<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Perpetual Impunity in Syria</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=perpetual-impunity-in-syria</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 03:47:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: hiernonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5424181</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hiernonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2014 13:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5424181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If the issue is simply the position of jihad in Islam, and nothing else, then I am at a loss to understand the posts you&#039;ve made on wholly unrelated topics.  Why the discussion of Tantawi&#039;s comments about Jews? 

That said, a few general comments.  You have made and alluded to the verses of the Medina period that enjoin Muslims to distrust Jews and Christians.  I have spent a great deal of time wandering the hinterlands of the Arab Muslim world, alone or with a single companion, and have been universally met with kindness and generosity.  When I was in Israel, and the van I was driving would not fit in the hotel&#039;s garage, the Israeli at the front desk was rude and dismissive: &quot;you&#039;re in Tel Aviv, there are many parking lots, find one.&quot;  There was a young Arab man minding the lot to a private business across the street, so I went to ask him where the nearest public lot might be.  He smiled, told me that one of his employers was gone for the week, and let me park there, for free, and he would not accept any money.  He was simply being kind.  Strangers in Siwa have helped me free a mired vehicle, in Cairo to jury rig a jack, in Ma&#039;adi have fed me, in Salalah have escorted me when lost, in Yemen have taken their days to guide and explain.  At the Church of the Nativity, my wife was turned away by the Zchristian keepers because her skirt was too short; an old Muslim man brought her a wrap and gave it to her so that she could visit a holy site of her religion, and would accept neither money nor the wrap back.  

Yet you, having glanced through the Quran and selected some verses, inform me that Islam requires its followers to treat Christians with distrust and as enemies.  What am I to conclude?  That you have stumbled on the essence of Islam, and that, year after year, I have statistically improbably met only Bad Muslims?  Or is it just possible that your approach is not sufficiently complete?

Many Christian preachers in the antebellum American South justified slavery by quoting the Bible selectively and insisting that blacks were properly singled out.  Would someone quoting those preachers and their selected verses have accurately identified the nature of Christianity thereby -- or the nature of many Southern Christians?

As for the &quot;reformation,&quot; don&#039;t play the secularization of the west as a Christian virtue.  Religion lost the power struggle with secular power in Europe, and the Peace of Westphalia was as instrumental there as the Reformation.  The process has started in the Middle East, arguably with Ataturk and then with the Arab Socialists, but the struggle is by no means over.  

I&#039;m off to a medical appointment, so must stop here.  Regards.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the issue is simply the position of jihad in Islam, and nothing else, then I am at a loss to understand the posts you&#8217;ve made on wholly unrelated topics.  Why the discussion of Tantawi&#8217;s comments about Jews? </p>
<p>That said, a few general comments.  You have made and alluded to the verses of the Medina period that enjoin Muslims to distrust Jews and Christians.  I have spent a great deal of time wandering the hinterlands of the Arab Muslim world, alone or with a single companion, and have been universally met with kindness and generosity.  When I was in Israel, and the van I was driving would not fit in the hotel&#8217;s garage, the Israeli at the front desk was rude and dismissive: &#8220;you&#8217;re in Tel Aviv, there are many parking lots, find one.&#8221;  There was a young Arab man minding the lot to a private business across the street, so I went to ask him where the nearest public lot might be.  He smiled, told me that one of his employers was gone for the week, and let me park there, for free, and he would not accept any money.  He was simply being kind.  Strangers in Siwa have helped me free a mired vehicle, in Cairo to jury rig a jack, in Ma&#8217;adi have fed me, in Salalah have escorted me when lost, in Yemen have taken their days to guide and explain.  At the Church of the Nativity, my wife was turned away by the Zchristian keepers because her skirt was too short; an old Muslim man brought her a wrap and gave it to her so that she could visit a holy site of her religion, and would accept neither money nor the wrap back.  </p>
<p>Yet you, having glanced through the Quran and selected some verses, inform me that Islam requires its followers to treat Christians with distrust and as enemies.  What am I to conclude?  That you have stumbled on the essence of Islam, and that, year after year, I have statistically improbably met only Bad Muslims?  Or is it just possible that your approach is not sufficiently complete?</p>
<p>Many Christian preachers in the antebellum American South justified slavery by quoting the Bible selectively and insisting that blacks were properly singled out.  Would someone quoting those preachers and their selected verses have accurately identified the nature of Christianity thereby &#8212; or the nature of many Southern Christians?</p>
<p>As for the &#8220;reformation,&#8221; don&#8217;t play the secularization of the west as a Christian virtue.  Religion lost the power struggle with secular power in Europe, and the Peace of Westphalia was as instrumental there as the Reformation.  The process has started in the Middle East, arguably with Ataturk and then with the Arab Socialists, but the struggle is by no means over.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;m off to a medical appointment, so must stop here.  Regards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Greenfield</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5423869</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2014 18:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5423869</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hiero, like every Islamic apologist, fails to mention who was behind the &quot;2,500 cleric petition&quot;, what country the majority of those clerics were from and what their agenda was.

I&#039;m help him out. They were from Saudi Arabia and its various puppets in the region which has its own agenda when it comes to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Saudis aren&#039;t against extremist clerics.

