Democrats Embrace Siraj Wahhaj: Supporter of Cop-Killer, Al Qaeda and Hamas

In just a few days, the Democratic National Convention “kick off events” week will include its first ever “Jumah (Arabic for gathering) at the DNC” – three Islamic-centered events beginning with a Friday afternoon prayer and sermon, an evening Islamic banquet and an all-day Islamic festival.

Many of the individuals scheduled to speak during the DNC week have extremely spurious backgrounds, including, astonishingly, support for Al Qaeda and for the U.S. State Department-designated terrorist organization, Hamas.

The celebrity Imam or “Grand Imam” slated for the event is Imam Siraj Wahhaj (pictured on the top far-left of the picture above).

As this article will demonstrate, Wahhaj has a thirty-year, well-documented history of supporting  terror and preaching religious and racial intolerance against Americans.  For decades, Wahhaj has preached violence and insurrection against the U.S. with the goal of replacing the Constitution with shari’ah law, as the law of the land.

Here is Wahhaj in his own words:

“Islam is better than democracy- Allah will cause his deen [Islam as a complete way of life], Islam to prevail over every kind of system, and you know what?  It will happen.” [i]

The following is a two-part profile on the man who will headline “Jumah at the Democratic National Convention.”

Read these mind-blowing statements from Wahhaj, and ask yourself, “How could the Democrats associate their party with such a man?”

“As long as you remember that if you get involved in politics, you have to be very careful that your leader is for Allah.  You don’t get involved in politics because it’s the American thing to do.  You get involved in politics because politics are a weapon to use in the cause of Islam.” [ii]

“If only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.  If we were united and strong, we would elect our own emir and give allegiance to him.  Take my word, if eight million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us.” [iii]


Wahhaj’s Mentors Preached Anti-Semitism and Supported Nazi Germany

Siraj Wahhaj was born and raised in Brooklyn, New York. He became a card-carrying member of the Nation of Islam in the late ’60s.  For almost a decade, Wahhaj’s role models and those who mentored him, were a veritable who’s who in militant Black Nationalist thought, including Nation of Islam founder Elijah Muhammed, Louis Farrakhan[iv] and Malcolm X.

Elijah Muhammed hated white people, calling them “the human beast—the Serpent, the Dragon, the Devil and Satan.” [v]  During World War II Elijah Muhammed supported Hitler and Nazi Germany.  [vi]

The infamous Louis Farrakhan made violent pronouncements against Jews and whites.  Farrakhan described Catholics and Jews as those who practiced a “gutter religion,” [vii] He harangued Jewish people as “wicked Jews,” [viii] said “Hitler was a very great man,” [ix]  and called white people “white devils,” who he said were “potential humans … [who] haven’t evolved yet.” [x] In the late ’90s, years later, Siraj Wahhaj was a frequent congregant at Farrakhan’s temple. With Farrakhan’s support, he became a minister and led his own temple in the Nation of Islam. [xi] In one sermon, Wahhaj himself said, “White people are devils.” [xii]

While Malcolm X was hailed as a great leader by the mainstream media during the civil rights movement, he was a convicted felon, and like Elijah Muhammad and Louis Farrakhan, he addressed white people as the “Klu Klux Klan,” and “White Nazis,” and Jews as “Nazis” and “dogs.” [xiii]

All of these people would be considered racists today. The so-called “Grand Imam” of the “Jumah at the DNC,” Imam Wahhaj still reveres Malcolm X to this day, and during his present-day lectures, he encourages Muslim youth to follow in the path of Malcolm X.  Wahhaj says Malcolm X can still “reach out of his grave and influence Muslim youth today.” Wahhaj also frequently lectures on the history of Malcolm X, and many of these lectures can be found on YouTube or Islamist websites.  Wahhaj speaks of Malcolm X as a “hero.”[xiv]

The DNC-hosted “Jumah at the DNC” includes the daughter of Malcolm X, Ilyasah Shabazz as a guest speaker. Has the Democrat leadership now embraced hatred of whites and Jews as part of their platform?

Wahhaj Misrepresents the Facts of His Muslim Cleric Training

Wahhaj claims on his bio[xv] that he completed Muslim cleric training from Umm al Qura University in Mecca, Saudi Arabia in 1978.  However, Umm al Qura University was not established until 1981. [xvi]   Prior to 1981, Umm al Qura was called, The Colleges of Shari’ah and Education. It was the primary institution in Saudi Arabia to prepare new Islamic clergyman.  From 1971-1981, The Colleges of Shari’ah and Education was a branch in Mecca for the Jeddah-based King Abdul Aziz University. [xvii]

Why would Wahhaj conceal that he was, in fact, educated at such an institution? King Abdul Aziz University is a hub for young radical terrorists. Osama bin Laden, Sheikh Abdullah Azzam and Wael Jalaidan,[xviii] all co-founders of Al Qaeda, were affiliated with the university:

  • Osama bin Laden graduated from King Abdul Aziz University in 1979. [xix]
  • Abdullah Azzam, Osama bin Laden’s professor and mentor taught at King Abdul Aziz University until 1981.
  • Wael Jalaidan was a King Abdul Aziz University representative in the U.S. during the 1970s.   He left King Abdul University in the mid-1980s.  Jalaidan prepared the way for two Al Qaeda terror hubs in the U.S.:  one in Arizona, and the other in Brooklyn, New York, inside the Al Farouq Mosque. This mosque was later implicated in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.  The director of the Al Farouq mosque was Osama bin Laden’s professor and mentor, Sheikh Abdullah Azzam.

Brooklyn, New York is Wahhaj’s hometown. It is the city in which Wahhaj founded the At-Taqwa mosque in 1981, located just 1.5 miles away from the terror cell known as Al Farouq mosque.

It appears likely that Wahhaj is intentionally deceptive about the name of the university at which he studied, in an effort to hide his association with these individuals.

Siraj Wahhaj Defends Al Qaeda Leader, the Blind Sheikh

Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman (aka the Blind Sheikh), a leader of a terrorism organization in his native Egypt, was charged with the attempted assassination of American ally, and leader of Egypt, Anwar-al Sadat.   Abdul-Rahman took over leadership from Sheikh Abdullah Azzam at Al Farouq in Brooklyn, New York. In one of Rahman’s Friday sermons, he said, “We must terrorize the enemies of Islam and … shake the earth under their feet.”[xx]

Siraj Wahhaj actually invited Abdel-Rahman to be a guest speaker for his congregation at At-Taqwa.

Rahman’s group successfully bombed the World Trade Center in 1993, murdering 6 people and injuring over 1000.  The attack blew a hole five stories deep and half the size of a football field in a lower level of the World Trade Center.[xxi]

Astonishingly, Imam Wahhaj was a character witness for the blind Al Qaeda sheikh at the World Trade Center bombing trial. During his testimony, Wahhaj praised the sheikh a “respected scholar,” and “bold, as a strong, preacher of Islam.”[xxii]

Wahhaj Leads an Islamic Movement of Jihad and Martyrdom

In 1988, at the Al Farouq mosque, Al Qaeda co-founder Sheikh Abdullah Azzam announced, “The Jihad, the fighting, is obligatory on you wherever you can perform it.”  Four years after Azzam said this, Wahhaj expressed a similar view just blocks away at his own mosque when he said, Muslims are “commanded to do jihad…Bis a billah Allah [jihad for the sake of Allah] is when Allah commands us to fight….Islam is the only answer because it is only Islam that we do it for Allah.”

In another sermon, Wahhaj proclaimed, “I will never ever tell people don’t be violent that is not the Islamic way.  The violence has to be selected.” He then pointed to Islamic theology to justify violence.  “Islam is the only answer because it is only Islam that we do it for Allah.” We are “commanded to do jihad.”  “[W]hen Allah commands us to fight we are not stopping, no one will stop us.”

Wahhaj Supports Shari’ah Law in All Its Ruthlessness

The Democrats will be hosting a man who believes the Islamic way of life is the preferable alternative to the “garbage can ” [xxiii]  which is what he has called America.  Wahhaj himself encourages his audience to work towards an America completely dominated by Islam:

“Wherever you came from, you came to America.  And you came for one reason- for one reason only- to establish Allah’s deen [Islam as a complete way of life], as a servant of Allah.”

It is no surprise that the Muslim conference will discuss anti-shari’ah bills, since Wahhaj has long advocated for shari’ah (Islamic law) to replace our American democracy. Wahhaj not only supports organizations and litigation against anti-shari’ah bills, he campaigns for shari’ah to overthrow the U.S. Constitution as the law of the land:

“Islam is better than democracy.  Allah will cause his deen [Islam as a complete way of life], Islam to prevail over every kind of system, and you know what?  It will happen.” [xxiv]

Wahhaj supports the most ruthless practices of shari’ah law regarding capital punishment, including cutting off hands for the crime of theft and stoning for adultery, and he frequently refers to Islamic scripture for his justification:

“If Allah says 100 strikes, 100 strikes it is. If Allah says cut off their hand, you cut off their hand. If Allah says stone them to death, through the Prophet Muhammad, then you stone them to death, because it’s the obedience of Allah and his messenger—nothing personal.” [xxv]

This is the man the DNC is voluntarily, of its own choice, associating with, and to whom it is giving new national prominence. The DNC must be made to state their reasons for this appalling action.


Congregants of Wahhaj’s Mosque Charged with Providing Support for Al Qaeda

An astonishing series of congregants at Wahhaj’s at-Taqwa mosque were charged and convicted of providing material support for Al Qaeda during that same 1993 World Trade Center bombing.  Wahhaj testified at the trial on behalf of the defendants, his congregants.  One such man who regularly worshipped at Wahhaj’s Masjid at-Taqwa was a member of the Black Nationalist extremist organization[xxvi], Jamaat al Fuqra,[xxvii] which is dedicated to “purifying Islam through violence.”[xxviii]  His name was Hampton-El and he organized a U.S.-based terrorist training camp.

Wahhaj defended Hampton-El (Rashid), whom he said he knew for 10 years, as “one of the most respected brothers” in his congregation. [xxix] Wahhaj said everyone in the congregation sought out Hampton-El for advice.

Two more at-Taqwa congregants aided the Blind Sheikh. One was a bomb-maker named El Gabrowny. El Gabrowny’s cousin, Nosair, was charged with the assassination of the founder of the Jewish Defense League.  A search in El Gabrowny’s home revealed taped messages from Nosair urging violence and jihad: “Without fighting there will not be justice on earth. … We cannot establish God’s rules on earth except by fighting.” [xxx]   Once again, Imam Wahhaj testified during the trial, where he expressed flattering admiration of El Gabrowny. [xxxi] Ibrahim El-Gabrowny was sentenced to 57 years in prison. [xxxii]

Another At-Taqwa congregant was Siddig Ibrahim Siddig Ali, a diplomat of the Sudanese Mission to the UN whom federal authorities described as the “ring leader[xxxiii] in the World Trade Center attack. Siddig Ali told an FBI informant that “he ha[d] connections that [would] allow him to drive a car carrying a bomb into a parking lot in the United Nations building.” [xxxiv]  He also conspired to carry out attacks in Israel and expressed racist views, calling Jews “sons of monkeys and pigs.”  He avowed, “The sword is to be absolutely used and implemented. This is as a principle.” [xxxv]

Imam Wahhaj testified during the trial he had a favorable impression of Siddig Ali and laughably added, “We don’t accept the idea of terrorism. Our mosque is open to all, but not to fanatics.”  Siddiq Ali was sentenced to 11 years in prison.[xxxvi]

Siraj Wahhaj Expresses Pride to Be on a List of Alleged Terrorists

Imam Siraj Wahhaj was alleged to be associated with the terrorist cabal organizing the 1993 World Trade Center bomb plot.  For that reason, his name was included on a list of the 172 unindicted co-conspirators in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.  Soon after, Wahhaj commented during one of his at-Taqwa sermons, “I’m not frightened by no list, by no government!  I thank Allah.  I’m honored that they thought enough of me to put me on a list.”  [xxxvii]

Siraj Wahhaj’s Self-proclaimed Support for U.S.-based Al Qaeda Operatives

Rafik Abdus Sabir and Tarik Shah are two terror operatives, indicted in 2005 for plotting to open an Al Qaeda training camp in the U.S.  Both Sabir and Shah had sworn allegiance to Osama Bin Laden. [xxxviii]  Sabir, a Columbia University-educated medical doctor in Boca Raton, Florida, pledged that he would fly to Saudi Arabia to provide medical aid and train Al Qaeda terrorists.  The other operative, Tarik Shah, was the son of a former Malcolm X aide[xxxix] and was also himself associated with the Nation of Islam. [xl] At a 2005 CAIR Banquet in Georgia, Siraj Wahhaj showed support for these two men:

“Rafik Sabir from Florida. You might have heard about him. About five months ago him and another brother named Tarik Shah were arrested by the United States government, charged with helping Al Qaeda.  They said that Doctor Sabir said that he would treat those of Al Qaeda who needed him.  He’s in jail now in Manhattan. I’ve been trying to go see him for the last few months, can’t go see him yet….there’s not a day that goes by right now that my mind is not on Doctor Rafik Sabir in prison right now in Manhattan…”

Just this last April, DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was scheduled to be keynote speaker for an organization known as Emerge.  It is led by Chairman Khurrum Wahid, the same Attorney who defended Rafik Sabir.  When Frontpage magazine’s Joe Kaufman and Beila Rabinowitz exposed Emerge’s ties to radical Islamists, Wasserman Schultz backed out of this keynote speech.

To see Part II, click here.


[i] Paul M. Barrett, American Islam:  The Struggle for the Soul of a Religion (NY, New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux 2007), 115.

[ii] Audio, Siraj Wahhaj, “The Muslim Agenda in the New World Order,” Islamic Association of Northern Texas, Dallas, TX, November, 15, 1991

[iii] Audio, Siraj Wahhaj, sermon sometime in Fall of 1992

[iv] Louis Farrakhan was then supervisor of the NOI’s New York Operations.

[v] Author Unknown “Religion: The Messenger Passes,” Time Magazine, March 10, 1975.,9171,917218,00.html#ixzz1RH7srhPr ( accessed 7.5.11)

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] “Black Separatist,” Southern Poverty Law Center, (accessed 8.22.11)

[viii] “Nation of Islam,” Southern Poverty Law Center, (accessed 7.5.11)

[ix] Ibid.

[x] Ibid.

[xi] Paul M. Barrett, American Islam:  The Struggle for the Soul of a Religion (NY, New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux 2007), 108.


[xiv] Siraj Wahhaj, Young Muslims (YM) Youth Conference 2011, May 28-30, 2011,  Hartford, CT.

[xv] Siraj Wahhaj Speaker’s Bio for ISNA, Siraj Wahhaj Speaker’s Bio for Mecca Centric Dawah Group, Siraj Wahhaj Speaker’s Bio for ICNA Convention Quran Guidance: Towards a Just and Balanced Way, May 28-30, 2011, Hartford,Connecticut,, Siraj Wahhaj Speaker’s Bio for ICNA Relief Fundraiser,, Siraj Wahhaj Speaker’s Bio for  Azizah Magazine’s 10th Anniversary Gala: “An Evening of Empowered Voices”

[xvi]“About,” Umm Al Qura University, (accessed 7.14.11)

[xvii] “Home,” Umm Al Qura University, (accessed 4.5.11)

[xviii] Steven Emerson, Jonathan Levin, “Terrorism Financing: Origination, Organization, and Prevention: Saudi Arabia, Terrorist Financing and the War on Terror,” Testimony to the United States Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, July 31, 2003,

[xix]  CNN Wire Staff,“Timeline: Osama bin Laden, over the years,” CNN May 2, 2011, (accessed 7.21.11)

[xx] Brian Jenkins, “Defense: Juror `bias’ in Terror: Sheik, others convicted in New York,” CNN, October 1, 1995, (accessed 7.15.11)

[xxi] Phil Hirschkorn, “New York Remembers 1993 WTC victims,” CNN, New York Bureau, February 26, 2003,  (accessed 7.21.11)

[xxii] USA v. Omar Ahmad Ali Abdel-Rahman, et al. “Testimony of Imam Siraj Wahhaj,” S5 93 CR 181 (MBM), (S.D.N.Y. 1995).

[xxiii] Audio, Siraj Wahhaj, “Who are the Real Terrorists?” Jumu’ah Khuttbah, Masjid At-Taqwah, February 17, 1995.

[xxiv] Paul M. Barrett, American Islam:  The Struggle for the Soul of a Religion (NY, New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux 2007), 115.

[xxv] Paul M. Barrett, American Islam:  The Struggle for the Soul of a Religion (NY, New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux 2007), 114.

[xxvi] Jerry Seper, Steve Miller, “Militant Muslims seek Virginia base; Group Abandons Communes in West,” The Washington Times, July 1, 2002, pg. A1.

[xxvii] Jessica Stern, “The Protean Enemy,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2003, (accessed 5.3.11)

[xxviii] Jamaat-ul-Fuqra, South Asian Terrorism Portal, (accessed 6.9.11)

[xxix] Paul M. Barrett, “One Imam Traces the Path of Islam in Black America,” Wall Street Journal, October 24, 2003.,,SB106694267937278700,00.html (accessed 4.12.11)

[xxx] The Tribune-Review, “Rabbi’s killer turned radical during years in Pittsburgh,” August 4, 2002, (accessed 7.15.11)

[xxxi] “Francis X. Clines, “Bomb-Plot Suspects’ Lives Emerge in Sharper Detail,” New York Times, July 4, 1993, (accessed 5.3.11)

[xxxii] Ibid.

