qui possède le pouvoir la tourne à sa manière et à son avantage : Spartacus n’était-il pas un « terroriste »… appelé « barbare » à l’époque… parce qu’il s’opposait à l’Empire romain ? Che Guevara ne l’était-il pas pour les Amers Ricains ? Les Résistants français ne le furent-il pas pour les Nazis autant que les Algériens pour les Coloniaux ?

Mais bon… passons sur les « maux » !

Le Hamas, disais-je, est désormais le parti élu par les Palestiniens.

Il est appelé à former le futur gouvernement et il faudra faire avec… bon gré mal gré… que l’on aime ou que l’on déteste… comme il a fallu faire avec le Likoud pourtant digne héritier des groupements terroristes Stern, Irgoune et Lehi dont les actions les plus connues furent l’assassinat en 1944 par Ytzhak Shamir, ex premier ministre d’Israël, du ministre d’État britannique pour le Moyen Orient, Lord Moyne et l’assassinat en 1948 du représentant des Nations Unies pour le Moyen Orient, le comte Folk Bernadotte (Itzhak Shamir est encore sous le coup d’un mandat international).

En conséquence, Israël n’est pas en position de donner des leçons d’humanisme ni de bonne conduite au monde ni encore de désigner comme terroristes des groupes qui se battent pour leur liberté.

Israël a été le premier à l’être… et continue de l’être !

Le Hamas est, aujourd’hui, le représentant légal du peuple palestinien !

Ne pas l’admettre…
… C’est nier la volonté populaire !

Refuser de le comprendre …

… C’est contester le droit du peuple palestinien sur sa propre terre !
Persister dans l’incompréhension…
… C’est programmer sa destruction !

Lorsque je lis que les gouvernants américains et israéliens ne veulent pas reconnaître pareille victoire, au demeurant un véritable raz de marée… et dans la tradition la plus démocratique… cela me frappe tellement ils sont en opposition flagrante avec le principe qui, soi-disant, les anime et qu’ils mettent toujours en avant comme pour se convaincre qu’ils l’appliquent !

On est démocrate ou on ne l’est pas !

C’est manichéen, certes, mais dans ce cas précisément, il ne peut y avoir de milieu… surtout pour ceux qui ne se lassent de donner des leçons aux autres et notamment l’illustre et unique démocratie du Moyen Orient !

Voilà nos amis expansionnistes pris soudain à leur propre piège !
Il est néanmoins clair aujourd’hui que méconnaître le Hamas c’est nier le résultat des urnes.

Nier le résultat des urnes… c’est quoi, au fait ?
Nos « démocrates »… qui font voter même les morts… nous le diront !
Passons sur une Union européenne qui pratique le chantage en affirmant qu’elle coupera les subsides si le Hamas l’emportait. Qu’est-ce à dire ?

Aider en imposant n’est plus aider… mais asservir !
D’ailleurs, Dame Europe ne m’étonne pas !

Elle a toujours fermé les yeux sur la situation des Palestiniens. Et, lorsqu’on sait qu’elle a mis au placard le rapport de sa propre commission parce qu’il dénonçait les crimes d’Israël on est en devoir de se poser des questions sur sa capacité à défendre les Droits de l’Homme.

Il est étrange également qu’un Premier Ministre, le nôtre en l’occurrence, prenne la décision de ne dialoguer qu’avec un gouvernement qui abandonnera la violence.

Si cela est vrai…pourquoi discute-t-il, alors, avec celui qui ne cesse de la pratiquer contre des civils et des enfants innocents ?
Le peuple palestinien s’est exprimé en masse pour les dirigeants qu’il a voulus !
Il faut respecter, dès lors, le choix qu’il a fait c’est-à-dire celui des urnes… c’est le propre de nos démocraties que je sache, non ?
L’inverse ferait éclater au grand jour la démagogie d’un Occident qui tente d’imposer au monde sa vision monolithique et mettrait en évidence la trahison de ses propres principes !!!

Les voix [modérées] de l’Islam

«Tôt ou tard, tu paieras le prix de tes mensonges» est l’un des messages de menace reçus la semaine passée par l’auteure de The Trouble with Islam: A Wake-up Call for Honesty and Change. Dans cet ouvrage qui vient d’être publié au Canada, Irshad Manji, 34 ans, explore avec ce qu’elle appelle sa «plus grande honnêteté» des thèmes sinon largement tabouisés tels que l’anti-sémitisme, l’esclavage ou l’infériorité des femmes.

«Devenez enfin des adultes!» lance-t-elle aux Musulmans. «Et assumez vos responsabilités pour votre rôle dans les troubles dont souffre l’Islam.»

Bien que journaliste de télévision et personnalité publique, Manjii, qui est également une Musulmane pratiquante, traite son sujet en profondeur. «Je suis bien consciente que chaque religion a ses intégristes. Les Chrétiens ont leurs évangélistes. Les Juifs ont leurs ultra-orthodoxes. Pour l’amour du ciel: même les Bouddhistes ont leurs fondamentalistes. Mais le point sur lequel ce livre tient à insister avec force, c’est que seul l’Islam considère l’intégrisme comme la norme.»

Ses efforts ont valu à Manji des qualificatifs tels que «dégoûtée d’elle-même», «impertinente», «traîtresse à l’Islam» et «blasphématrice». Elle est accusée à la fois de dénigrer l’Islam et de déshumaniser les Musulmans.

Ce déluge d’hostilité incita Manji à louer les services d’un garde du corps et à faire installer des vitres à l’épreuve des balles dans sa maison. La police de Toronto confirme maintenir «un très haut degré de vigilance» pour sa sécurité.