They&#039;ve produced most of them.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hiero, like every Islamic apologist, fails to mention who was behind the &#8220;2,500 cleric petition&#8221;, what country the majority of those clerics were from and what their agenda was.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m help him out. They were from Saudi Arabia and its various puppets in the region which has its own agenda when it comes to the Muslim Brotherhood.</p>
<p>The Saudis aren&#8217;t against extremist clerics.</p>
<p>They&#8217;ve produced most of them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hiernonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5423761</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hiernonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2014 16:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5423761</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ &quot;While reasonable in principle, the problem is that the machinery of the Security Council could then be abused, much like the UN Human Rights Council, to single out Israel for special condemnation while protecting countries with far worse human rights records. &quot;

Translation:  we want a way to end the ability of Russia and China to shelter their clients via their P5 vetoes while retaining the ability to shelter ours.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> &#8220;While reasonable in principle, the problem is that the machinery of the Security Council could then be abused, much like the UN Human Rights Council, to single out Israel for special condemnation while protecting countries with far worse human rights records. &#8221;</p>
<p>Translation:  we want a way to end the ability of Russia and China to shelter their clients via their P5 vetoes while retaining the ability to shelter ours.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph Klein</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5423630</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Klein]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2014 12:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5423630</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The religious rituals of five times a day prayer, siyam and the like are not the issue. Jihad as a mainstream doctrine in Islam connoting holy war is the issue. You keep using arguments to divert from this issue.

First you claimed that the Muslim terrorists did not start targeting the U.S. until &quot;after its foreign policy took a turn for the interventionist in the Middle East.&quot;  I pointed out that Thomas Jefferson and John Adams had reported more than 220 years ago that the Muslim ambassador from Tripoli had explained to them in response to their inquiry that Muslims&#039; war on nations &quot;was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.&quot; You dismissed this, without any evidence, as just a rationale for piracy. 

Then you tried to argue moral equivalency between Christianity and Islam in terms of acts of violence, ignoring that such acts continue all over the world in the name of Islam and jihad today while that is not true with any other religion today.  The only &quot;reformation&quot; that Islam has gone through, as ObamaYoMoma correctly pointed out, was between the Meccan Period and the Medinan Period &quot;when Muhammad became consumed with revenge and turned to politics and jihad, and in the process reformed Islam at the same time from what was once a religion similar to other religions of the time, into what it is today.&quot; 

When I quoted multiple passages from the Koran to illustrate the meaning of jihad and the Islamist supremacist ideology, you dismissed them as cherry picking. When I cited Qaradawi, recognized as one of the most influential Muslim scholars alive today (I provided a source for that assessment), for his interpretations of the Koran on apostasy, treatment of women and call for genocide of Jews, you dismissed him as an extremist. You denied that he represented &quot;the Islam of the great masses of Cairo and Amman and Damascus.&quot; When I pointed out that Qaradawi has millions of followers, as demonstrated by his huge audiences for his radio show and his speech in Cairo, you responded &quot;Yes, he does.  I said he is an extremist.  I didn&#039;t say that he is not a popular extremist.&quot;

You suggested that I take a look at what Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi had to say to understand mainstream Islamic scholar thought.  I did and found that he was an anti-Semite, which he defended on religious grounds, a point you conceded but tried to explain away. 

Here is more regarding Tantawi:Al-Azhar from an Al-Azhar report in 2002: 

&quot;The great Imam of AlAzhar

Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, demanded that the

Palestinian people, of all factions, intensify the martyrdom operations [i.e. suicide

attacks] against the Zionist enemy, and described the martyrdom operations as the

highest form of Jihad operations. [Tantawi] says that the young people executing them

have sold Allah the most precious thing of all. emphasized that every martyrdom

operation against any Israeli, including children, women, and teenagers, is a legitimate

act according to [Islamic] religious law, and an Islamic commandment…&quot; 

Jihad is an inherently supremacist, political ideology which incorporates violence and stealth tactics of infiltration to spread Islam as widely as possible with the ultimate objective to create the universal caliphate. In hadith collections, for example, the 199 references to jihad in the most standard collection of hadith, Sahih al-Bukhari, all assume that jihad means warfare.  The two leading Muslim states based on sharia law, Iran (Shiite) and Saudi Arabia (Sunni) espouse the supremacist ideology of jihad. The Sufi&#039;s concept of jihad as moral self-improvement is the exception rather than the rule.