[xxxiii] Frank J. Prial, “Sudanese Deny Any Tie To Bomb Plot,” August 18, 1993

, (accessed 7.16.11)

[xxxiv] William C. Rempel And Ronald J. Ostrow, “Bomb Plot Reportedly Hinged on U.N. Link: Terrorism: Sudan envoys deny any ties to alleged plan to hit N.Y. targets. Arrest of cleric ruled out, source says,” Los Angeles Times, June 26, 1993, (accessed 6.9.11)

[xxxv] Steven Emerson, Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America, DVD, Ventura Distribution, 2001

[xxxvi] Benjamin Weiser, “Remorseful Terror Conspirator Gets an 11-Year Sentence,” Los Angeles Times, October 16, 1999, (accessed 7.7.11)

[xxxvii] Siraj Wahhaj “Who are the Real Terrorists?”  Jumu’ah Khuttbah, Masjid At Taqwah February 17, 1995

[xxxviii]Robert Gearty, “Jazzman, Doc Are Indicted,” New York Daily News,  June 28, 2005,  (accessed 4.18.11)

[xxxix] Nicole Bode, Corky Siemaszko, Michael Saul, Jeanne Dequine, “Wanna-be Posed As Jazzman,” New York Daily News, May 31, 2005, (accessed 4.18.11)

[xl] Michael Isikoff, “The Threat in our Midst,” The Daily Beast, May 20, 2007, (accessed 7.8.11)

[xli] Andrew C. McCarthy, Willful Blindness: a Memoir of the Jihad, (New York, NY: Encounter Books, 2008), 213.

[xlii] “Profile: Sudan’s Islamist leader,” BBC News, January 15, 2009, (accessed 7.16.11)

[xliii] Audio, Siraj Wahhaj, “Stand for Justice,” May 8, 1992

[xliv] Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism,  “Foreign Terrorist Organizations” U.S. Dept. of State, May 19, 2011, (accessed 8.5.11)

[xlv] Steven Emerson,” ISNA’s Lies unchallenged again,” Counterterrorism Blog, August 11, 2007,

[xlvi] “Abu Marzouk: Damascus Welcomed Expelled Hamas Leaders, as Visitors,”, November 23, 1999, (accessed August 23, 2011)

[xlvii] ISNA “Speakers Information: Short Biographies,”

[xlviii]  Interview with Hassan Al-Turabi, ISNA’s Islamic Horizons, March/April 2001,

[xlix] “Speaker on Islam Won’t Condemn Hamas, al-Qaeda at UCF,” March 3, 2011,   (accessed 7.22.11)

[l]US v. Holy Land Foundation, Case 3:04-CR-00240-P “Memorandum Opinion Order,” (Page 15-20)


[lii] CAIR “Who are We?”  Management and Staff, Archive, December, 7, 2001

[liii] For Example: CAIR Fundraiser, Vienna, Virginia, October 7, 2001, CAIR Fundraiser, Orange County, California, October 19, 2002, CAIR Fundraiser, Anaheim, California, October 4, 2003, CAIR- Fundraiser Southern California, October 9, 2004, CAIR- San Jose Fundraiser 11.7.10, CAIR Fundraiser – Orange County, California 10.30.10, CAIR – Anaheim 11.1.08, CAIR Fundraiser Anaheim 11.10.07, CAIR Fundraiser 11.18.06, CAIR-San Francisco 9.17.06, CAIR New York Fundraiser, July 7, 2008, CAIR San Diego Ist Annual Fundraising Banquet, September 17, 2006

[liv] CAIR- CA, “Thank You for Your Generous Support of CAIR’s Work:  More Than 750 Turn Out for CAIR-SFBA Banquet,” Dec 09, 2010, (accessed 8.11.11)

[lv] Steven Merley, “The Muslim Brotherhood in the United States,” Hudson Institute, April 2009, (accessed 8.15.11)

[lvi] Mohamed Akram, “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” May 22, 1991, Government Exhibit 003-0085, U.S. vs. HLF, et al. (P. 7 of 18).

[lvii] Mohamed Akram, “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” May 22, 1991, Government Exhibit 003-0085, U.S. vs. HLF, et al. (P. 7 of 18).

[lviii] Muhammed Abdullah Ahari, “The Islamic Community In The United States: Historical Development,” undated, Islam for Today, (accessed 4.9.11)

[lix] Susy Buchanan, “End of Watch: Ricky Leon Kinchen, 35,” Southern Poverty Center, Intelligence Report, Fall 2005, Issue 119,,7 (accessed 7.11.11)

[lx] Ibid.

[lxi] Joe Kaufman, “Islamist Payola in the City of Brotherly Love,” FrontPageMagazine, January 03, 2008, (accessed 8.23.11)

[lxii] Al-Amin v. State, 278 Ga. 74, 88(18)(a), 597 S.E.2d 332 (2004) (citation and punctuation omitted).

[lxiii] Shiv Malik, “The Conveyor Belt of Extremism,” New Statesman, 18 July 2005,

[lxv] Video Sajjad Khan, Hizb ut Tahrir: International Khilafa Conference August 7, 1994, Wembley Arena,  London, England

  • richard sherman

    TThe man was chosen by the Democrat Party because Obama believes and supports everything this man preaches.

    • Janice Galford Dorn


  • kafir4life

    I think it's refreshing that the mask is off! We can officially call the Democrat party the terrorist's choice. Look at their "leader", President BO (aka Stinky). He bows before other terrorists. He holds terrorists and terror supporting and terror producing gutter cults and their followers in high regard.
    Yeah…..let's give that thing another 4.
    Will pork products be banned from the convention? To a degree, yes. They'll still have to let Moochella in, so it won't be 100% pig free.

  • Elizabeth

    Too bad democrats can't extend their " religious tolerance" to Catholics who merely wish to protest against the coverage mandate of birth control and abortifacients.

  • Marshmello

    You are confused by your ignorance of Muslims. You cannot distinguish between declarations of commitments and principles, which most Muslims are in agreement about, and the path that each group of Muslim proposes to fulfill such porposes.

    That they don't disavow some groups that commit terrorist acts is often because a) they might not agree on their classification as terrorists (e.g. Hamas) or b) they believe that they are falsely accused (Blind Sheikh)

    • Drakken

      We infidels understand you muslims just fine, you are a clear and present danger to us all. If you savages think your going to take over the west, you have another thing coming, for we infidels will not go quietly into the night but come out with a Crusaders vengeance. The old pagen funeral pyres will once again be piled with you muslims and given the due consideration you and yours deserve.

    • SickoftheBS

      Everything we need to know about Islam was shown to us on 9-11-01.
      Only thing I could reccomend is to feed them pork before we send them to their virgins.

      • Travis

        Sick, you and Drakken are both advocating terrorism. You want to kill people because of their religious affiliation. If you were in Pakistan, those sorts of messages could earn you some Hellfire from a Predator drone. I'm a conservative, but I understand America is a land of pluralism and religious freedom. I have known muslim-Americans, and they are good people. Your ignorant hate-fueled bigoted extremism has no place in modern society. I urge you two to consider converting to Christianity – the loving message of Jesus, the Prince of Peace, may bring you some enlightenment. Regarding 9/11, I pray you learn to stop judging all by the actions of a few. Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols were Christian terrorists, but I am no more responsible for the bombing of the OKC Federal Building than a Muslim American is for 9/11.

        • Kufar Dawg

          "You want to kill people because of their religious affiliation". Gee, isn't that what islamofascists are doing all over the world, right now, in the 21st century? Isn't that what islamofascists did, to millions of Jews, Christians, Hindus and Sikhs in the 20th century? Gee isn't that what the holy Quran and hadeeths advocate for?

          • Travis

            Our Old Testament has some iffy stuff, partifularly regarding the settlement of Canaan – it's all in the interpretation. I have a couple of muslim friends – they're good, caring, reasonable, moderate people. Drakken and Sick, on the other hand, are advocating the type of violent extremism. That motivated the Sikh temple shooter. I don't like violent extremism, and I don't like terrorist sympathizers who threaten my friends for being members of a different faith. Jesus – the Prince of Peace – he was a cool dude. You should read about him. It would make no more sense to judge all muslims by the actions of Al Qaeda than it would to judge all Christians by Tim McVeigh, the Temple shooter, or the Fred Phelps nutjobs at Westboro Baptist. I'm not ignoring the dangers of violent religious extremism, I'm just pointing out the fact that 1) collective blame is bigoted hate directed against innocents, and 2) the muslims haven't cornered the market on violent extremists. Drakken and Sick have made that clear.

          • Roger

            Then have those reasonable muslim friends walk your dog.

          • Travis

            My Muslim friends tend to be Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants, etc. I met many of them on the college debate circuit, which attracts driven personalities with a thirst for education, competition, and success. You'd be amazed at how many immigrants' children confirm the stereotype that those who come to America legally for a better life tend to have remarkable progeny who acheive professional success. I'm afraid dog-walking is well below their paygrade.

          • Roger

            Then you shouldn't have a problem explaining about the peaceful and beautiful parts of islam that counter the wife beating, the hate, the violence and the child brides.

          • Travis

            Since I reject collectivism, I reject collective blame. As a conservative, I believe in individual responsibility, and judge individuals by their own actions. Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin, and yet I am still capable of finding beauty in country music. I condemn the medieval crap that accompanies radical Islamic fundamentalism – I'm pointing out 1) 'those things don't happen here!', and 2) most of the muslim world isn't fundamentalist. Much of our Muslim population came here specifically for American freedom, so I'm quite certain they aren't trying to institute the very practices they fled.

            Up until the resurgence of fundamentalist Islam in the post-colonial period, islamic culture was generally pretty enlightened when it came to women's rights, the embrace and development of science, and the respect of minority populations. Muhammad married a widow, and the Koran gave women property rights. Both Jewish and Christian communities were allowed a substantial degree of autonomy up to and including Ottoman rule. Algebra isn't called Stevegebra, and western civilization rediscovered the Greek philosophers thanks to Arabic translations captured in the reconquest of Basque Spain.

            I know all this stuff because I studied world history and religious history at a renowned Jesuit Catholic University, Creighton. Islam is an Abrahmaic religion, they keep the same covenant as us, worship the same God as us, and revere my personal savior Jesus as a prophet. This isn't 'propaganda', it's facts. The political repression in Iran. the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan are also facts – facts I don't deny. So is the relative freedom and tolerance in Turkey, Jordan, Jakarta, and (for now, knock on wood) Egypt. So are my Musli-American friends Samira, Namrita, Hajeer, and Omar. They're good folks, second-generation Americans, and they don't hate. Their family stories of immigration, assimilation, hard work, and success is the lifeblood of the American dream. They are part of what makes America great.

          • Roger

            If every single muslim is taught to follow the koran or be stoned for apostasy, then they deserve collective blame. I know this because I'm not stupid.

            And under sharia politics is based on religion, if you won't even admit that then you're just another hack troll outside of reality.

          • Travis

            There is no single monolithic interpretation of the Koran, and the statistics make it pretty clear that Muslim Americans are a peaceful group. My muslim neighbors and high-school debate teammates Samira and Omar didn't even get 'spanked' growing up, let alone stoned. When Sam went off to Yale and married a Jewish boy, nobody worried about whether their families could get over the culture shock, because there 'was' no culture shock. Samira's dad is a math professor and Dan's dad is an accountant, and Sam and Dan are both lawyers. Both families are thoroughly assimilated members of America's intellectual and financial elite. They had a string quartet playing pop hits under a giant canopy at Dan's family's summer home in the Berkshires. 'Dog' was not on the menu.

            I tell that anecdote because THAT is part of the reality of Islam in America. This is lived experience, not propaganda. I went to their wedding a couple years back and danced with their classmate, who is Queen Noor of Jordan's niece – I've got the pictures to prove it :-) Which was really cool, because I'd studied the Hashemite Royal Family, their clash with Arafat and the PLO, and their attempts to forge peace with Israel while under pressure from their neighbors. Queen Noor (who was Christian before she met King Hussein) was raised in America, and is a crusader for peaceful coexistence and nuclear disarmament – living proof that not all politics are the same in Muslim nations. Samira also took classes with Barbara Bush (although I never got a chance to meet her – too bad, she's a total hottie.) Which brings us back to Bush again. One of the things Barbara's dad George got very, very right is – we ARE at war with fanatical terrorists bent on mass murder in service of an insane ideology. Some of our most valuable allies in that war (in Quattar, in Turkey, in Yemen, in Jordan, and throughout the world) are muslims who reject AQ and seek peace. That's the God's honest truth of the situation, Roger. The only kind of 'getting stoned' any muslim in America encounters is acheived with the help of a bong. Peace.

          • Roger

            Of course there is a monolithic view of the Koran, ask any muslim activist.

            And as for American muslims, I seem to recall one at Ft. Hood that wasn't so peaceful. And I do remember on 9/11 peaceful muslims in my town cheering as they sat in their minimart watching the towers collapse.

            Until you deal with those few 'monolithic' muslims you are whistling into the wind.

          • Travis

            Here is an article on the many divisions within Islam, to further your education and lay your concerns to rest.

            As far as Fort Hood goes, Jeffrey Dahmer was a youngish white Christian guy like me, but I manage to make it through my day without anybody judging me for his actions or assuming all white folks are harboring cannibalistic urges.

            If American muslims had been celebrating 9/11, it would have been a news sensation. There were a few isolated accounts of folks in Palestine celebrating, and those images are understandably famous. Live in the real world, dude. Muslim Americans weren't glad when their homeland and countrymen were murdered by fanatics who claim to share the same prophet.

            Timothy McVeigh, the Columbine shooters, the Aurora shooter, the Sikh shooter, the guy who killed 9 folks in my own Westroads Mall in Omaha, Nebraska… Indeed, the overwhelming majority of serial killers through history – white guys like me. Yet I assure you, my white friends and I are peace-loving folk. You don't generalize the crimes of a handful of people to an entire religion or ethnicity. That's how most of the worst crimes in history have been justified.

            That kind of logic is PRECISELY how the terrorists operate! They say that all Americans are responsible for the actions of our government, and therefore we are all judged 'guilty'. The mindset of a person who would blame all muslims for the actions of a handful of fanatics, and then advocate violence against them, (Drakken and Sick from upthread) is so similar to Osama bin Laden's they could be kin. If you were to make a line representing the spectrum of violent ideologies, with my peace-loving messiah Jesus on one hand and living embodiment of evil Osama bin Laden on the other, Me, Samira, Omar, and Hajeer would be chilling with Jesus peacefully coexisting with everybody around us and harboring no ill will towards anybody, and Draken and Sick would be in the metaphorical cave of hateful violent bigotry. Don't take Draken and Sick's side, Roger. Join us folk over by Jesus. Let me tell you, it's a LOT more pleasant over here.

          • Roger

            And how does that make the victims of jihad any less dead?

            You try to distract from that one issue. All the different sects seem just as willing to pack a nissan full of exposives and park it in a place like Times Square.

          • Travis

            Jihadists and those who support them are responsible for jihad. It's called 'individual responsibility' – it's a great idea, and the bedrock of conservative philosophy. Your collectivism doesn't stand up to serious intellectual scrutiny.

            In reality, there has been widespread and very public denunciation of terrorism by American muslims and their organizations. Your average American muslim is no more involved in jihadism then you or I was involved in the Sikh temple shooting. I happen to think the Golden Rule (treat others as you would like to be treated) as well as trying to put yourself in somebody else's shoes, and gaining firsthand knowledge of a situation instead of trusting propaganda, are all good guidelines. Your opinions about the beliefs, practices, and loyalties of the mainstream muslim American community are objectively false. You and too many others are living in a world where you're surrounded by imaginary threats that would be dispelled if you actually went out into your community and got to know your neighbors.

            I've never denied that Islamic extremism is a threat, I'm just pointing out the obvious common-sense truth that extremism is perpetrated and enabled by extremists. Most folks, by definition, aren't extremists. In any given big-city hospital you're likely to find a dozen muslim American doctors and nurses healing the American sick and strengthening their communities. In fields that require advanced education, Pakistanis, Indians, etc are overrepresented to the point it's become a cliche – the hard-driving immigrant parents riding their kids to ace their academics and get the best jobs. Another one of my debate partners is in Med School right now and his friends Manish and Sonia occasionally join us for poker. That's what's called 'real life' – people whose parents came to America for the opportunities and freedom, assimilating into our communities while retaining some of their culture. It's the melting pot, and like it or not, those folks are just as American as you. For people like me who deduct points from folks who blind themselves with prejudice born out of ignorance and generalizations, I'd go so far as to say my highly educated, civic minded, enlightened muslim friends are MORE American.

          • Roger

            It's not individual responsibility. You're going to need to do better than that. It's called common values and teachings.

            You're using propaganda, and it's not working.

          • Travis

            The rare extreme wahhabist preparing for jihad is not getting the same teaching as the average American muslim who does things like teach, heal, run a business, fight for our freedom, or serve in congress. This isn't propaganda, this is the real world. I encourage you to go out and see it sometime.

          • Roger

            Yes, because the Wahhabist is the ones funding and supplying the literature for those mosques.

            You can only ignore reality so long, then a plane over your head might have an underwear bomber go off.

          • Travis

            What do you mean, 'all these sects'? All what sects? You've yet to provide me with a single example of actual imams/mosques in America advocating violence, whereas I have provided you with links showing widespread condemnation of violence.