La situation désagréable de Manji n’est hélas que trop typique de ce que doivent endurer les Musulmans courageux, modérés et modernes lorsqu’ils dénoncent le fléau de l’Islam militant. Son expérience fait écho aux menaces de mort proférées contre des écrivains tels que Salman Rushdie et Taslima Nasreen.

Et les non-Musulmans s’étonnent que les Musulmans anti-islamistes d’Europe occidentale et d’Amérique du Nord restent si discrets?

Les Musulmans anti-islamistes – souhaitant vivre une existence moderne, libérée des burgas, des fatwas et des visions de guerre sainte – sont sur la défensive, dispersés. Quelle que soit leur éloquence, leurs voix isolées ne peuvent rien contre le grondement déterminé, les moyens financiers (dont une grande partie en provenance de l’étranger) et la violence de l’Islam militant. Celui-ci, avec sa phobie anti-occidentale et ses objectifs d’hégémonie mondiale, domine la présence musulmane en Occident et y apparaît ainsi aux yeux de beaucoup comme la seule version de l’Islam.

Mais les Musulmans anti-islamistes non seulement existent, mais ont également haussé le ton au cours des deux ans qui nous séparent du 11 septembre 2001. Ils forment un ensemble très varié, dont ni l’approche ni les intentions ne sont harmonisées. Certains sont pieux, d’autres pas, d’autres encore sont de libres penseurs ou des athéistes. Certains sont conservateurs, d’autres libéraux. Ils ne partagent que leur antipathie pour le wahhabisme, Khomeiny et les autres manifestations de l’Islam militant.

Ils ont commencé à produire des livres qui s’attaquent à la vision totalitaire des islamistes. Abdelwahab Meddeb, professeur à la Sorbonne, signa ainsi un ouvrage au titre évocateur, La maladie de l’Islam, dans lequel il compare l’Islam militant au nazisme. Dans Islam Under Siege, Akbar Ahmed, d’American University, exhorte les Musulmans à respecter les non-Musulmans.

Parmi les autres universitaires à s’exprimer ainsi ouvertement, on peut citer Saadollah Ghaussy, ex-membre de l’université Sophia de Tokyo, Husain Haqqani, de l’institut Brookings, Salim Mansur, de l’université de l’Ontario, et Khaleel Mohammad, de l’université d’État de San Diego.

Des journalistes, comme Tashbih Sayyid de Pakistan Today, et Stephen Schwartz (qui écrit, entre autres, pour The Post et The Weekly Standard) occupent les lignes de front contre l’Islam militant aux États-Unis, en compagnie de l’écrivain Khalid Durán. Tahir Aslam Gora assume le même rôle au Canada. L’ex-Musulman qui écrit sous le pseudonyme de Ibn Warraq a réalisé une série de livres qui encouragent les Musulmans à remettre leur foi en question.

Il existe un certain nombre d’organisations anti-islamistes, dont le Conseil suprême islamique d’Amérique (Islamic Supreme Council of America), le Conseil pour la démocratie et la tolérance (Council for Democracy and Tolerance), le Congrès islamique américain (American Islamic Congress) et les organisations shiites comme l’Association pour l’humanité et l’Islam en Amérique (Society for Humanity and Islam in America). Plusieurs organisations turques sont d’inspiration résolument séculière, comme l’Association Atatürk et l’Assemblée des associations américano-turques.

Quelques anti-islamistes sont investis de responsabilités publiques. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, aux Pays-bas, qui a traité l’Islam de religion «rétrograde», siège au Parlement hollandais. Naser Khader, au Danemark, est également membre du Parlement et s’engage en tant que séculariste en faveur de l’intégration totale des Musulmans au sein de la société danoise.

La position précaire des anti-islamistes conduit à deux conclusions centrales:

Pour être perçus malgré le tapage des islamistes, ils ont besoin d’aide extérieure – marques d’estime des gouvernements, subventions des fondations, reconnaissance des médias et attention du monde universitaire.
Ces mêmes institutions doivent éviter ostensiblement les organes établis de l’Islam militant aujourd’hui dominant. Les modérés n’auront une chance d’être entendus que si les islamistes sont désavoués.
Il est indispensable de soutenir les anti-islamistes et d’affaiblir les islamistes pour favoriser la percée en Occident d’une forme modérée et moderniste de l’islam.
dans les pages de nos journaux ou sur nos écrans de télévision, les images de masses fanatisées conduites par des leaders hystériques qui les poussent à hurler, agresser, incendier, piller et même tuer parce que des publications ont reproduit des caricatures – sans aucun doute irrévérencieuses et de mauvais goût – du prophète Mahomet, dessins qui ne méritaient ni cet honneur ni cette indignité. Et il est certain que cette accumulation, du Moyen-Orient à l’Asie en passant par l’Afrique, de cris de haine, de visages convulsés, d’appels au meurtre, de violences et de sang, de drapeaux brûlés, de bâtiments dévastés aura plus fait pour accréditer en très peu de temps la thèse du “choc des civilisations” que les prêches les plus durs des imams les plus intégristes, ou que les discours si dialectiquement habiles de l’ineffable Tariq Ramadan. Jusqu’à nous convaincre. S’il y a des musulmans modérés, il n’y a pas d’islam modéré.

Dhimitude Danoise Le Danois Au Genoux Devant les Arabes.

Le Journal danois Jyllands Posten presente ses excuses pour les dessins animés du prophète malgré la liberté d’expression réclamé. Bientôt, l’Islam va contrôler notre liberté d’expression et de parole ? Ensuite l’Islam va dicter le comportement de notre société…
Eux peuvent nous appeler des infidèles, des porcs et des chiens et des singes, dans leur sermons et dans leurs dessins animés propulsé par un racisme débridé. On se demande quand la puissante mais frileuse Europe va mettre fin a cela et va faire des contre demandes de respect de notre, religion, notre valeurs, notre civilisation.