In sum, you are in denial.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The religious rituals of five times a day prayer, siyam and the like are not the issue. Jihad as a mainstream doctrine in Islam connoting holy war is the issue. You keep using arguments to divert from this issue.</p>
<p>First you claimed that the Muslim terrorists did not start targeting the U.S. until &#8220;after its foreign policy took a turn for the interventionist in the Middle East.&#8221;  I pointed out that Thomas Jefferson and John Adams had reported more than 220 years ago that the Muslim ambassador from Tripoli had explained to them in response to their inquiry that Muslims&#8217; war on nations &#8220;was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.&#8221; You dismissed this, without any evidence, as just a rationale for piracy. </p>
<p>Then you tried to argue moral equivalency between Christianity and Islam in terms of acts of violence, ignoring that such acts continue all over the world in the name of Islam and jihad today while that is not true with any other religion today.  The only &#8220;reformation&#8221; that Islam has gone through, as ObamaYoMoma correctly pointed out, was between the Meccan Period and the Medinan Period &#8220;when Muhammad became consumed with revenge and turned to politics and jihad, and in the process reformed Islam at the same time from what was once a religion similar to other religions of the time, into what it is today.&#8221; </p>
<p>When I quoted multiple passages from the Koran to illustrate the meaning of jihad and the Islamist supremacist ideology, you dismissed them as cherry picking. When I cited Qaradawi, recognized as one of the most influential Muslim scholars alive today (I provided a source for that assessment), for his interpretations of the Koran on apostasy, treatment of women and call for genocide of Jews, you dismissed him as an extremist. You denied that he represented &#8220;the Islam of the great masses of Cairo and Amman and Damascus.&#8221; When I pointed out that Qaradawi has millions of followers, as demonstrated by his huge audiences for his radio show and his speech in Cairo, you responded &#8220;Yes, he does.  I said he is an extremist.  I didn&#8217;t say that he is not a popular extremist.&#8221;</p>
<p>You suggested that I take a look at what Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi had to say to understand mainstream Islamic scholar thought.  I did and found that he was an anti-Semite, which he defended on religious grounds, a point you conceded but tried to explain away. </p>
<p>Here is more regarding Tantawi:Al-Azhar from an Al-Azhar report in 2002: </p>
<p>&#8220;The great Imam of AlAzhar</p>
<p>Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, demanded that the</p>
<p>Palestinian people, of all factions, intensify the martyrdom operations [i.e. suicide</p>
<p>attacks] against the Zionist enemy, and described the martyrdom operations as the</p>
<p>highest form of Jihad operations. [Tantawi] says that the young people executing them</p>
<p>have sold Allah the most precious thing of all. emphasized that every martyrdom</p>
<p>operation against any Israeli, including children, women, and teenagers, is a legitimate</p>
<p>act according to [Islamic] religious law, and an Islamic commandment…&#8221; </p>
<p>Jihad is an inherently supremacist, political ideology which incorporates violence and stealth tactics of infiltration to spread Islam as widely as possible with the ultimate objective to create the universal caliphate. In hadith collections, for example, the 199 references to jihad in the most standard collection of hadith, Sahih al-Bukhari, all assume that jihad means warfare.  The two leading Muslim states based on sharia law, Iran (Shiite) and Saudi Arabia (Sunni) espouse the supremacist ideology of jihad. The Sufi&#8217;s concept of jihad as moral self-improvement is the exception rather than the rule.</p>
<p>In sum, you are in denial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hiernonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5423431</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hiernonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 23:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5423431</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Qaradawi has a following of millions of Muslims as witnessed by his reception in his return to Cairo for a speech and his radio show listenership.&quot;

Yes, he does.  I said he is an extremist.  I didn&#039;t say that he is not a popular extremist.


&quot;You mean the same Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi who said about Jews: &quot;[The] Qur&#039;an describes the Jews with their own particular degenerate characteristics, i.e. killing the prophets of Allah, corrupting His words by putting them in the wrong places, consuming the people&#039;s wealth frivolously, refusal to distance themselves from the evil they do, and other ugly characteristics caused by their deep-rooted lasciviousness.&quot;

The same Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi who in 2002 said that Jews are “the enemies of Allah, descendents of apes and pigs.”&quot;

Yes, I mean that Tantawi.  I&#039;m taking issue with the contention that Islam is uniquely violent, and with the portrayal of Islamists such as Qutb as representative of mainstream Muslim doctrine.  I&#039;m not trying to argue that anti-Semitism isn&#039;t deeply ingrained in Egypt, nor would I argue that there are no mainstream clerics who defend such anti-Semitism on religious grounds.  (It&#039;s also the same Tantawi who, the next year, issued the directive not to call Jews &quot;monkeys&quot; or &quot;pigs&quot; anymore.  If you&#039;re trying to figure out whether Tantawi was speaking from personal prejudice or religious conviction when he made the comment you cite, consider the alacrity with which he abandoned that position when the MFA asked him to back off.)

Again, the question is whether you are willing to make a good-faith effort to understand Islam as it is generally practiced.  ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Qaradawi has a following of millions of Muslims as witnessed by his reception in his return to Cairo for a speech and his radio show listenership.&#8221;</p>
<p>Yes, he does.  I said he is an extremist.  I didn&#8217;t say that he is not a popular extremist.</p>
<p>&#8220;You mean the same Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi who said about Jews: &#8220;[The] Qur&#8217;an describes the Jews with their own particular degenerate characteristics, i.e. killing the prophets of Allah, corrupting His words by putting them in the wrong places, consuming the people&#8217;s wealth frivolously, refusal to distance themselves from the evil they do, and other ugly characteristics caused by their deep-rooted lasciviousness.&#8221;</p>
<p>The same Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi who in 2002 said that Jews are “the enemies of Allah, descendents of apes and pigs.”&#8221;</p>
<p>Yes, I mean that Tantawi.  I&#8217;m taking issue with the contention that Islam is uniquely violent, and with the portrayal of Islamists such as Qutb as representative of mainstream Muslim doctrine.  I&#8217;m not trying to argue that anti-Semitism isn&#8217;t deeply ingrained in Egypt, nor would I argue that there are no mainstream clerics who defend such anti-Semitism on religious grounds.  (It&#8217;s also the same Tantawi who, the next year, issued the directive not to call Jews &#8220;monkeys&#8221; or &#8220;pigs&#8221; anymore.  If you&#8217;re trying to figure out whether Tantawi was speaking from personal prejudice or religious conviction when he made the comment you cite, consider the alacrity with which he abandoned that position when the MFA asked him to back off.)</p>
<p>Again, the question is whether you are willing to make a good-faith effort to understand Islam as it is generally practiced.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph Klein</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5423234</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Klein]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 15:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5423234</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very well said. We may not always agree on the precise terminology to use,  but your account here of the &quot;reformed&quot; version of Islam that defines Islam jihad today and the doctrine of abrogation is spot on.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very well said. We may not always agree on the precise terminology to use,  but your account here of the &#8220;reformed&#8221; version of Islam that defines Islam jihad today and the doctrine of abrogation is spot on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jospeh Klein</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5423098</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jospeh Klein]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 12:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5423098</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Qaradawi has a following of millions of Muslims as witnessed by his reception in his return to Cairo for a speech and his radio show listenership.
You mean the same  Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi who said about Jews: &quot;[The] Qur&#039;an describes the Jews with their own particular degenerate characteristics, i.e. killing the prophets of Allah, corrupting His words by putting them in the wrong places, consuming the people&#039;s wealth frivolously, refusal to distance themselves from the evil they do, and other ugly characteristics caused by their deep-rooted lasciviousness.&quot;