            The fact that there are some violent fanatics in Islam doesn't make the good works of Muslim Americans any less good. It doesn't reduce the skill or care that an Indian-American surgeon brings to a double-bypass surgery. And stoking the fires of hate against innocent people doesn't bring any victims back from the dead. If anything, it encourages a cycle of distrust, resentment, alienation, and mutual violence. Using the deaths of innocents to justify hate against yet more innocents is not a moral action.

          • Roger

            You have yet to provide a single US mosque that condemned any act of violence that I mentioned.

            The fact that there are fanatical muslims and that there is no way to tell them apart is all we need to understand.

            And for you to pretend that the people in the twin towers weren't innocents and should be ignored, that the soldiers at Ft. Hood weren't innocents that should be ignored is not moral action.

          • Travis

   I actually did provide examples of many mosques condemning the violence, and there – now I've done it again. Click the link, and prepare to have your illusions shattered! The mind often recoils from facts that challenge our preconceived notions, but nonetheless they remain facts.

            There is actually an amazingly simple way to tell the difference between a muslim fanatic and a peaceful, loyal American who happens to belong to a religious minority – talk to them. Sounds crazy, I know, but if you treat an individual 'as an individual' and accept that each American deserves to be judged based on his or her own merits, you'd be amazed what you can learn. Its as easy to tell my friend Hajeer from Osama bin Laden as it is to tell Herman Cain and Alan West from Louis Farrakhan. You're intelligent enough not to lump all black people or all Jews in together – why can't you manage the same feat with Muslim Americans?

            You're really going out of your way to misconstrue what I've said. "Using the deaths of innocents to justify hate against yet more innocents is not a moral action." The premise of my statement is that the victims of terrorism are innocent. The victims of the white supremacist Sikh Temple shooter were also innocent, and if he's shot up a Muslim temple, those folks would have been innocent as well. Lumping all Muslims together is lazy, false, unjust, and dangerous.

          • Roger

            Nop they didn't. Not really, they may have mumbled and quietly spoken behind their hands. That's not standing up and defying the activists in the religion.

            For that, they get an honor killing.
            And you can't show there is a difference we can use to tell the difference, between the mythical moderate and the pretend moderate that is waiting for a chance to go nuts, like the Ft. Hood shooter.

            And if you treat an individual as an individual what happens? They get evaluated and released from places like Gitmo then get killed on the battlefield because muslims are taught to lie and pretend. Al Taqiyya.

            I'm simply dismantling your lies. Lumping muslims together due to common values and teachings is being realistic.

            You're still a lousy debater.

          • Travis

            I thought in the 21st century we'd learned that bigotry is wrong. I provided you with a link showing muslim organizations condemning 9/11, here's another link of them condemning the Fort Hood shooting –

            I reject the characterization of terrorists as Islamic activists. They represent a numerically tiny splinter that advocates a radical interpretation known as Wahabbism. This is outside the mainstream of Islam.… There is no viable strategy for defeating Islamic extremism that doesn't involve help from the mainstream muslim world. The mainstream muslim American isn't a timebomb waiting to go off, he or she is just another loyal citizen like you or I. If this were 30 years ago, you'd be ranting about some vast seditious communist conspiracy on the verge of overtaking society. You need some block of people to vilify to populate your paranoid fantasy, and you're chosen Muslim Americans. That's a shame.

            I'm not lying. I've provided citations for my facts, which directly rebut your false assertions. One of us is living in the real world, recognizing actual threats with clear eyes but not allowing himself to be overcome by paranoia. The other has lost the ability to discern good from bad, seeing threats in every shadow, lumping 1 billion generally innocent, peaceful people into a mass of imaginary evil. Your view of the world is clouded by hate and propaganda. If you had more experience in the real world, speaking with the flesh-and-blood people who this conversation concerns, a lot of your fears would dissipate.

            I hardly think you're qualified to judge my debate abilities, because you discard all facts that don't fit your narrow-minded preconceptions. At the risk of being prideful, I won several state championships in debate and numerous regional tournaments. Despite being far more conservative than much of the academic debate community (I'm a right-of-center small-government libertarian type) I still did ok for myself.

          • Roger

            The problem is that islam isn't in the 21st century, it's trapped in the 8th century.

            You are lying. And Neville Chamberlain learned what happens when you pretend that your enemy will behave.

            And your debate abilities might work better if you weren't arguing for a flawed and brutal forced style of life.

            You might want to listen to a real debate.
            There is a potcast 'Red State' coffee and markets on 8/21 has two muslim debating, and did you know one that pretended their mosque was moderate was funded by a muslim organization that produces radical muslim pamphlets?

            Amazing, it's like you can't tell which muslim is ready to actually follow the koran.

          • Travis

            There have been times in the past where my Christian bible has been distorted to advocate violence – it's all in the interpretation. I have muslim friends – they're good, caring, reasonable, moderate people. I'm a more libertarian-type conservative. My political worldview isn't shaped by xenophobia and revulsion of 'the other', I don't believe in collective blame, I judge people as individuals, and I don't like violent extremism that threatens my friends for being members of a different faith. I think all peaceful law-abiding people deserve freedom and a presumption of respect, and I have seen 'zero' evidence there is a danger of our tiny muslim minority imposing sharia law. It seems about as plausible as us instituting the Hindu cast system. It would make no more sense to judge all muslims by the actions of Al Qaeda than it would to judge all Christians by Tim McVeigh, the Temple shooter, or the Fred Phelps nutjobs at Westboro Baptist. I'm not ignoring the dangers of violent religious extremism, I'm just pointing out the fact that 1) collective blame is bigoted hate directed against innocents, and 2) the muslims haven't cornered the market on violent extremists.

          • Roger

            Travis, you make the same mistake other muslims do.

            Christ is who Christians follow, you can't say Christ taught violence. You can't say the Bible advocates violence for the modern Christian church. The best you can do is show a history of a warrior society in the past, the Jews. But you can't even show they follow that violent past in their dealings today.

            So, you came here to spread propaganda. Either out of foolishness or out of stupidity. Either way the result is the same.

          • Kufar Dawg

            An argument of false equivalence. Millions of non-muslimes have been slaughtered in the late 20th and early 21st century by muslims, in the name of allah, the ballah. Non-muslimes are routinely persecuted or murdered or raped by muslimes in all your muslime states. Muslimes are engaged in ethnic cleansing right now in the 21st century, if not genocide. Since most muslimes live in muslime states it's pretty obvious they support this. Go pound sand.

          • Travis

            Kufar, I'm referring to Muslim-Americans. One of the bedrock conservative principles is 'Individual Responsibility'! Everything you're saying relies on collective blame, which is just as irrational as any other form of collectivism. We live in a melting-pot society, and the actual Muslim Americans I've known embody what makes America great far better than Drakken and Sick. They're professionals who've worked their asses off to make a life for themselves which makes their parents proud and serves the public good. I wouldn't for a second deny that there are nations that are suffering under the boot-heel of political Islamism (Saudi Arabia and Iran being two prominent examples), but America ain't one of em, and we've got enough real problems without inventing new ones.

            Most of our muslims are the children of immigrants who came here specifically because of the freedom and prosperity America represents. Blaming them for the conditions in Sudan makes even less sense than blaming a Russian-American patriot like Ayn Rand for Stalinism. Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were trying to provoke exactly the civilizational conflict between Islam and Christendom that you seem to be advocating. Thank God President Bush was wise enough to deny him the legitimacy you are suggesting he had. Bin Laden was never the voice of Islam, and his murderous thugs are hated on the 'Arab Street'. President Bush praised moderate muslims (the vast majority) as followers of a vibrant faith, genuinely seeking to live virtuous lives according to God's peaceful will. He was right. You're wrong.

            You act like all Islamic nations are the same, but that's just as absurd as suggesting all Christian nations are the same. Western-friendly, modern, freedom-loving Jordan has little in common with repressive Saudi Arabia. Part-European Turkey with its tradition of secularism and cosmopolitan culture is starkly opposed to Iranian theocracy. And the European Bosnian muslims like my friend Ida were victims of an attempted genocide by the Serbian Christian Slobodan Milosevic. My old debate partner Phil is fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan precisely 'because' most Muslims don't want to live under repressive theocracy. He's fighting FOR the future of innocent Afghani muslim kids who don't want to get beheaded for dancing. The problem isn't 'ARGH Muslims R BAD!!!', it's TERRORISTS are bad. Our leaders and heroic soldiers get that – why can't you?

          • Roger

            All that and you still don't explain why we should tolerate a system of belief that stones Christians in Dearborn and uses apartheis against others all around the world.

            You act as if muslim nations are not all the same, how is that? It's the same surah 9 mandates no matter what version of sharia you live under.

            And the soldiers get what? That the Ft Hood shooting was just another muslim finally realizing that the teachings in the koran demand action?

          • Travis

            We should grant Muslims and their religion respect and equality under the law because we have a Constitution that guarantees religious liberty. To everybody. As far as the 'stoning' in Dearborn, most of the folks at the Arabic cultural celebration took the provocative and obscene mockery of their religion with stoic dignity. A few folks tossed some debris, but nobody got injured. The hate machine used that understandable response as propaganda to make some ridiculous narrative about how OMG BROWNS ARE RUINING AMERICA!

            I'm not 'acting' like all Muslim nations aren't the same, I'm informing you about diverse societies in the Islamic world. If you actually educated yourself about how the world works, you'd know western-allied, modern, free (but still overwhelmingly muslim) Turkey and Jordan aren't the same as repressive theocratic Iran and Saudi Arabia. Open your eyes, see the world, travel, or just read a book. It's a big ole planet.

            Your knowledge of Islam is from propaganda manipulating you into hating muslims. The Fort Hood shooter was no more being a good Muslim than Timothy McVeigh was being a good Christian. Guess where the Hood shooter's imam was. YEMEN! Because American imams don't preach terror. Do you know what happened to that Imam? Barack Obama blew his ass up with a hellfire missile. That's not propaganda. It's called 'history'.

          • Roger

            Religious liberty is not permission for them to demand a place outside of the law.
            Honor killings, sharia, stoning Christians in dearborn… they prove that islam is not compatible with our system of western thinking and law.

            And for you to use Obama murdering an American citizen outside the justice system without a presumption of innocence shows that you have no respect for our rule of law.

          • Travis

            That's kind of a straw man – they aren't living outside the law. I've looked into this 'sharia' hysteria, and the farthest it goes is that some Muslims choose to resolve their familial disputes (divorce, inheritance, etc) with guidance from sharia IN ADDITION to following existing secular law. This same practice has been established and commonly followed by orthodox Jews who follow the edicts of rabbinical courts (for instance, needing to meet the more strict requirements of a 'get' to sever the bonds of matrimony). Even Catholics do similar things seeking annulments within the church. I can't really see the danger of permitting people to use their religious law in private disputes provided all proceedings also comply with our legal code. How would we stop them? WHY would we stop them?

            There were no honor killings in Dearborn, and nobody got stoned. I looked into that one as well. There was a minor scuffle over a protest, and nobody got injured. It's certainly not part of a larger pattern. Forced burqas, acid attacks, female genital mutilation, jihad – I'm not denying that any of these barbarous practices exist, and that they are terrible where they happen. But they are no more synonymous with Islam than clinic bombing, wife beating, or mosque attacks (5 documented cases in the last year) are synonymous with Christianity. I don't know a single Muslim who is any less disgusted by those practices as you or I.

            I have plenty of respect for the rule of law. In fact, I happen to share your disturbance with Obama's extra-judicial assassination with al-Awlawki. I don't buy Holder's bogus claim that 'due process doesn't require judicial process.' The point I was making wasn't 'Obama blew up the Fort Hood imam, yay Obama!' it was 'the Fort Hood imam was in Yemen because mainstream American muslims don't tolerate that brand of extremism.' I know he was in Yemen because that's where he got blown up. I have deep reverence for the rule of law AND the constitution, which is why I backed Dr. Ron Paul in this last cycle.

          • Roger

            Travis, what you're selling selling.
            Of course muslims stoning Christians in Dearborn was outside the law. But muslims answer to sharia so they don't care. And as long as that's true nothing else you say matters.

            You have respect for nothing incompatible with your religion. And western law is incompatible or we wouldn't have stories about honor killings in Arizona and Christians being stoned in Dearborn, or even soldiers shot in Ft. Hood.

            If you want to pretend you backed an American politician at least be believable and pick the one with a muslim heritage.

          • Travis

            Your examples aren't from the real world. The reason the mainstream media didn't pick up on the 'stonings in Dearborn' thing is, it didn't happen! A hate group went to the Arab festival with a pig's head, shouting obscene slogans. Some young folk through trash at them. Nobody got injured, no one was martyred – end of story.

            I'm sure you'll admit the obvious when I say that the overwhelming majority of murders are committed by Christians, yet I don't see you condemning my religion (again, I'm Christian). Most crimes in America are committed by white folks like me, but I don't see you arguing that white folks are inherently predisposed to crime. You don't blame me for the Oklahoma City bombing, which was committed by a white christian conservative like me, so you shouldn't blame my friend Samira for Ft. Hood. It's the 21st century – how hard is it to grasp that bigotry is wrong? What about the Sikh temple shooting, the mosque attacks in that nutbag Joe Walsh's chicago congressional district, the arson in Joplin and Murfeesboro – the vast majority of terrorist incidents this year have been perpetrated by white folk against brown folk. That's a fact.

            As far as the 'muslim heritage' thing, I really don't know where you're going with that. I consider myself a pro-business limited government federalism-loving strict-constructionist Republican. I backed Jon McCain in 2008, and I'd have done it again. I was most recently made proud of my support for that American hero when he took to the floor of Congress to denounce that un-American neoMcCarthyite far-right extremist zealot for her baseless smear campaign against Huma Abedin. Being a muslim isn't a crime, and the folks in the mainstream of our party understand that.

          • Roger

            Your defense isn't from the real world. Of course the stonings in Dearborn happened.

            Sop you lie to defend the undefendable. They were assualted for free speech which proves that your religion isn't ready to tolerate western laws. Most hate crimes are committed by black people on black people. You just keep making up the strangest sorts of propaganda.

            And don't think your'e fooling anyone with it.

            Being muslim isn't a crime, but following the teachings that push for violence is. That whole surah 9 mandate things it just keeps rearing it's ugly head.

          • Travis

            I saw a lot of water bottles. Some frisbies. I don't condone persecution via frisby. But I still didn't see any stones. Hate groups have a right to free speech. The ACLU defended the right of the Neo-Nazis to demonstrate in Skokie, in a Jewish neighborhood that had become a haven for holocaust survivors, and their right was upheld.
            These protesters are doing the same thing as the Neo Nazis were doing and they have the same right to do it. The police should have made an effort to stop the projectiles. But, nonetheless, none of that adds up to 'stoning'. Stoning is a method of execution. It involves stones. These people got water-bottled.

            I am referring to factual things that happened in history, which I could easily provide links for, and you're just offering a blanket dismissal of 'propaganda'. Where am I getting my facts wrong? Most murders in America are white Christian folks like me. The reason for that is, most people in this country are white Christian folks like me. The numbers are even more skewed when it comes to mass shootings – Columbine, Padukah, Aurora, Von Maur, the spate of postal shootings in the 90s, the Gabby Giffords attack, the vast majority of serial killers (Starkweather, Gacy, Dahmer, Bundy, Son of Sam, Zodiac, etc etc etc. Why do those murders not say anything about the population perpetrating them, but you get one isolated nutbag in Fort Hood and suddenly every brown guy is waiting to become the enemy within? When that white supremacist broke into that Sikh temple, there were dozens of brown folks and one white guy in that room. Only one of those dozens of people was a terrorist murderer. Do you remember which one it was? The facts don't support your prejudice. I'm not arguing – don't trust white christians like me because we're prone to violence, I'm saying 'Treat individuals as individuals – it's a great policy.'

          • Roger

            Chunks of concrete are limestone by composition.

            And you still pretend islam isn't violent by nature.

          • Travis

            I don't have to 'pretend'. Before the reformation, the catholic church routinely subjected people to torturous inquisitions, launched crusades of conquest, and burned dissenters alive as heretics. That didn't mean that Christianity was violent by nature. The actions of fringe extremists, denounced by the mainstream, can't be used to judge the mainstream.

            To go with a more current example, incidents of soccer hooliganism and rioting in Europe are quite common. Occasionally, somebody dies from this extreme rowdiness. But that doesn't mean soccer fandom is violent by nature. Most American muslims will never commit an act of violence that even rises to the level of chucking a water bottle at a hate group. The facts are on my side.

          • Roger

            And none of the Catholic abuses were in line with the teachings of Christ, so people rejected it. But the abuses and violence today are in line with and accepted by islamic fundamentalists.

            And to go with a more current example, surah 9 mandates that these fundamentalists not do less.

            Travis, you blathering about your debate experience was illustrative. Debate teams are taught to be able to argue on either side of any argument. That you can pretend islam is worthy of defending says a lot about you.

            For you to defend a religion that doesn't value life means you don't.
            For you to defend a religion that hacks the heads of Christians says you don't think it's wrong.
            For you to defend a religion that doesn't care if Girls get an education, or throws acid at their faces for getting an education means you don't care about women's rights either.

            Every time you take a position you need to remember it's not debate, it's real life and people are literally dying for this thing you defend.

            Facts are only on your side if you have those values of a barbaric forced style of life called sharia.

          • Travis

            According to the standards and practices of the people living at the time, the Catholic Priesthood defined what the teachings of Christ were. If you disagreed with them, you might find yourself on the wrong end of some thumbscrews. The fact you'd have been right would serve as cold comfort.