The same  Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi who in 2002 said that Jews are “the enemies of Allah, descendents of apes and pigs.”]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Qaradawi has a following of millions of Muslims as witnessed by his reception in his return to Cairo for a speech and his radio show listenership.<br />
You mean the same  Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi who said about Jews: &#8220;[The] Qur&#8217;an describes the Jews with their own particular degenerate characteristics, i.e. killing the prophets of Allah, corrupting His words by putting them in the wrong places, consuming the people&#8217;s wealth frivolously, refusal to distance themselves from the evil they do, and other ugly characteristics caused by their deep-rooted lasciviousness.&#8221;</p>
<p>The same  Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi who in 2002 said that Jews are “the enemies of Allah, descendents of apes and pigs.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ObamaYoMoma</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5423072</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ObamaYoMoma]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 12:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5423072</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mention the word Islam or Muslim to a Euroloon, and they immediately start vilifying and demonizing Christianity based on a very false history. Your first reaction is to do the same thing. Of course, while the Muslims want to replace our constitution with Sharia, the Marxist totalitarian left wants to replace it with Marxism, but both ideologies are exceedingly bankrupt. Anyway, to do that both Marxists and Muslims must destroy Christianity and along with it traditional American values and traditions. Hence, your unhinged obsession with denigrating Christianity is subconscious.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mention the word Islam or Muslim to a Euroloon, and they immediately start vilifying and demonizing Christianity based on a very false history. Your first reaction is to do the same thing. Of course, while the Muslims want to replace our constitution with Sharia, the Marxist totalitarian left wants to replace it with Marxism, but both ideologies are exceedingly bankrupt. Anyway, to do that both Marxists and Muslims must destroy Christianity and along with it traditional American values and traditions. Hence, your unhinged obsession with denigrating Christianity is subconscious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hiernonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5423023</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hiernonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 09:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5423023</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You, and most who frequent this site, repeatedly claim that Islam is uniquely violent.  A most logical response to such a contention is to provide counterexamples.  Nothing about doing so in any way suggests &quot;hatred&quot; of anything or anyone.  ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You, and most who frequent this site, repeatedly claim that Islam is uniquely violent.  A most logical response to such a contention is to provide counterexamples.  Nothing about doing so in any way suggests &#8220;hatred&#8221; of anything or anyone.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ObamaYoMoma</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422984</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ObamaYoMoma]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 05:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422984</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anyone who repeatedly denigrates Christianity by repeatedly morally equating it to Islam, which is not even a religion, obviously must hate Christianity.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone who repeatedly denigrates Christianity by repeatedly morally equating it to Islam, which is not even a religion, obviously must hate Christianity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ObamaYoMoma</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422982</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ObamaYoMoma]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 05:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422982</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You are an extremely gullible useful idiot infidel.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are an extremely gullible useful idiot infidel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ObamaYoMoma</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422981</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ObamaYoMoma]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 05:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422981</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;The problem with getting one&#039;s education in Islam from Internet lists of selected quotes is the same a trying to understand Christianity from a list of quotations chosen by someone with an axe to grind.&lt;/i&gt;

First of all, stop morally equating Islam with Christianity, because Islam is not even a religion to begin with. Moreover, there are no Christians waging jihad against infidels all over the world the same way only Muslims alone have been doing for almost 1400 years perpetually.

Furthermore, there are two periods in Islam, the Meccan Period and the Medinan Period. The Meccan Period is the early period of Islam when Islam was a peaceful religion modeled off of several other religions of the time. The Medinan Period is the period following the Hijra (migration) in 622 AD, after which Muhammad and his early followers had been cast out of Mecca by the Meccans and were forced to migrate to Medina.

At that time Muhammad became consumed with revenge and turned to politics and jihad, and in the process reformed Islam at the same time from what was once a religion similar to other religions of the time, into what it is today, which is a very totalitarian cult with the sole fundamental purpose of subjugating all infidels and all religions into Islamic totalitarianism through both violent and non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia (Islamic totalitarian law) to ultimately make Islam supreme throughout the world. 

Meanwhile, the doctrine of abrogation, which is universally accepted throughout all of Islam, holds that the latter issued verses of the Koran abrogate, supersede, and replace the earlier issued verses of the Koran they conflict with. Thus, all the earlier peaceful verses of the Koran that originate from the Meccan period have been abrogated, superseded, and replaced by the latter issued sword verses of the Koran they conflict with and that were issued by Muhammad during the Meccan period. Indeed, those list of selected sword verses you mention are from the latter Medinan period and command Muslims to wage jihad against infidels until such time as Islam is made supreme. 

Moreover, Muslims also love to cite peaceful verses of the Koran from the Meccan period to dupe gullible useful idiot infidels into believing that Islam is a so-called “religion of peace.”]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>The problem with getting one&#8217;s education in Islam from Internet lists of selected quotes is the same a trying to understand Christianity from a list of quotations chosen by someone with an axe to grind.</i></p>
<p>First of all, stop morally equating Islam with Christianity, because Islam is not even a religion to begin with. Moreover, there are no Christians waging jihad against infidels all over the world the same way only Muslims alone have been doing for almost 1400 years perpetually.</p>
<p>Furthermore, there are two periods in Islam, the Meccan Period and the Medinan Period. The Meccan Period is the early period of Islam when Islam was a peaceful religion modeled off of several other religions of the time. The Medinan Period is the period following the Hijra (migration) in 622 AD, after which Muhammad and his early followers had been cast out of Mecca by the Meccans and were forced to migrate to Medina.</p>
<p>At that time Muhammad became consumed with revenge and turned to politics and jihad, and in the process reformed Islam at the same time from what was once a religion similar to other religions of the time, into what it is today, which is a very totalitarian cult with the sole fundamental purpose of subjugating all infidels and all religions into Islamic totalitarianism through both violent and non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia (Islamic totalitarian law) to ultimately make Islam supreme throughout the world. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, the doctrine of abrogation, which is universally accepted throughout all of Islam, holds that the latter issued verses of the Koran abrogate, supersede, and replace the earlier issued verses of the Koran they conflict with. Thus, all the earlier peaceful verses of the Koran that originate from the Meccan period have been abrogated, superseded, and replaced by the latter issued sword verses of the Koran they conflict with and that were issued by Muhammad during the Meccan period. Indeed, those list of selected sword verses you mention are from the latter Medinan period and command Muslims to wage jihad against infidels until such time as Islam is made supreme. </p>
<p>Moreover, Muslims also love to cite peaceful verses of the Koran from the Meccan period to dupe gullible useful idiot infidels into believing that Islam is a so-called “religion of peace.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hiernonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422979</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hiernonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 05:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422979</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Eh?  What in the world makes you think that I hate Christianity?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eh?  What in the world makes you think that I hate Christianity?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hiernonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422978</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hiernonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 05:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422978</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Qaradawi is indeed influential.  He is articulate and intelligent.  He is also an extremist, and is recognized as such among Muslims as well as in the west.  For example:  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1290132/posts

You can find other Muslim scholars carefully expressing respect for Qaradawi in general while noting that they have differences with him in particular matters.  He is virulently anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli.  It is support for Qaradawi that is, at least in part, responsible for the tensions between Qatar and it&#039;s Gulf neighbors.

Regarding Qutb, writing prolifically about one&#039;s personal take on Islam is not a substitute for formal education in religious doctrine.   As on example, he stood the concept of jahiliya on its head, declaring that it was not an era but a state of being, and that by extension self-professed Muslims whom Qutb considered insufficiently pure could be classified as non-Muslim and legitimately targeted for violence.  It&#039;s a clever construction and the work of an intelligent and active mind - but it&#039;s not Muslim doctrine.

You didn&#039;t answer my question.  If you are, in good faith, seeking to understand what Islam&#039;s doctrines actually are, why do you not turn to mainstream clerics such as Tantawi, and mainstream centers of doctrine such as al Azhar?

There&#039;s plenty to criticize and be wary about when it comes to Islam, but you can&#039;t solve problems if you aren&#039;t trying to understand them honestly.  Better to read Qutb and Qaradawi as the fringe elements they are, and to try to understand why they have broad appeal in the region, without pretending that they represent the Islam of the great masses of Cairo and Amman and Damascus.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Qaradawi is indeed influential.  He is articulate and intelligent.  He is also an extremist, and is recognized as such among Muslims as well as in the west.  For example:  <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1290132/posts" rel="nofollow">http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1290132/posts</a></p>
<p>You can find other Muslim scholars carefully expressing respect for Qaradawi in general while noting that they have differences with him in particular matters.  He is virulently anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli.  It is support for Qaradawi that is, at least in part, responsible for the tensions between Qatar and it&#8217;s Gulf neighbors.</p>
<p>Regarding Qutb, writing prolifically about one&#8217;s personal take on Islam is not a substitute for formal education in religious doctrine.   As on example, he stood the concept of jahiliya on its head, declaring that it was not an era but a state of being, and that by extension self-professed Muslims whom Qutb considered insufficiently pure could be classified as non-Muslim and legitimately targeted for violence.  It&#8217;s a clever construction and the work of an intelligent and active mind &#8211; but it&#8217;s not Muslim doctrine.</p>
<p>You didn&#8217;t answer my question.  If you are, in good faith, seeking to understand what Islam&#8217;s doctrines actually are, why do you not turn to mainstream clerics such as Tantawi, and mainstream centers of doctrine such as al Azhar?</p>
<p>There&#8217;s plenty to criticize and be wary about when it comes to Islam, but you can&#8217;t solve problems if you aren&#8217;t trying to understand them honestly.  Better to read Qutb and Qaradawi as the fringe elements they are, and to try to understand why they have broad appeal in the region, without pretending that they represent the Islam of the great masses of Cairo and Amman and Damascus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ObamaYoMoma</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422963</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ObamaYoMoma]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 04:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422963</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For years I read everything I could get my hands on both good and bad. Not to mention that at the same time I also read countless articles and papers as well. I also participated in a yearlong class once that included among other things reading the Koran. At one time I had copious notes that I had made over the years, but unfortunately lost them when my laptop and my backup hard drive were destroyed as a result of an accident.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For years I read everything I could get my hands on both good and bad. Not to mention that at the same time I also read countless articles and papers as well. I also participated in a yearlong class once that included among other things reading the Koran. At one time I had copious notes that I had made over the years, but unfortunately lost them when my laptop and my backup hard drive were destroyed as a result of an accident.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ObamaYoMoma</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422954</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ObamaYoMoma]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 04:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422954</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;Islam has not gone through any major internal reform in its central tenets and methods as Christianity has.&lt;/i&gt;