            You actually hit the nail on the head when you said the abuses are in line with 'Islamic fundamentalism', but most Muslims worldwide and the OVERWHELMING majority of muslim Americans aren't fundamentalists. It's really not that hard to tell the difference. If you see a muslim woman walking around downtown unaccompanied, blam – not a fundamentalist. I recall Jesus saying 'Judge not lest ye be judged', not 'judge often and indiscriminately with no regard for specifics.'

            The point of my debate experience is I had to do research into facts that were objectively accurate, with citations. This meant gathering data from a variety of credible sources that could be independently verified. It ALSO meant meeting and talking with people from a wide variety of backgrounds. That taught me how silly it is to try to shove people into preconceived boxes based on, say, their religion.

            I'm not defending Islam so much as I am defending the rights, dignity, and freedom of real Muslim Americans from your false characterizations and from Drakken's actual threats of violence. I believe in conservative notions of loyalty, truth, and justice. When I hear someone like Drakken threatening to murder my friends, I feel I have an obligation to speak up.

            But clearly Islam isn't incompatible with education for women, or my friend Samira wouldn't be an Ivy League educated lawyer. My student Sidra's parents wouldn't have sent her to me to tutor her on the SAT. 'Islamic fundamentalism' is incompatible with women's rights, freedom, science, peaceful coexistence, and loads of other good stuff, but most muslims aren't fundamentalists. Mormons are forbidden from drinking, but that doesn't stop us Catholics from boozing it up.

            The reason I expend all this energy to defend my friends is that I KNOW this is real life. There are real Americans with hopes and dreams on the other end of this rising tide of Islamophobia. They don't deserve to be hated for being born into the wrong religion. That sort of bigotry contradicts everything America stands for.

          • Roger

            You're still wrong and lying.
            Saudi funding and Iranian funding kills people that want moderation and individual choice.

            Don't you remember Neda murdered in Iran?

            All this talk about priests, you pretend the reformation didn't happen. It did, but any revival in islam leads to more violence, not less.

            The reason you expend all this energy is to hide the very nature of the threat we face, islam.

            You also ignore that surah 9 has mandates that muslim activists follow. American independence demands we face those who want us dead and take them on before our women and children are targeted here and home, and on 9/11 that happened.

            You don't understand America when you try that tact.

          • Travis

            Well, thanks for finally being honest. You want us to launch a crusade against a disfavored religious minority based on your own skewed understanding of their faith and their community. Here's an idea – just drop the pretense of being a respectable, reasonable, ethical, Christian person, grab a sheet, and join the Klan.

            I understand that America was founded on ideals of religious liberty, not hate-fueled bigoted witch hunts. I also understand that immigration and our melting pot culture is essential to what makes us the best country in the world. I have American friends of various backgrounds. While a given friend may be black, latino, asian, or muslim, each of them is an American, and each is an individual.

            As far as your obsession over a single surrah, the bottom line is that Islam has a 1400-year history of coexistance with other faiths. If muslims were compelled to kill people of other faiths, you wouldn't have an Egypt that is 90% muslim and 10% coptic christian, because the Christians would have been killed a thousand years ago. Yet every muslim nation has minorities of other religions, and has for centuries. They can tolerate their christians – why can't you tolerate our muslims? Are you less enlightened than the Muslim Brotherhood?

          • Roger

            Self defense, that was the core of the original crusades, nice of you to admit it. The last leg of the Eastern Roman Empire attacked and betrayed by your peaceful small little religious minority that is still punishing all other people within the empire they captured.

            And in Egypt, it went from 90% coptic to 10% coptic thanks to hundreds of years of apartheid. It's a perfect example of how brutal islam is, ask the muslim brotherhood about how much slack they will give the Copts, none.

      • Robert Greenberg

        You're a stupid ignoramus.. typical of your country.. put your head in a whole.. pathetic waste of life.

    • Roger

      That surah 9 mandate keeps teaching us about your religion of pieces.

      • Travis

        For some reason it won’t let me post this up-thread, so I’ll drop it here.
        Roger, I’m afraid you’ve missed the mark by about 1000 paces. When it comes to history and current events, I am neither stupid nor foolish, and I’m not spouting ‘propaganda.’ I’m giving you the benefit of my real-world experience. A big part of the peculiar magic that fuels American exceptionalism is that we draw the best and the brightest from around the world. We have been the beneficiaries of Indian, Chinese, Russian, and other regimes’ oppression, because it has led to many brilliant immigrants seeking freer more prosperous lives here. We’ve been a magnet for bright young minds for generations. I don’t deny that the Iranian Mullahs, their Hezbollah thugs, the Haqqani network, al-Shabbab, the Al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade, Al Jamiyya Islam, or any other confederation of terrorist scumbags are a threat to Global stability and peace, but they AREN’T the voice of American muslims, and if you knew any personally, you’d realize that.

        I wouldn’t want to live under Saudi Arabian repression, nor am I a fan of their exportation of the fundamentalist Wahhabi interpretation of the Koran’s Surrahs. Jordan, on the other hand, is an advanced, moderate, fairly westernized Islamic nation that I hear is pretty great. Turkey appears to be doing a decent job walking the line between the West and the East, and while I prefer Ataturk’s secularism to Prime Minister Erdogran’s Islamism, my Jewish friend David just finished his Doctoral research on Ottoman history and he assures me the socio-political climate in Istanbul remains very modern and cosmopolitan. On the other hand, Iran’s mullahs are oppressive theocratic terror-boosting expansionist nutbags. There is no unified ‘islamic agenda’, because Islam is an extremely diverse faith – shia, sunni, sufi, druze, literally dozens of sects, with hundreds of flavors.

        If you won’t take my word for it, listen to President Bush. He was very careful to explain both to America and to the world that we were not at conflict with Islam, but with a tiny minority of violent extremists who were killing in the Prophet’s name. Suggesting that these monsters represent the broader faith doesn’t merely contradict reality, it grants them a legitimacy they don’t deserve. You’re playing in to their narrative, being duped by their goofy propaganda, and thus giving AQ what they want. Actual polling has shown that the terrorists are extremely unpopular on the ‘Arab Street’. They’re still a problem because it doesn’t take that many committed fanatics to cause serious trouble.

        In closing, Jesus said to love thy neighbor as thyself. He never put in the caveat ‘unless they’re muslim.’ My friends Hajeer, Samira, Ruchi, and Sidra aren’t a threat to you. In fact, if you get hit by a drunk driver, one of em just might be the surgeon that saves your life or the lawyer who puts the other guy away. They’re the real face of Islam in America, and they’re not working on imposing Sharia – that’d cut way into their billable hours.

        • Roger

          And all that means nothing. You are using propaganda, ask Daniel Pearl.

          • Travis

            The definition of propaganda isn't 'facts that contradict my prejudice.' I gave you a bunch of factual statements about reality, combined with some basic please for human decency, individual responsibility, American respect for religious liberty, and common sense. You can't dismiss that with, BLAH, PROPAGANDA. That's like, the laziest argument ever. I hardly think the lesson progressive Jewish journalist Daniel Pearl would want the world to take from his horrendous murder is 'all Christians and Jews should hate all Muslims.' The muslims I know hate terrorism as much as anybody, but that fact doesn't jibe with the hateful propaganda folk have been spoonfeeding you. Hating someone because of their religion is unAmerican. Period. We're better than that. You seem like a reasonably well educated person, Roger – how you could possibly imagine that all Muslims are the same, I just don't know.

          • Roger

            It is propaganda because it's not what the real world facts are. Ask Daniel Pearl. Read surah 9 and figure out how closely it matches what is happening around the world. Then realize that you're just a schill.

            And what muslims are stepping up and stopping it? The ones blown up in car bombings or taken out in honor killings. Christianity had a reformation to stop abuses, and to bring the religion back to the teachings of Christ. islam? It hasn't happened yet and if it does happen, the teachings are violent so it won't help matters a bit.

          • Travis

            Islam isn't a monolithic faith. Their hasn't been a single unifying leader analogous to the Pope since shortly after Muhammad. The Sunni/Shiite split happened 1400 years ago – even the Abassid and Ummayad caliphates weren't recognized by all Islam. Since the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the fracturing has continued further. Which is my point – YES, there are most certainly interpretations of the Koran that are HUGELY problematic. The Wahhabist fundamentalism that Saudi princelings export to grow their influence and keep their extremists placated is one of several examples. But that isn't the majority of Islam.

            You have this false notion that Islam is this monolithic, unified, violent force which is simply contradicted by reality. Most muslims seek peaceful coexistence, and they do in fact denounce the extremists. The thing is, 'Muslim family goes about their business' doesn't really get the same press as 'al Shabbab terrorists claim another 4 lives.' Actual empirical objective scholarly evidence shows that support for Islamic extremism in the broader Islamic world is VERY LOW. My goal is to win the war on terror, which requires winning the battle for the hearts and minds of the moderate Islamic world. GREAT NEWS! We're WINNING! When my old debate partner Phil and his Army Ranger unit bust up some Taliban thugs, he's striking a blow not merely for America but for the Afghani people who want to live lives free from tyrannical religious terror. You seem to think that the Afghani people our soldiers are fighting for are also the enemy, because they're muslim. You're just plain wrong. Support the troops, dude, and get behind the mission. Freeing the muslim kids from the fascist terrorist tyrants requires accepting that there's a difference between them. If you knew many soldiers, you'd get that.

          • Roger

            But in most respects it is. Oh sure you blow each other up between Shia's and Sunni sects but you are monolithic in respect to unbelievers. And the koran 9 mandates are followed in attack after attack.

            You have this false notion that because your teachings say unbelievers will be stupid enough to believe your al taqiyya (and our liberals are falling for it) that you can say anything you want unchallenged.

            My goal is not never ever submit to the false god that demands obedience or death.

            And you knew many soldiers you'd know I'm not alone.

          • Travis

            When did you get the idea that I'm muslim? I was born, raised, and remain a Christian, through and through. I could just as easily go on about Constantine, the Nicean Creed, the Council of Trent, the Avignon papacy, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Reformation, Counter-Reformation, Vatican II, Calvinism, Anabaptists, Quakers, Shakers, and Candlestick Makers :-) When I studied religious history at Creighton, I certainly didn't neglect my own faith. But the very reason I acquired a depth of knowledge about Islam and the Middle East was that 9/11 happened my freshman year and we were soon engaged in two wars over there. My intellectual curiosity and my college debate career compelled an understanding of the conflicts, so I learned about the roots of extremism, the origins of the conflict, and the history of and fissures in Islam.

            So, again, it's not 'my' faith, but it is the faith that several of my good friends and a couple of my students (I teach now, hooray for me) profess, and it's a faith I've studied academically. Your worldview demands that I treat my fellow Americans with suspicion and hostility based on the behaviors of a small minority of their co-religionists. That violates the conservative principle of individual responsibility, as well as the Christian principle of loving thy neighbor. So I don't do it.

            I DO happen to know a lot of soldiers. The Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, the Naval Academy, and West Point all featured college debate teams, and Creighton traveled up to USAFA every year in October. Which means I was arguing the issues of the day with Cadets while the base was on lockdown shortly after 9/11. Further, as I mentioned, my own debate partner Phil is deployed in Afghanistan as an Army Ranger 'right now' and a number of my childhood friends have also been deployed. I haven't lost anyone over there (thank god) but my friends have lost friends in these wars, so I know the cost. The idea that we are engaged in a religious conflict against Islam is an insult to the very real sacrifice my friends have made to protect the world against terrorists. Many of the people my friends have sacrificed for are, themselves, Muslim. My friend Shannon spent several tours training Muslim men to defend themselves against extremists. The war in Iraq finally turned in our favor during the Sunni Awakening, when the muslim tribesmen were finally so fed up with the violence of the insurgents, they overcame their fear and rose up en masse to cast out the terrorists. If your 'Muslims are BAD' mindset had prevailed over there, we would have lost that war.

          • Roger

            Travis, you can lie about being a Christian all you want. But as a muslim defender you are very clever and trying to sound credible as you make up the most bizarre kinds of things to try to push islam as a sane alternative and way of life. Of course anyone watching the news from around the world knows better.

            And there are camps training muslims, they're called terror camps.

          • Travis

            I'm not lying, and I can prove it. 2004 – my partner and I were ranked 35 out of over 1000 collegiate debate teams. Which is why I'm so good at sounding credible – I am. I'll even link you the rankings –
            I was Hepburn, of Creighton Hepburn/Munce – I'm Hepburn. We only entered four tourneys that year, but we won two of em. I know these issues inside and out. I argued them with some of the brighter minds in the country, and if I didn't have my facts straight, I would have lost. If you want to look further into it, Creighton is a Jesuit school in Omaha, which I chose (in part) because I'm a good christian boy, who believes very sincerely in the Prince of Peace and his message of love.

            That said, I'm also something of a Wolfowitzian Bill Kristol-type neoconservative. I'm not a hippie peacenik-yes there are training camps, yes there are terrorist organizations, no they won't listen to reason, no this isn't a law enforcement issue, yes the correct strategy for Al Qaeda is to blow them to hell. And the correct strategy for the Arab Street is to show the world that jihadism is a quick trip to the other end of a hellfire missile, AND moderation/cooperation with the west will be rewarded. What's your endgame, Roger? Kill em all and let god sort em out? That's unconscionable, bigoted, and a surefire way to turn the civilized world against us.

            Naturally if I think we should be working proactively with our allies in the Muslim world, I think we should be cultivating more interfaith dialogue with our own Muslim community. If you persecute people for being muslim, greet them with scorn and prejudice, first off the bat you're contradicting what America stands for. Secondly, you're actually breeding the mutual resentment that CAUSES discord, violence, and the fraying of the fabric of society. If the problem is that some muslims Americans aren't fully assimilating, shunning can only worsen the problem – the solution is outreach.

            Everything I'm saying is in line with the Bush approach to the War on Terror. He wasn't bowing to political correctness when he acknowledged Islam as a legitimate faith, he was speaking his heart and acting as a good Christian leader. Your approach would convict good, innocent Americans of guilt by the most tenuous association, turn friends into enemies, and turn away from our founding principles of religious liberty, equality, and treating individuals as individuals.

          • Roger

            You don't sound credible. And I'm the most traveled man to the moon and mars, back and forth I have more completed trips than any chinese team combined.

            See, anyone can sound reasoned while lying. Most claim veteran status, I'm surprised you can just claim debate experience. You should have known as a debate person that being on the side lined with facts is a big plus. You aren't on this issue.

            Islam is violent and nothing you can reasonably lie about changes that.

          • Travis

            Your words about beating the chinamen to mars didn't seem that reasoned to me. I'm not claiming veteran status because I'm not a vet. I didn't just claim debate experience, I linked you to the rankings. I was 35th out of over 1000 teams that year, because I did my research and knew how to craft a logically valid and rhetorically powerful argument. You claim I'm getting my facts wrong but you can't cite any specifics. The vast majority of Muslim Americans are peaceful, loyal citizens who don't deserve to be judged by the actions of fanatics any more than you deserve to be judged by the white-supremacist terrorist Sikh Temple shooter. You seem reasonable enough to admit that terrorism is wrong, regardless of who the target is. So do virtually all Muslim Americans. These are facts, not lies.

            You're simply 'asserting' that Islam is violent, but that assertion doesn't stand up to scrutiny. In the last ten years, many more Americans have been saved by Doctor Gupta, Nurse Saini, and Doctor Rammandra then have been killed by Al Qaeda. You can deny reality all you want, but it won't stop being reality. The truth is the truth whether you believe it or not. Tarring the innocent with the crimes of the guilty is fundamentally unjust.

          • Roger

            All that and your morals are so lacking you defend islam when it defends beating women. When it defends suicide bombs. When it defends forced conversions and slavery.

            You defend depravity of a forced system that stones rape victims and then pretend to have morals? You fail.

          • Travis

            I'm not defending any of that, I'm informing you that 'Islam' doesn't do any of that stuff. Islamic fundamentalists do. I share your concern and condemnation of Islamic fundamentalists. You know who else condemns Islamic fundamentalism? American muslims! I defend the rights of individuals to be judged as individuals, based on their own actions. Here's some Bible for you – Matthew 7:16 "And ye shall know them by their fruits." The fruits of Islamic fundamentalism are as different from moderate muslim America as night from day or life from death.

            There's actually a muslim member of Congress, Keith Ellison of Minnesota. He doesn't advocate Sharia law, defend suicide bombs, or practice slavery. He's an American public servant. Muslim Americans are doctors, lawyers, accountants, writers, police, firefighters, teachers. These are the people you're trying to tear down with your ignorance. If you had the courage to actually get to know an American muslim before condemning them all in your mind, you'd know the truth. Taste the fruit. It's sweet.

          • Roger

            Yes, you are defending that.

            And when Ellison wanted to be sworn in on a koran instead of the Bible that's sharia speaking.

            Once again you are hoping to confuse the issues or to misinform on the issues. I do know muslims here at home, and after meeting them I won't buy Tyson chicken any more.

          • Travis

            I'm not defending repressive practices, I'm attacking bigotry. Keith Ellison doesn't beat his wife, stone his kids, or bomb his colleagues in Congress. How is swearing on a Koran sharia law? Keith Ellison swore on a Koran, now I'm not allowed to eat pork – is that how the world works in your mind?

          • Roger

            You defend any part of islam then you defend all of it. It's a package deal.

            And how much pork can you buy in Saudi Arabia? How does that work in your mind?

  • Schlomotion

    Laura L. Rubenfeld is so patently off base that she even tries to rewrite history with Malcolm X as a marginalized Islamic terrorist. This is the hardcore fanatical Jewish Nationalist version of history.