Why do people naively believe that Islam can be reformed like Christianity? Just because Christianity underwent a reformation, doesn’t mean Islam can too. 

In any event, it can’t be reformed for numerous reasons, one of which is because Islam today is not even a religion. Of course, it is their religion, but when closely examined by non-Muslims it obviously is a cult, a very totalitarian cult. Of course, Muslims don’t know that. Hence, it is their religion. 

Nonetheless, Islam did undergo a reformation already shortly after the Hijra, when Muhammad and his early followers were cast out of Mecca. As a result, Muhammad became obsessed with revenge and turned to politics and jihad, and in the process reformed Islam from what was once a religion modeled off of several religions of the time into what it is today, which is an extremely totalitarian cult that has as its sole fundamental purpose the subjugation of all infidels and all religions into Islamic totalitarianism through both violent and non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia (Islamic totalitarian law) to ultimately make Islam supreme. Indeed, it is Muhammad’s revenge.

Do you think that if GWB had understood what Islam actually is that he would still have occupied Afghanistan and Iraq for the idiotic reasons he did?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Islam has not gone through any major internal reform in its central tenets and methods as Christianity has.</i></p>
<p>Why do people naively believe that Islam can be reformed like Christianity? Just because Christianity underwent a reformation, doesn’t mean Islam can too. </p>
<p>In any event, it can’t be reformed for numerous reasons, one of which is because Islam today is not even a religion. Of course, it is their religion, but when closely examined by non-Muslims it obviously is a cult, a very totalitarian cult. Of course, Muslims don’t know that. Hence, it is their religion. </p>
<p>Nonetheless, Islam did undergo a reformation already shortly after the Hijra, when Muhammad and his early followers were cast out of Mecca. As a result, Muhammad became obsessed with revenge and turned to politics and jihad, and in the process reformed Islam from what was once a religion modeled off of several religions of the time into what it is today, which is an extremely totalitarian cult that has as its sole fundamental purpose the subjugation of all infidels and all religions into Islamic totalitarianism through both violent and non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia (Islamic totalitarian law) to ultimately make Islam supreme. Indeed, it is Muhammad’s revenge.</p>
<p>Do you think that if GWB had understood what Islam actually is that he would still have occupied Afghanistan and Iraq for the idiotic reasons he did?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ObamaYoMoma</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422953</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ObamaYoMoma]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 04:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422953</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are you sure you are not a Euroloon? Because you seem to be as unhinged as they are when it comes to hating Christianity, while apologizing for Islam.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you sure you are not a Euroloon? Because you seem to be as unhinged as they are when it comes to hating Christianity, while apologizing for Islam.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph Klein</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422949</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Klein]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 04:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422949</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre , an independent research entity affiliated with the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, ranks Qaradawi as one of the top 50 most influential Muslim leaders in the world and describes him this way:

&quot;Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is a preeminent Egyptian scholar. Articulate and widely read, he is one of the most famous scholars of Islam.&quot;

What you call his &quot;extremist&quot; views are extremist by contemporary Western standards to be sure, but are not viewed that way by Muslim thought leaders who see him as one of their most influential living scholars. He represents in their view mainstream interpretation of the Koran. 

As for Qutb, he was no layman, whether or not he can be considered a revolutionary. As described in the Guardian: &quot;His major work is Fi Zalal al-Koran (In the Shadow of the Koran), a commentary on the Koran in 30 volumes which began to appear in 1952 and was completed in prison. Apart from its length, two things are striking about the commentary: first, Qutb&#039;s unfailing sensitivity to the Koran&#039;s literary qualities; secondly, Qutb&#039;s relentless insistence on the unconditional demands made upon those believers.&quot;
His writings influenced the Muslim Brotherhood as well as al Qaeda. 
Again, with all due respect, Qutb and Qaradawi  written with more credibility in the Muslim world about what jihad requires under the Koran than the revisionist spin you are trying to portray.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre , an independent research entity affiliated with the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, ranks Qaradawi as one of the top 50 most influential Muslim leaders in the world and describes him this way:</p>
<p>&#8220;Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is a preeminent Egyptian scholar. Articulate and widely read, he is one of the most famous scholars of Islam.&#8221;</p>
<p>What you call his &#8220;extremist&#8221; views are extremist by contemporary Western standards to be sure, but are not viewed that way by Muslim thought leaders who see him as one of their most influential living scholars. He represents in their view mainstream interpretation of the Koran. </p>
<p>As for Qutb, he was no layman, whether or not he can be considered a revolutionary. As described in the Guardian: &#8220;His major work is Fi Zalal al-Koran (In the Shadow of the Koran), a commentary on the Koran in 30 volumes which began to appear in 1952 and was completed in prison. Apart from its length, two things are striking about the commentary: first, Qutb&#8217;s unfailing sensitivity to the Koran&#8217;s literary qualities; secondly, Qutb&#8217;s relentless insistence on the unconditional demands made upon those believers.&#8221;<br />
His writings influenced the Muslim Brotherhood as well as al Qaeda.<br />
Again, with all due respect, Qutb and Qaradawi  written with more credibility in the Muslim world about what jihad requires under the Koran than the revisionist spin you are trying to portray.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ObamaYoMoma</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422927</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ObamaYoMoma]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 03:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422927</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;If America&#039;s foreign policy has nothing to do with it, then it&#039;s interesting that 1) Muslim terrorists did not start targeting the U.S. until after its foreign policy took a turn for the interventionist in the Middle East, and 2) that the 9/11attacks were directed against the U.S. and not, say, Brazil, which is even more infidelish than America, or Japan. Why wasn&#039;t AQ flying planes into the Forbidden Palace or the Kremlin?&lt;/i&gt;