    This article is abject garbage coming out of Family Security Matters, a Frank Gaffney affiliated intimidation company which is part of the second wave of the hostile Neoconservative / World Likud assault on American politics, culture, values, and not to mention the Republican Party. The inclusion of the term "cop-killer" is meant to appeal to the Laura Ingraham listenership, e.g. Zionist racists trying to find common ground with Irish-American nativist racists. It shows how slender and desperate their fringe base is.

    America is the land of e pluribus unum, the separation of church and state, tolerance and democracy. The treatment of anyone who is Muslim as automatically a terrorist in need of career and political eradication is purely fascist in nature. Ms. Rubenfeld does not deviate whatsoever in writing articles that single out young political or religious American leaders simply because they are of Middle Eastern extraction and not Jewish, taking their photos and making them into wackadoo paranoid dossiers. This was exactly the kind of behavior that the ADL was onerously fined for in the 1990s, keeping dossiers on everyday Americans on behalf of Israel.

    The invidious and wicked nature of this particular author is that she works as an Islamic and Arabic teacher as a pulpit to attack people because of their faith. It is quite the opposite of scholarly interest. This carries over into the article as she describes people as either criminals and terrorists for their faith, or if she cannot slander the person that way, she will say that he lives a mere 1.5 miles away from someone else who does. In reality, a quick search shows that she is another PJ Media impostor working out of one of the fake "Islamic" centers developed according to the Brookings Institution plans from the early 2000s to make fake alternative Islamic bodega infoshops and disseminate Hasbara. This article is the real personality showing, this is Rubenfeld as the Reinhard Heydrich of Hasbara, attacking Brooklyn (from California) like she is the Reich Protector of New York.

    • david

      are you hiding in your mommys basement you loser?

      • Schlomotion

        Basement? Here's basement: True to form for all neocons, Ms. Rubenfeld took Russian language in school and went to Russia twice to study Communism and the Soviet Union and now employs those totalitarian tactics in America on behalf of Israel.

        • Curlyhammed

          I also went to Russia to study the language and culture. While I was there, Muslims killed 400 children in Beslan, held a theatre full of innocents in a theater, murdered random people in the Subways and stank up the place in general.

        • Kufar Dawg

          ARe you hiding in your mosque's basement?

      • Zionista

        shmo is more likely in a prison cell

    • Andy

      Schlo! If you let us know the city in which you live, I'll quickly send you the phone number and address of the nearest insane asylum.

      • Schlomotion

        Thanks. I already live near Kenneth Levin. When I need the services of a Dr. Imfried Eberl. I'll call him.

        • Pontotoc Bill

          Interesting. It is to be believed you need to visit SS-Obersturmmfuhrer Eberl at Treblinka. Let us know how that visit goes.

    • reader

      Interesting that tro schlo is all worked up about criticism against DNC, having faked the outmost anymosity toward Michael Moore just the other day. Real tool. Muslim brotherhood shill.

    • Jane

      Funny you offer alot of accusations ,criticism and irrelevant garbage but you cannot refute the direct terror involvement and hate speech of Wahhaj ,NOI,Malcolm etc.

      Don't waste anyone's time claiming separation of church and state,muslims do not acknowledge its existence and can't comprehend the concept.

      Face the facts – Hitler was a progressive liberal and allied with muslims who are pets of the demonrats.They all share racial hatreds ,extreme antisemitism ,fanaticism and embrace murder in their ideology .

      • Schlomotion

        Tell me all about the direct terror involvement of Malcolm X that this author above who tried to defect to the Soviet Union alleges. I really want to hear this rewriting of history in full detail.

        • reader

          "this author above who tried to defect to the Soviet Union"

          You got everything backwards yet again, tro schlo. If this auther tried to defect to the Soviet Union, she easily would. It was hard to LEAVE the Soviet Union.

          • Schlomotion

            And even easier for her to go twice and learn to her heart's content about Soviet Communism before moving back to the US to use their finer techniques in service of Israel.

          • reasder

            So, you've changed your assertion about defection to a speculation about learning techniques already? Bodes well for your credibility, which you have none already. Israel is not the Soviet Union. In fact, Arafat and all anti-Israel terrorists thereafter use KGB taught techniques, including propaganda techniques. You've even picked up a few, but you're too inadequate to make them work, so you're stuck here trolling. No Pulitzer is on the horizon, tro. And plusing your own posts is not going to change it.

          • Schlomotion

            Hmm. And yet the Soviet Union period remains. Why do so many Communists work for PJ Media?

          • reader

            Rather than asking an absurd question having no bearing on reality, why so many communists work in Obama administration, which – as you do – shill for muslim brotherhood?

          • Schlomotion

            It is duly noted that nobody here cares that all the books here are acclaimed by people who work for the same company and that they spent the lion's share of their education years in the Soviet Union. Neither the hardcore Jewish Nationalists nor the Christian Nativists care that their "right-wing" opinion columnists all took Russian language classes and went to study the Kremlin until unfortunately their patron empire collapsed. All that's important is that they hate Muslims, an inconsequential and remote religion whose fanatics used to be mashed like fleas in the 1980s, but in your feeble minds have grown up to become the greatest threat to mankind.

          • Touchstone

            "Muslims, an inconsequential and remote religion"

            Tell that to the 3000 killed on 9/11. Tell the Israelis threatened daily with annihilation that the genocidal ululating Muslims who neighbor them are "remote" and their hundreds of thousands of bombs "inconsequential".

            For such an inconsequential religion, it's funny how much influence they have on the proceedings at the UN. It's funny how much influence they have on oil prices and therefore the world economy. It's funny how many countries bend over backward to do their bidding, such as consenting to exclude Israel from an anti-terrorism conference (to pacify the hothead Erdogan). It's funny–if they're so inconsequential–how the "most powerful man in the world" bows obsequiously to the Saudi king. It's funny how an Iranian nuke will trigger catastrophic proliferation in the Middle East. It's funny how massive China sides with such inconsequential, remote people because it needs their oil so desperately. It's funny how Europeans are so worried about the demographic trends involving these remote, inconsequential people and their remote, inconsequential no-go zones right in the middle of European cities and countries, where native Europeans might be brutalized by these remote, inconsequential people.

            Funny how so many serious consequences have ensued as a result of these inconsequential people.

          • Schlomotion

            I think the 25,000 who died in the American Revolution, the 625,000 who died in the Civil War, the 20,000 who died in the War of 1812, the 13,283 who died in the Mexican-American War, the 116,516 who died in WWI and the 405,399 who died in WWII all to make the United States a free and independent democratic republic outweigh the 3,000 stockbrokers who died in a plane crash one day in 2001 so that they could be referenced by Likudnik Maoists as the eternal reason for why the US needs to embrace Israel and fascism and exterminate Islam.

          • Touchstone

            Good grief, what a heartless, ugly remark. There just aren't any moral depths you won't plumb. You dehumanize victims every bit as human as you are by calling them "stockbrokers", as if to imply that their lives mattered less, or perhaps even that they had it coming. Your callous glibness and spite not only make you despicable but fatally wound your arguments and render them worthless slop.

            In any case, the 3000 victims included a wide spectrum of backgrounds, but acknowledging that (as well as the humanity of stockbrokers) would conflict with the objectives of your crusade.

            By the way, if you're going to start listing random casualty figures, you should bear in mind that the numbers of those killed by Muslims over the centuries absolutely DWARFS the numbers you cite. But the real point would be the casualties they're currently aiming to inflict: Radicalized Muslims are both pursuing the means to exterminate a people and expressing that desire constantly and stridently. Your point seems to be that, just because America isn't the one threatened, the threat should be dismissed and those issuing the threats minimized as "remote" and "inconsequential".

            Geopolitics 101:

            Will America and its interests be affected if Iran gets the bomb, triggering extremely dangerous nuclear proliferation throughout the Middle East?

            Will America and its interests be affected if a coalition of "remote" and "inconsequential" Muslims succeeds in destroying Israel?

            If you answered "no" to either of the above, you must be Schlomotion.

          • Schlomotion

            Spare me the passion play about the Maoist Likudnik year zero of 9/11. Spare me also the tie-ins to Pearl Harbor and the Holocaust. They aren't a fair trade for a republic.

          • Touchstone

            To recap, these are the points you're powerless (or too lazy) to refute:

            – dehumanizing victims as "stockbrokers" is obscene, malicious, callous and wrong; in other words, perfectly in keeping with your character
            – it's further wrong to assume that all 3000 victims were stockbrokers, regardless of what you think of that profession
            – your casualty figures are dwarfed by the tally of history's victims of Muslims
            – the danger today comes less from what massacres Muslims perpetrated in the past, and far more from what so many radicals in Islam stridently intend to inflict tomorrow, thus negating your feeble-at-best point about American casualties, which are dwarfed by the Islam-related casualties anyway
            – if Iran gets the bomb, it will trigger extremely dangerous nuclear
            proliferation throughout the Middle East, but you're too thick to perceive how that would adversely affect America
            – if a coalition of allegedly "remote" and "inconsequential" Muslims succeeds in destroying Israel, as so many of them desire so passionately, you're too thick to perceive how the ensuing regional catastrophe would adversely affect America, and massively so

            Like Pavlov's dog, you will salivate and reflexively bark "9/11" at every opportunity. What you WON'T do is successfully refute any of the above points, nor are you likely to even make an attempt. You're out of ammo. You're just shooting blanks now.

          • Schlomotion

            Yes, your point is that each person who died in 9/11 is a dazzling and unique snowflake. Nice point. However it doesn't validate treating 9/11 like a Year Zero and throwing our republic in a trash can.

            Your other point was that the American fight for a democratic republic is dwarfed by Islamic slayings since the year 500. Frankly, I don't care because that point is stupid.

            Your third point was that despite your glamorization of the great history of the Scimitar, we should all be quivering on our knees about what Muslims might do to Americans (but you really mean Israelis) in the future. Sorry, my friend. You are a big ball of fear with a Jewish bunker mentality. I don't share it, and couldn't possibly cash in my Constitution and naked appreciation for Liberty to help you assuage that fear.

            Your other point was that I hope Iran gets the bomb and "destabilizes" Israeli saber rattling and reduces them to their idiotic Samson Option. You are right. I do.

            Your last point was that if Israel falls (meaning "has to share") then the entire region will collapse and so will America. Are you really going to try to lay the Domino Theory on me? Really?

          • Touchstone

            "a dazzling and unique snowflake" — You can't say anything without retching up sarcastic bile. You must be monumentally unpleasant in person. What I'm getting at is that they were simply PEOPLE. Not stockbrokers, not dazzling snowflakes, just people. Repeat after me: PEOPLE. Human beings. I know it's hard for your hate-warped brain to compute that the individuals you disdain are in fact human, but they are. No more, no less.

            "that point is stupid" — Uh oh. That means I qualify for membership in your adolescent mean-girl club now.

            "the great history of the Scimitar" — More catty sarcasm devoid of wit. You seem biologically incapable of responding to a point without diminishing it with sarcasm first. The hundreds of thousands of missiles aimed at Israel will obviously do more damage than scimitars, but since you won't be the one donning the gas mask, it's easy for you to be such a colossal prick from the comfort of your padded room.

            "You are a big ball of fear with a Jewish bunker mentality" — No, I just look at the looming disaster with eyes open. You, on the other hand, are a big ball of malice and venom. It's not overly fearful for Israelis to be concerned about Muslim radicals making good on their incessant genocidal threats. A man named Hitler made such threats once upon a time. Did Jews have no reason to fear those threats too, you stupid schmuck? True, I'm not Israeli, but that's no reason to dismiss the ever-present specter of war in the Middle East and the carnage it will entail.

            "I hope Iran gets the bomb" — I venture to say that all anyone needs to know about you are those six hateful words. If you hope the terror-sponsoring, woman-stoning, gay-hanging, genocidal warmongering, election-stealing, protester-murdering, prisoner-torturing, Shoah-denying, apocalyptic, medieval, fundamentalist, intolerant, barbaric tyrants running Iran get the bomb, it speaks volumes more about your own hopes, fantasies, allegiances, indifference to human suffering, and failure to foresee the resultant proliferation-related global catastrophe than all your rabid posts combined.

            "their idiotic Samson Option" — What's idiotic is your characterization of it as idiotic. It's actually tragic and terrifying from their perspective. And it's much the same as the doctrine of M.A.D. that existed between the USA and the USSR. To an indifferent ignorant idiot like you, a policy of nuclear deterrence is "idiotic". I guess Israel should just lay down its arms and everything will be sugar and spice and everything nice.

            "Domino Theory" — Sorry, I forgot that things need to be spelled out for you. It often takes several attempts for you to grasp basic geopolitical realities. By saying that America would be adversely affected by Israel's demise, I was getting at the widely held view that Israel's second-strike capability would mean that its genocidal enemies would suffer massive destruction, and that in turn would have catastrophic effects on the global economy, and perhaps result in terrorist attacks throughout the world (including America), all of which could lead to profound civil unrest. I don't think Israel's demise would lead to America's demise (yet that won't stop you from putting your sarcastic, hyperbolic, hysterical words in my mouth), but nobody really knows the full extent of what ugly scenarios America might face at home. Just the huge spike in oil prices alone would result in enormous chaos and misery.
            Any attempt to destroy Israel, especially with nukes, would quickly trigger a chain reaction of violence and economic disaster across the globe. It's idiotic to think that such a dramatic event as Israel's destruction would have no repercussions outside the region, but once again, I heartily defend your sacred right to embarrass the living s*** out of yourself by forming stupid sentences until they become stupid paragraphs expressing stupid thoughts.


            M.A.D. is now Mecca Assured Destruction.

          • Schlomotion

            In your hysteria to defend the unattacked, you conflate. The non plus ultra of your last post was that you conflate mutually assured destruction with guaranteed destruction. Did the US and the USSR destroy one another? No. Did Pakistan and India destroy one another? No. Does the US generally attack countries that have a nuclear bomb? No. Are Iran and Israel some kind of special countries that can't conform to the general thesis that countries with nukes don't nuke each other? No no no. Did I suggest that Iran should nuke Israel? No.

            Did I say that Iran having a nuke would make Israel have to shut up for a change and stop acting like it is going to preemptively attack yet another one of its less well-armed neighbors? YES. Did I say that Iran having a nuke would thankfully shut down a portion of the Hasbara press hounding the US to either attack Iran or finish the job if Israel starts attacking Iran? YES. Does any of that hurt Israelis? No. Does it deal a blow to Israeli chauvinism and histrionics? Yes. Does it have anything to do with the Holocaust, or the Apocalypse, or mean girls you went to school with? No.

          • Roger

            Schlo, it looks like you've been schooled for days and you're just not bright enough to know when you should crawl away.

          • Kufar Dawg

            Pakistain trains/equips/sponsors islamofascist terrorism against India. Iran funds islamofascist terrorism and sponsors Hezbollah.

          • Touchstone

            As usual, you dodged most of my points and reveled in your vapid, mean-girl cattiness:

            "Iran having a nuke would make Israel have to shut up for a change … Iran having a nuke would thankfully shut down a portion of the Hasbara press hounding the US"

            What stone-cold, reckless indifference! The fates of millions hang in the balance! You blithely want the hate-crazed, terror-sponsoring fanatics running Iran to possess WMD so they can SHUT ISRAELIS UP. That's your big reason. That's your mature, responsible, well-thought-out political position. Forget the daily annihilationist threats. Forget the ties to terrorist gangs. Forget the regional proliferation it would trigger. Allow genocide-glorying, Shoah-denying, fundamentalist zealots to get the bomb in order to SILENCE PEOPLE WHO IRRITATE YOU. Clearly, it's too much to ask you to endure all those pesky newspaper headlines about the Mullahs getting the bomb. Naturally, that's grounds for an Iranian nuke! My, what perfect logic.

            This is right up there with the most mean-spirited, shallow, myopic, asinine and UBER-SELFISH posts you've scribbled to date.

          • Schlomotion

            That's about the size of it. If Iran gets a nuke, no more preemptive strikes by Israel, no more threats of preemptive strikes by Israel, no more hounding the US to go to war with Iran. No more obnoxious Israeli-Americans pretending to be patriotic and lobbying the US to stop them stop them before Israel loses its ability to bully its neighbors with nuclear superiority.

            Of course, Israel will just start complaining about Egypt all the harder like they have been doing lately because Israel always magnifies whatever it has to complain about until it is the biggest drama queen life or death issue in the world. But in one small facet the most spoiled country in the Levant would have to suck its thumb for a while. The world would breathe a sigh of relief. I think it's worth it.

          • Roger

            You pretend that if Iran gets nukes that they are above all action Israel might take to survive.

            Do you really think the IDF will allow Iran the means to 'erase' it?

          • reader

            Backwards again. All the Jew killers in the Middle East were KGB and GRU (top a lsser extent) trained and supplied, tro.

          • reader

            I meant, to a lesser extent, in the parenthesis.

          • Kufar Dawg

            Delusional much?

          • Roger

            The soviet period remains?

            It's history, the past.

            That would be hard to change, unless you're a progressive re-writing things.

        • Curlyhammed

          Old Schlo is very schlo. Missing a few chromosomes I suspect.

          • Roger

            Pakistani rat child perhaps?

    • The Hammer

      I think it is good of you to raise some counterpoint. I have no knowledge of the author's background or true agenda (if there is one), but she does present a number of facts (I assume) about Wahhaj that are troubling and call into question whether the DNC understands the threat of political Islam.

    • richard sherman

      Do you support freedom or do you support shariah? It is one or the pother…this is very simple.

      • Schlomotion

        I support freedom. That's why I oppose both Islamic and also Zionist sharia.