The only Muslim terrorists that exist, exist within the recesses of your unhinged mind. You see Muslims aren’t terrorists. They are jihadists instead waging jihad (holy war) in the cause of Allah against infidels to ultimately make Islam supreme. 

Moreover, jihad (holy war) manifest by any and all means necessary, both violent and non-violent. As a matter of fact, astronomically far more jihad manifests today via non-violent means as opposed to violent means. Although, the infidel world is totally obsessed with stopping only the violent variety of jihad, because like you it misconstrues it as being terrorism, and at the same time that it is also oblivious to the manifestation of non-violent forms of jihad. Which is a very fatal mistake because the non-violent varieties of jihad relative to the relatively few violent jihad attacks that are misconstrued as being terrorism, represents an exponentially far greater threat to our world.

Indeed, through mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, which is really non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad for the nefarious purposes of mass Muslim infiltration and eventual demographic conquest, several European countries will start becoming Islamic majority countries beginning in about 25 years, and when that happens, those states will inevitably become Sharia totalitarian states. While the Euroloon infidels at the same time will be rendered into harsh and degrading dhimmitude. 

&lt;i&gt;1) Muslim terrorists did not start targeting the U.S. until after its foreign policy took a turn for the interventionist in the Middle East&lt;/i&gt;

You have Ron Paul Disease of the brain. It’s a very serious mental ailment, as it not only causes one to become stupid as heck, it causes self-hatred as well. Nevertheless, Muslims have been waging jihad against infidels perpetually since shortly after the Hijra in 622 AD. It may have not been very noticeable during the 20th century because Islam had become very weak and decrepit relative to the Western infidel world, it still existed nonetheless on a much smaller scale. 

Today, thanks to the transfer of hundreds of billions of dollars from Western coffers to Islamic coffers as a direct result of our dependence on foreign Middle East oil, Islam has been able to make a very miraculous resurgence and along with that rejuvenation we see Muslims now resorting to their age old tactics of waging jihad against infidels on a much larger scale than was the case throughout the 20th century. 

Why not Brazil? Islam is very much waging jihad against Brazil through mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, which is really stealth and deceptive jihad. Your problem is like a self-hating loon you see Muslims as being terrorists reacting to “capitalist imperialism” or “America’s interventionist foreign policies”, which is utterly absurd and extremely hilarious, as that lunacy ignores the long and very well established history of Islam. Besides, Brazil isn’t the world’s superpower like the USA. 

Moreover, the reason we were attacked on 9/11 was first of all because of Islam’s miraculous resurgence in recent years and also because OBL saw us as the Great Satan. If the Islamic totalitarian world can destroy the Great Satan, which is Islam’s biggest obstacle in the way of it attaining its goal, it can subsume the world. Not to mention that our Presidents and our foreign policies since the Reagan administration have all been incredibly incompetent, which made us appear to be very weak in the eyes of our enemies, and, of course, also emboldened our enemies at the same time of which OBL, of course, was one of them. 

As for as flying jets into the Kremlin goes, it was the defeat of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan that made OBL believe that if the Mujahideen can destroy one of the world’s greatest superpowers, then it surely can defeat the other one too. 

&lt;i&gt;Have you ever actually read Milestones and The Neglected Duty? &lt;/i&gt;