        • reader

          Muslim brotherhood shill opposing Islamic sharia? Right. By the way, there's no Jewish sharia either. This troll is just bizarre. Totally schizophrenic.

        • Kufar Dawg

          What "Zionist sharia"? Sharia law dictates Jews are to be persecuted and oppressed (minimally) so I doubt any Zionist would embrace that.

    • Ghostwriter

      Somehow,I'm not surprised that Schlobrain would defend someone who hated Jews. He has repeatedly shown that he is a Jew hating creep. Why doesn't he return to the sewer that spawned him?

      • Schlomotion

        I have noticed that you never call out any of the violent and racist pro-Israelis on here that talk about judgment and killing Muslims and how their sympathizers will get theirs, and how girls deserve to die, etc. You seem disgusted at certain acts of racism and vaudeville, but generally all the violence and all the pro-Jewish racism gets a free pass from you.

        • reader

          The only reason you pretend to care about the girl is that you try to help stirring anti-Jewish sentiment. You never shed a tear about Americans killed by islamic terrorists world-wide.

          • Schlomotion

            By Americans, are you referring to the oil contractors and the mercenaries that protect oil rigs?

          • Roger

            Why do the oil rigs need protection?

            Won't they pay 'jizya tax'?

          • reader

            Yes, by Americans I'm referring to oil contractors and people of all other walks of life. You are only interested in Jew haters – not because they may happen to be Americans, but because they hate the Jews. That's your only criterion.

          • Schlomotion

            Those poor oil contractors. Those poor extraordinary renditioners. My heart bleeds. It's so unfair that they don't get to live longer and waterboard more people. How can God in heaven permit such atrocities to take place? Stop jerking my tears, man! This is sadder than the Ode to the Confederate Dead.

          • reader

            You're jerking your tears yourself by merely mentioning mass murderers being water boarded. Of course, it's not because they're mass murderers, but because we're all islamophobes and Israel firsters. You just can't help yourself, tro, so, why pretend to be a “libertarian” and an Eric Holder opponent and all that crap, when it's clear that you are a Jew hater, a muslim brotherhood, and hence an Obama shill?

          • Schlomotion

            Under the Constitution, I would actually have the right to be all of those things you mention. As we compare who shills for whom though, it is of note that you shill for the above mentioned woman who got her education in the USSR, by day works at an Islamic Center, by night writes genocidal hysteria about Muslims, and has no allegiance to the United States whatsoever.

          • reader

            Yes, under the Constitution you can be as incoherent and incomprehesible as you strive to be, tro schlo. And you certainly seem to take the full advantage.


            Shariamotion, Happy Eternal Nakba!

          • Kufar Dawg

            But there are no less than three "authoritative" islamic hadeeths that call for a genocide of Jews and yet you have no problem with that.

    • Kufar Dawg

      What about the separation of mosque and state? Do you support that Farshad?

    • Touchstone

      "America is the land of e pluribus unum, the separation of church and state, tolerance and democracy"

      Ah yes, the land of "tolerance", in which a certain loudmouth routinely expresses such *tolerant* sentiments as wanting to "throw (insert name of hated filmmaker) into a pit of sharpened stakes" and to "wring the neck" of (insert name of hated columnist).

      My, what a great exemplar you are of the land of "tolerance". You extend your professed "tolerance" only to those who say things which DON'T make you want to murder them in various cruel ways.

      If you tolerate only those individuals who say and do nothing to disturb your sensibilities, then your capacity for tolerance is never tested. It's only by tolerating the intolerant that you prove you have any capacity for tolerance. Until that happens, you're not one to take pride in the "tolerance" of your country. You're lauding a national trait you yourself have tried to undo, thereby revealing yourself to be a fraud and a hypocrite. For not recognizing this chasm between your lofty words and your lizard-like ways, you yourself qualify for ownership of a "feeble mind'.

      • Schlomotion

        You really bring out what a fake "conservative website" this is, what with your Michael Moore lovefest.

        • Touchstone

          Wow, what a mind-blowingly stupid comment. Where to begin?

          You recently accused me of being a “collectivist”. But now you’re lumping everyone at this site together with me, because of one single comment I just made about Michael Moore! (Detect any irony there, genius?) That’s how a mindset warped by prejudice works: Guilt by association, simplistic reductionism, kneejerk stereotyping, scattershot smearing. Why counterattack just one opponent when you can stupidly paint us all with the same brush? Why not use every post as an opportunity to hold everyone in your field of view accountable for the words of just one individual? Throw accuracy, logic and intellectual integrity to the winds. That’s your M.O.

          More proof of your own hopelessly feeble mind: I’M NOT EXPRESSING ANY LOVE FOR MICHAEL MOORE WHATSOEVER. My opinion about Moore, whether positive or negative, is TOTALLY beside the point. Why can’t a self-styled “polymath” like you grasp that simple, crucial point? I’m defending a man’s RIGHT to voice his opinions (or, in this case, film them). I’m not actually defending the opinions in question. Can you grasp the distinction? How many more times need I explain it? Would it help if you moved your lips while you read?

          Obviously, it’s your own longing to murderously VIOLATE your fellow countrymen’s rights, and your insufferable hypocrisy in that regard, that I harp on, not the quality of Moore’s work. A well-trained orangutan would have grasped this rudimentary distinction by now.

          You’re not only feeble-minded, but a cowardly weasel for trying to deflect the pressure I apply on you back on to me. But again, the issue here is your hypocrisy, not whether I like Moore’s films. You’re the one who said he’d “gladly” throw Moore on “sharpened stakes”, yet proudly trumpets the “tolerance” of the country he loves! Those positions can’t be reconciled. And how do you defend this hypocritical garbage? By flinging dirt at me! Your desperation is complete. Can there be any doubt you’ve been checkmated?

          As deficient and hopelessly cornered as I think you are, I defend your right to express your muddled spite as much as I defend Moore’s right to express himself in film. That’s tolerance.

          • Schlomotion

            You are not the only one to come out all aflutter here because I took a swipe at Michael Moore, beloved filmmaker and entertainer extraordinaire, hater of the 2nd Amendment and champion of the Cuban health care system. Your other anonymous comrade, "Reader" did too. It's a good thing I didn't vilify Louis Farrakhan, because then you'd be forced to bemoan the cancellation of the Arsenio Hall show in your rabid defense of Israel (and of Ms. Rubenfeld solely because of her genetics and her shared hatred of Muslims).

          • Touchstone

            Again, it's not about Moore. He's incidental to the point. You're trying to change the subject, I realize that. That's your tactic. But I'm on to it. You can knock it off now. I'm not taking the bait.

            The issue is your hypocrisy. You speak glowingly of America's "tolerance" yet you've expressed a desire to murder some of your fellow Americans, just because they've expressed views you don't approve of. Perhaps the real tolerance you should admire is that of your countrymen, who tolerate your violent intolerance of THEM! After all, what could be less tolerant than killing people you don't like, which is exactly what you've expressed a desire to do?

            The issue isn't Moore. He and Shapiro are just Exhibit A and B. I presume there are many more Americans you would "gladly" — yes, you wrote "gladly" — throw on "sharpened stakes", just because you find them obnoxious. You're a vain creature who puts himself on a pedestal, imbuing himself with the power to arbitrate who gets to be tolerated or not. You arrogantly seek to determine whose rights get respected and whose get violated. And you want to do it while hypocritically claiming you're down with the program of American tolerance. What's more, you defend the indefensible by changing the subject and shooting the messenger — anything to distract the issue and get yourself off the hook.

            You're truly perverted and despicable. No "Alexander the Great" sticker for YOU, Mr. Polymath.

          • Schlomotion

            You can't even wield the word "hypocrite" when everything you say here is in defense of a massive land grab in the Levant and a blacklisting of anyone who speaks negatively about it, or about its PR agents in the United States. The very basis of your position is to maintain a permanent and beneficial hypocrisy for the State of Israel. Again, you are reduced to espousing one hypocrisy for militant Jews and decrying the same hypocrisy for goyim. It's racism. It's bias. It's religious fundamentalism. It's apologetics for one ethnicity trampling another. You have abdicated morality at the onset.

          • reader

            Only a moron who can't read an elementary map could be speaking of a massive land grab. The Brits gave away 80% of the Mandate to the Arabs in violation of their own pledge to the Jews even before the UN got to partition it for the n-th time. Only a complete ignoramus or a sincere Jew hater can buy into the shell game about "Zionists stealing the land from the Arabs". And we all know who you are.

          • Touchstone

            Another epic fail. You stayed true to form by trying to turn the tables on me, but it won't work. It can't. It's illogical. You're trying to defend bad behavior by pointing to someone else's bad behavior (what's worse, you have to INVENT such behavior and then ascribe it to me). You can't defend your position. It's indefensible. So you shoot the messenger. But shooting the messenger is not a defense. It's a deflection and a distraction.

            It's absolutely impossible to back up the ludicrous, desperate claim that "everything (I) say here is in defense of a massive land grab". What garbage! There's a variety of issues discussed here, not just Israel. This is just your latest desperate ploy to tar and feather me so my scathing indictment of you won't stick. Nice try.

            What's more, you're on record as describing yourself as a "Zionist" too, so who the hell are you to decry "land grabs in the Levant"? How hypocritical can you get?! Your comments are so stupid, so hypocritical, so desperate — wow, if this keeps up, I'll have to restrain myself from a laughing fit. Care to twist your worm-like self into any more perverted contortions, you muddled fool?

            The cold hard truth is this: Even if I were the most immoral person on the planet, I would still be 100% right about your own hypocrisy. I'd still be right about you being a clown with your head stuck up your backside. You just bloviated about the wondrous "tolerance" of America, yet you routinely endorse the murder of political opponents! No amount of finger-pointing at me will get you out of this bind. As long as I'm posting at this site, I'll remind them what a duplicitous, disingenuous, ill-intentioned hypocrite you are. I have your very own words to back me up.

            You're lost. You've scribbled too much. You've got no choice but to double down on lies and smears. You've painted yourself into a corner. There's no escape.

          • Schlomotion

            You cannot tar tar, and you cannot feather feathers. Like your hero Elie Wiesel, if you begin with a warped premiss, then your marvelous argument remains warped. At fundament, you are a Jewish Chauvinist who is flipping out because way back when, I endorsed Gunter Grass. That set off your "protect the herd" alarm and set you about to flapping wildly in defense of Israel, citing every papercut Jews ever suffered since the invention of papyrus. I really suspect you work for PJ Media the way you so ardently defend the Frontpage blacklist.

          • Pontotoc Bill

            Gunther Grass? A Waffen SS man? Not very reliable, buddy. As a new visitor, you do show a profound hatred of Israel and Jews along with a remarkable blind side for Islam.

          • Roger

            Muslim propagandists have that bent.

          • Touchstone

            Once again, you dodged my points, changed the subject and tried to discredit me. The pattern is getting tedious. Any other arrows in your quiver? Something sharp for a change?

            Kindly refute the following:

            – You claim to value the "tolerance" of America while expressing a desire to murder your political enemies; in other words, you're a hypocrite who claims to love tolerance but is actually so intolerant of people who exercise their right to free speech that you express a desire to murder them
            – Who are you to decry "land grabs in the Levant" when you described your own self as a "Zionist" who endorses Herzl's dream of a Jewish state?
            – How could "everything (I) say here" possibly be "in defense of a massive land grab" when there are numerous articles I've commented on which had nothing to do with Israel?

            "citing every papercut Jews ever suffered" — This manure smells just as bad as the "3000 stockbrokers" comment. You can't help but indulge your penchant for glib, callous, snide remarks. They don't serve your arguments well. They make you reek of bigotry. When I refer to Jewish suffering of the past, it's in reference to hardships far too brutal for a creature like you to comprehend or sympathize with. And it's with a view to establishing a context for my arguments (such as why Israel continues to be important as a place of refuge for Jews), not to gratuitously arouse sympathy or to demonize villains of the past.

            Oh, would that it were just papercuts. If only.

            "you are a Jewish Chauvinist who is flipping out because way back when, I endorsed Gunter Grass" — You've *spewed* a whole lot more bile since then. You stupidly expect to accuse, demonize, blame, condescend, dismiss, insult and provoke … with impunity! As if anyone who speaks up in his own defense is just "flapping wildly" to "protect the herd"! You come here to PROVOKE precisely the reaction you elicit. All this so-called "flapping" is entirely your fault, and your disingenuous, malicious comments about Grass were merely a bitter taste of what was to come.

          • Schlomotion

            OK. You have caught me out. You have made me realize how callous I have been.

            I forget sometimes how hard it is with the world on your shoulders. I don't take the time to consider how hard it must be to defend Judaism and Israel from so many hostile forces. The weight of all this horrible history is really upon you. You work tirelessly to stop a resurgence of the pogroms, to quell the ever lurking chance of an inflamed hatred against the Jews which happens for absolutely no reason at all, save for jealousy and ignorance. It is truly a Sisyphean task to protect and advocate for so many people, and knowing that the ancestors are watching. Now added to that is the weight of all the poor souls who were mercilessly killed on 9/11 for no other reason than to strike a blow against America for being allied with Israel, which so richly deserves as much land as they can hold in the Middle East as payment for all the wrongs done to them throughout the centuries. You endure all this over the internet. I don't know how you manage. I tip my hat to you.

          • Touchstone

            "Israel, which so richly deserves as much land as they can hold in the Middle East as payment for all the wrongs done to them throughout the centuries" — Your sarcasm is pure juvenilia, but this line is particularly hypocritical from someone who keeps reminding me that he's a Zionist and a supporter of Herzl's ideas. If you support Israel's right to exist, why do you scribble so many caustic words in an attempt to smear Israel as a "land-grabbing" force of evil? Why do you keep talking out of both sides of your mouth? It's not as though it's hard to keep track of your flip-flopping.

            The obvious answer is that you're lying when you're claiming you're fine with Israel existing, or that you're troubled by the Holocaust. But you're telling the truth when you're making evil, sarcastic comments that sound like they came out of a catty teenage girl's mouth. You're the stereotypical mean girl, heckling what she regards as her inferiors in the high school hallway.

            "to quell the ever lurking chance of an inflamed hatred against the Jews which happens for absolutely no reason at all" — No reason, yeah right. The antisemites have always had their many BS reasons. Misery ensuing from war and economic disaster will give them all the reasons they need. You're damn right there will be Jews on guard to try to prevent history from repeating itself. Your pig ignorant mockery won't put a dent in the survival instincts of the Jewish tribe or any other. You're not the one targeted, so naturally you can't relate, and what you can't relate to, you mock — like the vapid, antisemitic jerk you are. And I for one will never shy away from using words people like you disdain as "canned" (like antisemite, spew, venom, etc) in order to make points that need to be made. People like you seek to rob Jews of speech itself, so that we can't express what we consider important (and you'll do so while hypocritically trumpeting the "tolerance" of your country!). You'll never succeed in silencing anyone. You're just a prick with a head full of garbage masquerading as thoughtful commentary. Keep screaming in your wilderness. Your checkpoint-related frustrations are, at least on occasion, an unintentionally amusing distraction. Kind of like a trained monkey.

          • Schlomotion

            Perhaps you know Theodor Herzl backward and forward. In my meager reading I got the distinct impression that he was an adventurous and optimistic guy who believed anything you will, you can do it, especially if you work directly and relentlessly upon it yourself. I also got the impression that his notion of settlement building was people building their own houses and then living in them, building extra ones for people who can't do it themselves because of age or infirmity. I got the impression that he thought emigration and repatriation were win-win scenarios where people came to fair terms and people benefited as much from pioneering and cooperation as they did from buying or inheriting legally and actually abandoned properties and businesses. That is the basis of my Zionism as much as of my Black Nationalism, or Garveyism, or any other ambitious voluntary libertarian mutualist endeavor. I hold that as distinct and superior to marauding, swindling, invasion, occupation, lawfare, and annexing by means of the press. I reject Marxism and rank theft. That is not the Herzl I know when I say I am a Zionist. You know some other Herzl and some other Zionism that requires other peoples' stuff, other peoples' land, other peoples' glowing approval, and where the diaspora never vacates the premises but rather stays there to rip people off to finance more land grabs in the West Bank. I wonder if Herzl would have approved of this Meyer Lanskyism.

            You have asserted yet again that I must move in lock step with every craven action of purported Zionists in order to use the label and not be purged from the tribe. I fail to see this as different from Stalinism or Beginism.

            You just can't crank through your ideological terrarium that there might grow a flower that is perfectly OK with Israel existing but doesn't agree with it expanding. No, no, that must mean that I reveled in the Holocaust. That's what the rulebook says.

            You have now flipped this conversation from me defending the right of Gunter Grass to publish a poem critical of Israel into me stealing words from poor defenseless Jews and clamping their ever-loving mouths shut. No. Originally, I was defending the right for someone to not have to be or stay politically or verbally annihilated because 7 million Israelis wish he died in WWII. People who have been alive in various periods of history don't have to shut up simply because speaking their mind offends somebody who thinks he has a right to build a pop-up house in somebody else's front yard. What that has to do with girls who bullied you in school, I will never know.

          • Roger

            Come on, you can make a longer comment, don't give up now!

            Even if none of it makes sense, who reads you seriously at this point anyway?

          • Bob Goldberg

            Burn in hell .. cockroach

          • Roger

            So, what troll are you?

            The name is new, but the hate I've seen before….