I’ve read the former a long time ago, but not the latter.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>If America&#8217;s foreign policy has nothing to do with it, then it&#8217;s interesting that 1) Muslim terrorists did not start targeting the U.S. until after its foreign policy took a turn for the interventionist in the Middle East, and 2) that the 9/11attacks were directed against the U.S. and not, say, Brazil, which is even more infidelish than America, or Japan. Why wasn&#8217;t AQ flying planes into the Forbidden Palace or the Kremlin?</i></p>
<p>The only Muslim terrorists that exist, exist within the recesses of your unhinged mind. You see Muslims aren’t terrorists. They are jihadists instead waging jihad (holy war) in the cause of Allah against infidels to ultimately make Islam supreme. </p>
<p>Moreover, jihad (holy war) manifest by any and all means necessary, both violent and non-violent. As a matter of fact, astronomically far more jihad manifests today via non-violent means as opposed to violent means. Although, the infidel world is totally obsessed with stopping only the violent variety of jihad, because like you it misconstrues it as being terrorism, and at the same time that it is also oblivious to the manifestation of non-violent forms of jihad. Which is a very fatal mistake because the non-violent varieties of jihad relative to the relatively few violent jihad attacks that are misconstrued as being terrorism, represents an exponentially far greater threat to our world.</p>
<p>Indeed, through mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, which is really non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad for the nefarious purposes of mass Muslim infiltration and eventual demographic conquest, several European countries will start becoming Islamic majority countries beginning in about 25 years, and when that happens, those states will inevitably become Sharia totalitarian states. While the Euroloon infidels at the same time will be rendered into harsh and degrading dhimmitude. </p>
<p><i>1) Muslim terrorists did not start targeting the U.S. until after its foreign policy took a turn for the interventionist in the Middle East</i></p>
<p>You have Ron Paul Disease of the brain. It’s a very serious mental ailment, as it not only causes one to become stupid as heck, it causes self-hatred as well. Nevertheless, Muslims have been waging jihad against infidels perpetually since shortly after the Hijra in 622 AD. It may have not been very noticeable during the 20th century because Islam had become very weak and decrepit relative to the Western infidel world, it still existed nonetheless on a much smaller scale. </p>
<p>Today, thanks to the transfer of hundreds of billions of dollars from Western coffers to Islamic coffers as a direct result of our dependence on foreign Middle East oil, Islam has been able to make a very miraculous resurgence and along with that rejuvenation we see Muslims now resorting to their age old tactics of waging jihad against infidels on a much larger scale than was the case throughout the 20th century. </p>
<p>Why not Brazil? Islam is very much waging jihad against Brazil through mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, which is really stealth and deceptive jihad. Your problem is like a self-hating loon you see Muslims as being terrorists reacting to “capitalist imperialism” or “America’s interventionist foreign policies”, which is utterly absurd and extremely hilarious, as that lunacy ignores the long and very well established history of Islam. Besides, Brazil isn’t the world’s superpower like the USA. </p>
<p>Moreover, the reason we were attacked on 9/11 was first of all because of Islam’s miraculous resurgence in recent years and also because OBL saw us as the Great Satan. If the Islamic totalitarian world can destroy the Great Satan, which is Islam’s biggest obstacle in the way of it attaining its goal, it can subsume the world. Not to mention that our Presidents and our foreign policies since the Reagan administration have all been incredibly incompetent, which made us appear to be very weak in the eyes of our enemies, and, of course, also emboldened our enemies at the same time of which OBL, of course, was one of them. </p>
<p>As for as flying jets into the Kremlin goes, it was the defeat of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan that made OBL believe that if the Mujahideen can destroy one of the world’s greatest superpowers, then it surely can defeat the other one too. </p>
<p><i>Have you ever actually read Milestones and The Neglected Duty? </i></p>
<p>I’ve read the former a long time ago, but not the latter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hiernonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/perpetual-impunity-in-syria/comment-page-1/#comment-5422774</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hiernonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2014 23:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=226111#comment-5422774</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And, again, you&#039;ve selected a fringe extremist for your attempt to show what &quot;typical&quot; Muslims believe.  2,500 Muslim academics signed a petition to the UN asking them to stop extremist clerics, and they specifically named Qaradawi among them.  He&#039;s certainly bigoted against Jews and takes some very extreme stances, but he&#039;s hardly representative of mainstream Islam.

Here&#039;s my question to you:  if you&#039;re making the case that Islam is a certain way, why are you turning to the fanatics and extremists for your support?  If you&#039;re genuinely interested in what Muslims believe, why don&#039;t you turn to, say, Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi of al Azhar?  What you&#039;re going is like turning to Pastors Fred Phelps and Terry Jones for an understanding of what Christians believe, instead of turning, say, to the Pope and the college of cardinals.  The existence of fringe extremists among any clergy isn&#039;t evidence of the beliefs of the mainstream religion.

&quot;With all due respect, I&#039;ll have to take the word of Qaradawi and Qutb over yours when it comes to interpreting the Koran.&quot;

No doubt you prefer to turn to extremists who support your preconceptions.  Qaradawi, at least, is an actual cleric, though a famously exremist one; no amount of &quot;all due respects&quot; on your part can turn Qutb into anything other than a revolutionary layman.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And, again, you&#8217;ve selected a fringe extremist for your attempt to show what &#8220;typical&#8221; Muslims believe.  2,500 Muslim academics signed a petition to the UN asking them to stop extremist clerics, and they specifically named Qaradawi among them.  He&#8217;s certainly bigoted against Jews and takes some very extreme stances, but he&#8217;s hardly representative of mainstream Islam.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s my question to you:  if you&#8217;re making the case that Islam is a certain way, why are you turning to the fanatics and extremists for your support?  If you&#8217;re genuinely interested in what Muslims believe, why don&#8217;t you turn to, say, Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi of al Azhar?  What you&#8217;re going is like turning to Pastors Fred Phelps and Terry Jones for an understanding of what Christians believe, instead of turning, say, to the Pope and the college of cardinals.  The existence of fringe extremists among any clergy isn&#8217;t evidence of the beliefs of the mainstream religion.</p>
<p>&#8220;With all due respect, I&#8217;ll have to take the word of Qaradawi and Qutb over yours when it comes to interpreting the Koran.&#8221;</p>
<p>No doubt you prefer to turn to extremists who support your preconceptions.  Qaradawi, at least, is an actual cleric, though a famously exremist one; no amount of &#8220;all due respects&#8221; on your part can turn Qutb into anything other than a revolutionary layman.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 989/1069 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-30 22:56:14 by W3 Total Cache -->