          • Touchstone

            Zionism is bigger than one man. Herzl died in 1904, long before the near-daily murders of Jews by Arabs began. Long before the large-scale massacres of Jews by Arabs. Long before al-Husseini collaborated with Hitler in the Holocaust, planning to murder all Middle Eastern Jews the same way. Long before the Arabs tried to annihilate every last Jew in Israel in 1948, and again in 1973. According to you, Zionism was set in stone in 1904 and could never be altered one iota, could never evolve organically and allow for the contributions of others, because all others weren't Herzl. No Herzl, no Zionism. Too bad you weren't around in 1904. Surely you would have been applauding Zionism the loudest. Then again, you would have been calling for the head of the falsely accused "traitor" Dreyfus.

            You think like a simpleton. Are the Jewish people to forever follow in the footsteps of one single man? You've decided that you approve of one single Jew whose name was Herzl. That's great. You must feel very magnanimous for admitting that. You've discovered a token Jew you can put on a pedestal. But with him as your model, you castigate any Jew who deviates from what you've decided should remain the gold standard for all Jews. If an Israeli thinks for himself, he gets a red flag. What? A Jew who doesn't follow Herzl's commandments? Burn him at the stake! How convenient for you to have established a rigidly fixed standard, an impossible standard, against which you insist on measuring all Jews. This is a staggeringly obvious sign of an antisemitic mentality. The world applies an impossible double standard to Jews and Israel, and so do you. And the way you do it is by carving Herzl in marble and scoffing at all the rest of us Jews made of mud. It never enters your mind that Israelis and Jews have had to contend with a NON-STOP ONSLAUGHT of Arabs and Muslims trying to destroy them, decade after decade, either in war or by political means, such as at the UN, or by boycotts, etc. You refuse to judge Israel's responses to its enemies in that context, the REAL context, preferring instead the abstract context of Herzl's ideas. You stupidly omit ALL THE YEARS OF HISTORY between Herzl's era and the present day, as if nothing of consequence occurred, nothing that would merit the slightest deviation from the course Herzl set. You remove context and substitute it with your own rectum-derived abstraction that all villainy in the Middle East arises from Jews who aren't enough like Herzl, the one single Jew you endorse. The way you praise him and condemn all others implies that, in your bigoted mind, he's really just a court Jew.

          • Schlomotion

            It's funny to me that the Dreyfus Affair is still a palpable issue for you. Does the Great 1906 San Francisco Earthquake still get you all riled up too? Should all the buildings in Israeli settlements be earthquake proof? Should they be hardened against Baal Worship as well? How can you claim that Zionism evolves, when fresh-minded Zionists, especially Jews are shouted down as antisemitic, and when at a loss, Zionists roll out a passion play from the 20th Century, the 19th Century, the 15th Century, and the 1st Century? How is the petrified political religion of Menahem Begin evolutionary? I keep forgetting. Evil evil Muslims are to blame, and why can't I just conform to that narrative? I only like what? Court Jews? That is your way of saying House N***er Jews.

          • Roger

            Schlo, just when I think you are done making things up you drag something else out for the sun to decompose.

          • Touchstone

            Almost half your post was in response to an offhand remark about Dreyfus. You're incredibly easy to distract. I was just drawing a parallel between now and a hundred years ago. You're the self-unaware fool who harps on Herzl, yet hypocritically takes ME to task for referencing something that occurred in Herzl's day. It's ok for YOU to dwell on a man who lived a century ago, but heaven forbid I do the same, even for a moment! What a hypocrite you are. You can mention Herzl, but I can't mention Dreyfus. Right. Got it.

            Hey, isn't this the point where you announce that we've strayed too far from the article and now you have to cower and flee? I guess another way you cower and flee is by seizing upon minutiae like my Dreyfus reference and making that the focus of your new rant. By the way, if Herzl is relevant (and he is), so is the Dreyfus affair, and so is the Pale of Settlement, and so is the Holocaust, and so is the invention of the word "antisemite" in the 1800s, and so is the ancient libel that Jews killed Christ, and on and on. History is very much alive and with us. It keeps getting resurrected in every generation. I didn't start that fire. It was burning long before I came along. Don't pretend I'm the only one who still thinks historical events contain varying degrees of relevance. Herzl didn't live past 1904 yet YOU still refer to him constantly.

            Again, what a COLOSSAL hypocrite you are. History is perfectly relevant as long as YOU bring it up to advance your own arguments, but its relevance ends the moment your opponents do the same.

            As for Zionism evolving, what I'm saying is that Israel has had to adapt to its circumstances, which Herzl couldn't have anticipated. Much like the founders didn't foresee the amendments or the Civil War. People roll with the punches. If a genocidal antisemitic radicalism is pervading the Muslim world, it's better to be honest about it and face it and react to it appropriately, rather than pretend it doesn't exist and sarcastically mock anyone who alludes to it in childish terms like "Evil evil Muslims are to blame". Not very helpful.

            As for the "court Jew" thing, I'm not denigrating Herzl at all. I'm describing what I think he is in YOUR mind, not mine. You put him on a pedestal and denigrate other Jews, so it seems to me that he must have said something that jives with your profoundly antisemitic bent, a bent which you've revealed on innumerable occasions. I'm saying that YOU see him as a court Jew, because you approve of him IN THE CONTEXT OF RABID ANTISEMITIC DISAPPROVAL OF JEWS IN GENERAL. It's the CONTEXT in which you show approbation that makes all the difference.

          • Schlomotion

            I don't think he's a court Jew at all. The court Jews are the ones here stroking and petting the Republican party on behalf of Likud. The reason I like Herzl is because he made something happen. He didn't moan about what happens to him, or what might happen to him. He was a man of will.

            I love this quote:

            "I am convinced that those Jews who stand aside today with a malicious smile and with their hands in their trousers' pockets will also want to dwell in our beautiful home."

            I think that's you, overcompensating by being an UberZionist. You forget, deliberately and repeatedly that I support the existence of Israel. I do not support a fortress state, apartheid, blockades, and a constant assault on the American press and academia. You think that merits disparagement. I have shown repeatedly that I will counter any disparagement with candid and explicit evaluations of those disparagements. There is a good stock of rote Zionist responses and ways that they go after people, and I have been reading and hearing them since 1987 as the objects of those epithets and attacks change from day to day. If you want to switch it, and keep making it about Jews, and not about Zionists, if you want to keep using the idea of Jews as human shields, you'll have to wail when I shoot through them verbally.

          • Touchstone

            The next time you moronically bloviate about "land grabs" and "ripping people off" and the like, consider that when Israel left Gaza, Hamas took over and showered them with rockets. You see, Israelis know exactly what awaits them when they vacate, after having been stung by the experience. Also consider that the same thing is likely to happen, but the consequences for Israel far worse, should it immediately vacate the West Bank, given the current climate. Hence a little something called the "peace process". But with all your reckless talk, you prove that you don't care at all about real-world scenarios; you may endorse Herzl's ideas, but you couldn't care less what dangers await actual living Jews in Israel.

            Israel is too small to find on a map, yet to you it's an ever-expanding avaricious land-grabbling empire. I don't know how the anti-Israel crowd gets away with such braindead idiocy, such malicious and hysterical duplicity, and such ignorance of who the real imperialists are and how they roll. And yet this sewage keeps getting recycled. Accuracy takes a back seat to your monomania.

            By the way, why would you assume that "mean girl" was a reference to someone from my past? You can't resist playing the self-styled psychoanalyst, and a piss-poor one at that. You act like I'm the first person to ever use the epithet "mean girl". Have you never heard of pop culture references? (e.g. Not long ago I heard a pundit describe Sarah Palin as the classic "mean girl" in high school.) What I'm saying is that your cattiness is reminiscent of the "mean girl" who exists in the popular imagination, like the classic bully on the beach who kicks sand in the 98 pound weakling's face. These are some of modern civilization's cliches, more caricatures of real people than actual people themselves. That's what you are to me, a caricature: The "mean girl" caricature of popular myth, similar but not identical to any actual living, breathing person I've ever met. Congratulations on positioning yourself in my mind as a two-bit cliche. That's the net effect of your one-note symphony.

            P.S. You're not a "flower" in anyone's terrarium. No doubt your inflated self-perception and effeminate streak (re: "mean girl") give you that lovely image of yourself. Your endless outpouring of vicious, arrogant hostility towards Jews and Israel is enough to make your already specious claim of being a Zionist a total sham. You're a canker, not a flower. A metaphorical flower might actually give a crap what would happen to the living, breathing Jews he's scolding. A canker like you merely pounds on the door in the middle of the night, barks "Juden Raus!" at the top of his lungs, and damn the consequences.

          • Schlomotion

            "but you couldn't care less what dangers await actual living Jews in Israel. "

            You mean the ones clustered against the Separation Wall, hoping that if they build enough right up against it, it will move and sweep whatever is on the other side farther away. It's like a Berlin Wall on rollerskates. Can you inspire in me sympathy for the guardians of the Berlin Wall? Can you make aggressive ethnic urban sprawl equally as sympathetic? How hard can you make Johannesburg glisten to me?

            I am sorry to disappoint you in that regard and in my blatant lack of analysis of pop culture for recent references to Sarah Palin. I am deliberately missing the boat. I barely read Huffpo or Wonkette, and I disdain the Democratic and Republican parties and their circuses. It goes without saying that I don't keep tabs on their clowns' most recent nip slips.

            I have an effeminate streak now? I'll take it. You can tell me why that's bad, if you can. Let's play along. You posited a deep and meaningful connection to tabloid politics. You drew the connection of Nazis storming the ghetto. What is this ubermännlichkeit you are now wielding? What symbol of Juden-Mars?

          • Roger

            For you to equate the two walls is farcical at best.

            It certainly has no bearing on reality. And if the West bank hadn't been sending so many suicide bombers Israel never would have needed to build it now, would they?

          • Touchstone

            Roger is right. Equating the two walls is idiotic.

            Was there a flood of German suicide bombers blowing up innocents before the Berlin Wall was built? Was it built to keep out terrorists and protect innocent lives?

            The "Apartheid Wall" crowd truly reveal their savagely Jew-hating streak with such complaints. How you must hate it that innocent Jewish lives are spared by that wall. Perhaps it will console your rabid heart to know that Arab lives are being spared by the wall as well, because without it there would be suicide bombers, meaning Jewish casualties, leading to reprisals against Arab terror groups, resulting in unintentionally killed Arab civilians. Ergo, the wall protects innocent Jews and Arabs from suicide bombers.

            It's a measure of how inhumanly rabid you are and how morally bankrupt your position is that you fail to perceive the life-saving function of the security wall, clearly the purpose of its construction.

          • Schlomotion

            Looks the same to me.

            And when it comes down, we will all have a big laugh about how crappy that country was, just like before.

          • Touchstone

            That's your counterargument? A defiant mural has more meaning to you than untold lives that have been saved? You're so damn shallow and stupid that if two walls merely "look the same", their raisons d'etre must be the same too.

            The terrorists and their enablers (i.e. rabid Jew-haters like you) will be waiting a long time to "laugh" at further terrorist incursions and Jewish body parts scattered on the pavement.

            P.S. That "crappy country" is the one Herzl built. You can't get your sympathies straight.

          • Schlomotion

            Au contraire. I was just rereading The Jewish State and was on Chapter 5, and it doesn't say anything about "let's build a paranoid and dismal fortress state that spits at international law and leans excessively upon the major states." It is still a very inspiring writing.

          • Touchstone

            You ignored the pre-Herzl part of my post, so I'll assume you agree that my indictments stick.

            What happens when international law is used as a weapon to intimidate and endanger a people? Should those people kowtow and perish, or should they resist and survive?

            Once upon a time, it was also "law" for Jews to wear Yellow Stars, live confined to a ghetto, and get their asses on cattle cars. Is there never a time to defy the law? Another issue here is to what extent do you possess adequate understanding of the law in question and which party is in fact in breach of it. I've read countless times that Israelis are in fact complying with the law that granted them far more land than they lay claim to now. Perhaps you're cherry-picking which laws and international decrees Israel must abide by, and which must be discarded at your highly prejudiced whim.

            And, for the last time, if Israel has a fortress mentality, are you so blind and stupid that you can't perceive the role played by multitudes of ululating, sanguinary fanatics in inducing such a mentality? Did that mentality arise in a vacuum? Did it arise purely from a few verses in the Torah? You probably think so. Your prejudice prevents you from incorporating a hundred years of ever-salient ARAB INTRANSIGENCE AND INTOLERANCE into your attempts at political "analysis".

          • Schlomotion

            In your arguments, an individual who questions Israel, a newspaper that disagrees with Israel, a territory next to Israel, an international meeting of nation-states that want to hold Israel to the Oslo Accord, Adolf Hitler, The Blind Sheikh, and the Pharaoh Ramses all get elevated to the same level of panic. You have scalable panic for Israel. You also turn each individual into evidence of multitudes. I think quite frankly, that your identity as a Semitist codepends upon the existence of Antisemitism. Not as an individual, but rather as an member of a group identity. I fail to see any identity other than the passive aggressive one.

            You treat international law like it is a person, just one more antisemite. Just like Israel treats the UN just like it's a hostile Arab nation. It's amazing, but Gunter Grass, the UN, Hamas, America under Obama, Myself, Hitler are all the same size. You think one year is 2000 years, one dispute is a pogrom, one international treaty is all the laws of Nazi Germany.

            What can you do when someone resizes his sense of panic to consume all of his available space, no matter the size of the perceived anti-Israel mote? I don't like apartheid walls. I don't like the Berlin Wall. I don't like the Israeli Wall. So make I fun of it. I call for its dismantlement. I call for the slow annexation that made it necessary. Too bad.

            And why now do pro-Israelis not admit what even their forebears admit, that they attacked their neighbors and that they are taking land from other people. They admitted it. Why can't you?

          • Touchstone

            "what even their forebears admit" — So now you're doing the same with "forebears" as you did with Herzl. You seize upon one or a few within a much larger group whose opinion jives with your own, and you impose them on all others within the group, scolding the others for not being more like the Jews you approve of. According to you, Jews are villains if they hold opinions which diverge from the ones which receive your stamp of approval. No other opinions are legitimate or permitted, their arguments be damned. Got it.

            As for your disquisition about how I "elevate" everything and everyone "to the same level of panic", I don't see evidence of that. Perhaps you're seeing what you want to see in my posts, while dodging the arguments I am in fact making.

            I think you probably just skim the posts of others and go off on whatever tangent you feel like pursuing. For example, you're still equating the Berlin Wall with the security wall, even after I made the case that the security wall was built to SAVE LIVES. That's about as important a distinction I can conceive of, and one that happens to be absolutely true, but there's just no getting through to you. You're teflon. Nothing sticks. You'll just keep harping on your pet peeves in your little vacuum, oblivious to logic and reasonable arguments. Enjoy yourself.

          • Roger

            And conveniently his approved view is so close to what muslims want for Israel it's hard to tell where one ends and the other takes over.

          • Schlomotion

            I come from a shoe town, And I always marveled at how when factories make shoes, some guy will sell shoelaces and another guy will sell shoe inserts, and another guy will sell a buttonhook. You, you are the guy who sells buttonhooks in a shoe town. Funnier still, is you sell buttonhooks in a town that makes sneakers.

          • Roger

            How nice for you.

            Was that supposed to make any sense in context with the raging debate?

            I don't even see how you made it anti-Israel or anything. Slipping?

          • reader

            Apparently, takija is not easy. Must be an art form you haven't quite mastered in your basement madrasa.

    • Michelle

      How sad for you. Maybe you should go move to a muslum nation since you idolize them so much and see how many rights you have then. Idiot!

    • Kufar Dawg

      Islam is fascism.

    • Shea Berea

      You are a genius.. thank you for disseminating the truth and shedding light on the propaganda and deception being spread by the author on this page. Simply put, she is a hypocrite. I commend you for the great insight and FACTS in your comments. Don't mind the other zionist hypocrites and slimeballs on the comment board. You are wasting your time reasoning with them. They are beneath you. & Btw, I have no idea what you are doing on this pathetic rag of a website. You are too good to be wasting your time here.

  • Lillith

    You know all you people that say the Jews control America, well that is just plain balmy, do you really think if the Jews controlled the country it would be in such bad financial strife…I think not!

    • Paul D

      Good one!!

  • Infovoyeur

    Let's see, "SLOMOTION" condemns the article's stigmatizing "anyone who is Muslim." This is inaccurate; that would be too populist and inclusive. Rather, the artikal is properly elitist and hierarchical, only singling out those who have really achieved disparagement through their so-Amerioan initiatives of responsible social change. [In short, WHAAAAAAT? George Orwell 1984 Newspeak: up is down, day is night, etc….]

  • jacob

    I would love to learn what do Democrap JOOS think about the inclusion of this "jewel" in the DNC….
    And as to stigmatizing, I'm still to see a condemnation of so called "Moderate" Muslims of terrorist actions
    of their correligionists which, in my book, makes them criminals by OMISSION…..
    I love to bring up the fact of Muslims dancing and giving out candy (as Muslim sign of joy) on 9/11 in the
    streets of QUEENS, New York, while people were jumping to their deaths from the WTC windows….
    Were all those dancing and giving out candy Jihadists or rather MODERATES ??????
    Now, as to the Black Muslims creed…..
    I remember having read in a Reader's Digest at least 50/60 years ago, an article about it, which I haven't
    been able to obtain a reprint from it and doubt I'll ever get it, in which the inventor of this cult was a man
    named ELIJAH O'TOOLE, self appointed ELIJAH MUHAMMAD, The Messenger of Allah….and later on
    kicked out for immorally tampering with the female payroll….
    According to his "bible", in the beginning, the world belonged to the black man.
    Of the goodness of their hearts, they allowed a white demon, one JAKUB to live among them….
    But it so happens, that faithful to his nature, he started making trouble for the black people, who banished
    him to a deserted island somewhere, in which he begot 3636 demons like him (guess he invented the
    cloning process), which returned to the land and enslaved the black people.
    Therefore, ALL white people are demons, descendants of that JAKUB and black people's last names are
    those of slavery (Washington, Jefferson, Wilson, etc,.) and must be deleted and replaced by an "X", with
    as many "X"s as same first names there are in the congregation….
    Now where did they hit upon embracing the religion of the slave masters and those who sold them to the
    white slave traders is a mystery to me but I remember seeing a picture of either said Messenger of Allah
    or his first jailbird convert, MALCOM X, with Egypt's President SADAT in Cairo…
    And didn't Mr. OBAMA participate in the MILLION MEN MARCH ON WASHINGTON of "Mad Dog" LOUIS
    FARRAKHAN, the Reggae singer turned "MINISTER" after MALCOM X was "wasted" and calling Farrakhan
    a GREAT MAN ??????

    What I will never be able to understand is how with his bagagge, the American people still elected OBAMA
    President….80% JOOS included and 60% still to reelect him…..

    • Jane

      There is alot of information available on the insane members and leaders of the NOI.

      They are blatant racists,segregationist ,hate mongers and very often murderers.They had a sect that required beheading 4 white people to join .And of course the NOI Zebra murderers.Sex,drugs,fraud,hate crimes,pedophile ,antisemitism ,aliens,mad scientist and extreme violence – NOI has it all.

      Their goal,like most black supremacist ,theology and radicals like BPP,NBPP are not unity and religion .It is the elimination of white people and Jews to take control of property ,businesses and government .They function on greed,hate,drug sales,lies and control.

      Including former members like Rev Jeremiah Wright.

      • Ghostwriter

        I'm not fond of the NOI either,Jane. What do you think?

  • Andy

    This ludicrous move by the Democrats shows they've become dhimmis to Obama's will who while working at ruining America is wrecking the Democratic Party. A pox on both and Hallelujah!

  • Porky's2istan

    On the one hand, I think the author is stretching associations a little, especially going so far back in history. For 400 years white racists, who called themselves Christians, treated black people horribly. It's natural to see why they would embrace a militant, violent religion that calls Christians (and Jews) inferior devils. With the advent of easy publishing, the internet, and finally 9/11, the shine of islam has worn off in the black community. Using the internet, even the most cursory research reveals that muslims are every bit as racist (still today) as white people used to be 50 years ago. Even Mohammad called black people 'ugly raisin heads' in the Quran, and islam murdered, raped, and enslaved a hundred times more Africans than Europe and America ever did. (And has NEVER apologized for it, either.)

    On the other hand I think the Democrats are falling victim to the taqiya practiced by almost every imam on earth. Imams talk about 'tolerance', and 'inclusiveness' in English and in press releases, but in private (and in Arabic) they show their real vicious, violent, intolerant, racists, sexist, and expansionist ideology. I think my fellow liberals just don't get that 'moderate' islam is like moderate nazism. They are both totally incompatible with a modern democratic secular state. I think we are so used to being 'all inclusive' that we fall for the near constant muslim disinformation campaign and fail to notice how much islam is antithetical to our core Democrat(ic) ideals.

    Despite the over zealousness of this article I don't think there is any real reforming of islam, nor is there any true 'moderate' (non-violent) islam. I hope my fellow liberals realize this before the next islamic attack kills another 3000 Americans.

    • Edip Yuksel

      I agree that there are many racists among the so-called Muslims as among the so-called Christians. I agree that the so-called Muslims committed many atrocities, invaded countries, killed their population as did the so-called Christians. Both groups share many crimes, including misogyny, bigotry, violence, waging religious and nationalistic wars, supporting capitalist pigs, etc. Both groups fabricated many lies attributing to their prophets.

      However, I know the Quran and I know that you are attributing it a lie, a primitive propaganda. You will never find in the Quran a racist statement, including your "ugly raisin head"


      • Chiggles

        "So-called" Muslims?

      • Porky's2istan

        You may be right that that statement is not in the quran itself. It may be in the hadith, sira, or biographies (of Muhammad). I've been reading a combined text that includes ALL widely recognized islamic texts in chronological order (so you can tell EXACTLY what has been abrogated). The quran is so poorly written, out of order, self contradictory, and illogical that it virtually becomes a personal roshark test. When combined with the other recognized islamic texts, the true nature of islam becomes crystal clear.

        The driving philosophy behind islam today includes ALL these texts and NO major sect of islam completely ignores any of them except on very small minor points.

    • Kufar Dawg

      3000? Why think small? OBL wished that he had killed 300,000 Americans. Islam has already killed millions of kufrs in the late 20th and early 21st centuries (think Sudan/Darfur).

  • Khayree Muhammad

    They are saying that the Imam along with the Hon. Elijah Muhammad, Malcolm X and Minister Farrakhan called whites devils and they are anti-Jew. Why don’t they say that about Jesus? He called a group of people devils and said they were from their father the devil who was a liar and murderer in the beginning. Jesus also said that there were those who say they are Jews and are not but are off the Synogoge of Satan. Sounds like our leaders are keeping good company.

    Also, when have Blacks who followed these men and Islam in America hung whites and Jews from trees? When have those who follow these men and Islam in America bomb white churches and synagoges? When have those who follow these men and Islam in America bomb white businesses and neighborhoods like the whites who bombed, burned, and killed Blacks in Tulsa Ok and Rosewood Florida? When have those of us who follow these men and Islam red line neighborhoods to keep whites and Jews out of their neighborhoods and refused to loan them money? When have those men and those of us who follow them in Islam in America have caused any harm to whites, Jews, or any others who live in America like whites, Jews and those who run the government have harmed Blacks, Hispanic’s and native America’s.

    It is all recorded in the historical account of whites and Jews in the book, “The Secret Relationship of Blacks and Jews”. Get your copy and read of the destruction both have done to Blacks in Africa and America. After slavery during reconstruction Blacks (ex-slaves) built more than 60 cities to begin to have their own economy and state of independence and all of those cities were destroyed by whites and Jews. Maybe those were the Jews that Jesus was talking about. And don’t tell me the book is full of lies and you have not read it or if you read it point out the lies. Show us where the book is wrong since we quote a lot of what Jewish scholars have written themselves.

    There are Jews however who realized what happened and are allies of the Hon. Elijah Muhammad, Louis Farrakhan and the Imam. You all have closed you eyes to what white America has done to Blacks and still continue to do and when our Leaders stand up and confront you all you can do is call them haters and anti-semitic. At the same time, we can see Hitler on tv everyday as you glorify what he did. He was great, wickedly great and you promote it. Because the Minister said it you use it to say he glorified Hitler when Hitler hated and killed Black people.

    Hell, it was Black soldiers who saved many in WWII and white America treated them with disdain and hatred when they returned from war. So you should be happy to have the Imam speak at the convention. You should have invited Minister Farrakhan as the President had his full support and you all tried to call the President on that.

    You all need to study the man you say you believe in, Jesus. If he was here today would you invite him to speak at your convention. Peace.

    • Drakken

      More bloody propaganda, you savages will push the rest of us infidels untill we give you what you fear the most, retribution on steroids.

    • Pontotoc Bill

      The Secret Relationship of Blacks and Jews? Henry Gates, head of the department of Afro-American studies at Harvard University, referred to the book as "the Bible of new anti-Semitism". We should read this book? I think not. Anyway, the Nation of Islam has reasons to shove this tripe to disguise that is was ISLAM and Muslims who destroyed the Blacks in Africa by selling them to others, castrating many, and using them as slaves.

      Does Islam deny that slavery is commanded by the Qu'ran?

      The Christian Jesus is NOT the Jesus of the Qu'ran. Lucifer gave the Qu'an to Moohammed thereby creating a satanic version of Christianity. Islam = Worshippers of Satan.

    • Curlyhammed

      Write a book next time. Maybe some revisionist history that professes the worth of Americanized Africans (porch monkeys) will make you fell better.

      Poo' wittle baybeeeeees! Awwwwwwwwww

      Free cheese anyone? Elijah Mohammed was in it for the hats, that's all. Next time, get up in the morning and stand in line when Evolution comes around. Zheeesh!

    • Kufar Dawg

      Islam, ne0-nazis and the KKK strange bedfellows:

      Drop dead.

  • Ghostwriter

    Well,Khayree Muhammad,I went to your website,"The Final Call" earlier in this comments section. It was no different from a KKK site or the Neo-Nazi site Stormfront. I've often thought that the Nation of Islam was Black America's answer to the Ku Klux Klan and the Neo-Nazis. Your soothing words haven't changed my mind. Any black person with a functioning brain and conscience would stay away from you guys like the plague. Your Jew hatred is no different than Schlomotion's idiotic rants. And I'll tell you something,Mr. Muhammad. I'm white and I think you're no different from the Klan. If any group of people in Black America deserves the label "hate group,"it's the NOI. You're just as bigoted as the KKK. You and Farrakhan deserve to be labeled racists,Mr. Muhammad. Just because you're black doesn't mean you won't be called on what you are.

  • Curlyhammed

    Religions, all of them, are adhered to by a select group who NEED someone else to tell them how to behave. Evolution, it seems, has not affected them.

    Crawl out of your 7th Century superstitions and think for yourself.

  • Curlyhammed

    My superstition is better than your superstition! My god has bigger muscles than your god! "Moderate Islam" is like being a little pregnant.
    If you want to learn about Islam, go to

    If you want to learn about Negros, go to "The Final Call".

    Don't waste your time here reading the unintellgable rants of those that Evolution overlooked.

    Meanwhile, I will work late tonight providing a service for my clients and not give myself to "Drank" or crawling around on the floor to an invisible moongod.

  • fightwarnotwars

    quoting a youtube video as a true Malcolm X speech… seriously people… this is an uncredited youtube video that doesn't even sound like Malcolm X … this is just plain lazy and shows how poor your research skills are

  • Marvin Fox

    This article seems to me to depict Muslim actions and personalities well within what most of us have seen of Muslim terrorists since the US 9/11, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, and the other nations who have had incidents of terrorism from the terrorist Muslim factions. If the Christian nations do not wake up and rid themselves of the terrorist Muslim factions; the strength those factions are gaining within their plan for the conquest of the West will, in my opinion, eventually cause a major war. This is a very good article on Muslim terrorist tactics.
    Marvin Fox

  • WilliamJamesWard

    The Democrats embrace Islamist murderers, the Democrats are gone and over with, what is left of
    a once proud American party is a collection of leftist, marxist, communist, Islamist reprobates that
    embraces anti-Americanism. At some point in the past the Democrats embraced Satan……….William

  • Kufar Dawg

    The DNC sounds more like the islamic equivalent of the Nuremberg Rally. Maybe they can all get together and chant: "Khaybar Khaybar ya yahud, Jaish Muhammad saya'ud". I wonder if Soros will be in attendance?

  • islamsfinest

    White man fears what he can not control or understand or destroy , as he did with the Native Americans and others. You understanding like that same understanding the cause Whites to kill Native Americans. Just as you seen what happen with the White Racist that killed those Sikees . Typical White man who can not control or destroy what he do not understand. As you fall into this same category. As these same times of ideas was said about Obama when he first was running for election. Your ideas and articles did not stop him from getting elected. As this article do not show the real Imam Siraaj and neither would he do you no good, either cause a scratch on his image to his own peoples who he work and strive with to better them. All this is your whims being express so feel free because it will not spore out to any one of them who you target. The White man trying to explain which he do not understand White racist, your end is soon.

    Soon you will find that there will be no one you can oppress no more as your own country is going down by its owns hands and its own evil. Where it even thrive on the destruction of its own White people, as we seen with economic chaos and crises that was started by Whites rich greedy by President Bush and others like the Banks is at fault . That even target the Poor White men.

    Guess what Osama bin Laden did not cause the Economic crises in America, neither was it started by any Muslims, Blacks, Native Americans all those races you destroy. It was started by your own White dirty hands.

  • Ghostwriter

    Just what this website needs. A fan of the dishonorable Louis Farrakhan.

  • Roger B

    Too many gun owning freedom loving American citizens for this to ever become a Muslim Sharia nation

  • dnha14

    And the Democrats think this showing will get them how many votes?

  • CJM

    All of the above doesn't appear to be very American to me! Very foreign indeed! We are a Christian Nation.

    Obama needs to leave our beloved Country & go back to Kenya. We can do very well without him.

    America will remain America with God's Blessings.

  • Roger

    I disagree that your muslim friendly advocacy for violence is what makes our country great.

    Time for another jihad or something?

    24 minutes ago @ – Soldier Found Guilty i… · 1 reply · +1 points
    The whole town needs locked in the church and the church set on fire. IMO

    • Travis

      I'm not advocating violence. In fact, the only reason I waded into this discussion is that Drakken and Sick were explicitly advocating violence against people for belonging to a religious minority, gleefully envisioning Americans burning in a fiery holocaust, and I wanted to step in and shine a light on just how sick that kind of thinking is. Easy principle – all violent extremism directed against civilians is evil, whether it's advocated against a group you've chosen to hate or not.

      Let's bring this home with a quotation of the offending death threat, shall we?
      "Drakken · 1 week ago
      We infidels understand you muslims just fine, you are a clear and present danger to us all. If you savages think your going to take over the west, you have another thing coming, for we infidels will not go quietly into the night but come out with a Crusaders vengeance. The old pagen funeral pyres will once again be piled with you muslims and given the due consideration you and yours deserve."

      That's a disgusting call for religious violence. He's essentially issuing his own christian fatwa that we launch our own jihad against muslims for being muslims, that we round up and slaughter people for being born into the wrong faith. It got 6 likes. That should be a body-blow that wakes up any real Christian to the madness of religious hatred, and its utter incompatibility with the message of Christ. For goodness sake, people, when you saw the Sikh Temple massacre, was your initial response 'he shoulda shot up sum Muslims?' I'm not going to pull any punches here – anyone who thinks that way is simple a terrible human being. Some of you want to murder a billion people because you think they're violent! The madness of that paradox is both terrifying and hilarious.

      • Roger

        And you defend this forced system of life.

        You defend evil, you defend the very things you pretend to argue against. Only you defend the one who slaughters the helpless and the ones too weak to resist. That's not nobility.

        • Travis

          I don't defend that, I reject it utterly. Its disgusting. How many times do I have to say that I recognize the horrors of Islamic fundamentalism before you actually listen? I'm not defending the monsters who stoned that innocent muslim girl, I'm defending innocent muslim American girls from monsters like Drakken who want to roast them on a pyre. Monsters whose cries for a holocaust against American muslims get 6 thumbs up on this website. I'm not the one joining the violent horde here, I'm the one who is standing against it pleading for compassion, peace, and understanding.

          I agree with you – standing up for the powerless is noble. That's what I'm trying to do here. The only way to defeat Islamic fundamentalism is by empowering moderate muslims, and that requires RECOGNIZING moderate muslims. Let me come back to the Sunni Awakening. President Bush has acknowledged that the Iraq war turned in our favor when the moderate Sunni tribesmen finally overcame their fear of the extremists, rose up with our assistance, and cast them out. That's the kind of success we need to replicate. We're in a battle for hearts and minds, and you don't win that with indiscriminate hate.

          A dozen people in Afghanistan were beheaded by the Taliban recently for dancing. That's evil. The Taliban are evil. They won't be reasoned with, so they have to be defeated through force of arms. The moral imperative of this mission derives its weight from the fact that the muslim Afghani people don't want to be dominated by Taliban extremists but may lack the organization and resources to fight them off on their own. My friend Phil is in Afghanistan RIGHT NOW fighting with the help of our moderate muslim allies against Islamic fundamentalist extremists. I don't defend evil, I defend good people being slandered as evil by folks who somehow can't grasp that people are individuals. Not all black people, or all women, or all chinese people, or all jews, are the same! Same with Muslims.

          • Roger

            If you defend islam that means you defend submission to the system that is those evils.

            You strand up for islam knowing what it is, that's evil and you defend it.

            If you call the taliban evil for following the sharia style of life and defend islam then you defend the taliban because that's what they follow.

            If you want to reject islam then you reject the taliban, there is no middle road in this world in our reality.

  • Jason Mtag

    The author is a stupid Israeli concubine.. spreading propoganda. This article is a perfect example of why the jews are the biggest deceivers and manipulators in the world. You jews are a cancer and a plague on the earth.. and the people of the world are finally awakening to this fact.

  • Ali From Taqwa

    wo! wow!wow!
    there is nothing more dangerous than ignorance and hatred combined. I prayed in his mosq for more than 10 years and listened to him. He is nothing but what he said "a Muslim American". He is a man fought drug dealers, kept the street of bedstyle clean of drugs and prostitution, kept young people out of jail, gave them hope and careers. . . . . . . What have you done? Oh by the way one persons hero is another one's terrorist. The crusade were your heroes but they were terrorists, hamas is your terrorist by they are heroes to others.

  • rebecca

    I’m not that much of a online reader to be honest but your sites really nice, keep it up!
    I’ll go ahead and bookmark your website to come back later on. All the best

  • free-thinker

    This Article seems based on biased lies.

  • Auto Parts Warehouse printable coupon

    Hi my loved one! I want to say that this article is awesome, nice
    written and come with approximately all vital infos.
    I would like to look extra posts like this .

  • Roger

    Or just a hate filled troll that calls for jihad.

    24 minutes ago @ – Soldier Found Guilty i… · 1 reply · +1 points
    "The whole town needs locked in the church and the church set on fire. IMO"