<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Extreme</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/extreme/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 07:46:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>The Extremist, Radical New Israel Fund and Its Funders</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ronn-torossian/the-extremist-radical-new-israel-fund-and-its-funders/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-extremist-radical-new-israel-fund-and-its-funders</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ronn-torossian/the-extremist-radical-new-israel-fund-and-its-funders/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2014 05:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ronn Torossian]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[donations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new israel fund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Palestinian]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=246199</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The immense funding campaign behind the anti-Israel organization. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="color: #232323;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/money-rolls.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-246200" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/money-rolls.jpg" alt="money-rolls" width="351" height="262" /></a>During these sensitive times, as the world is a kinder-box due to Muslim extremists, Jewish extremists must also be rejected. As Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosor recently said in United Nations speech, “Most people believe that at its core, the conflict is a battle between Jews and Arabs or Israelis and Palestinians. They are wrong. The battle that we are witnessing is a battle between those who sanctify life and those who celebrate death.” The Ambassador is right – which means organizations like the New Israel Fund (NIF) which empower terrorists must be shunned. <span style="color: #1255cc;"><a href="http://observer.com/2014/11/new-israel-fund-supports-groups-that-hurt-the-jewish-state/">The New Israel Fund supports groups that hurt the Jewish State.</a></span></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">An NIF grantee, the Executive Director of the Human Rights Defenders Fund (HRDF), received $332,625 from 2011-2013 in grants from the New Israel Fund and recently called Israel “racist,” and “murderous,” and described the country as a “temporary Jewish apartheid state.” She actively promotes the Palestinian ‘right of return.’ Other NIF grantees demand boycotts of the State of Israel, and contribute to gross Anti-Semitism by funding campaigns for Breaking the Silence who tour college campuses to accuse Israel of war crimes.  These organizations are outside the consensus. As The <a href="http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/11/26/birthright-israel-terminates-partnership-with-controversial-new-israel-fund/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">Algemeiner Journal</span></a> reported New Israel Fund is “a controversial foundation that supports dozens of Israel related causes, many of which are considered hostile to the Jewish State.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Thankfully today it was revealed that Birthright and Young Judea will no longer work with New Israel Fund. New Israel Fund is associated with funding boycotts of Israel and programs to support the Israel Defense Forces, hence the Jewish community is rejecting these extremists. As Algemeiner added, “NIF <a href="http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/new_israel_fund"><span style="color: #1255cc;">actively supports organizations</span></a> like Machsom Watch, which harass Israeli soldiers while on duty at checkpoints, Breaking The Silence which dispatches former Israeli soldiers on international tours accusing the IDF of human rights violations and war crimes, and +972 magazine, which offers a ready stream of anti-Israel articles and opinions pieces. During the recent Gaza war, New Israel Fund dispatched emergency grants to fund anti-Israel protests in Israel.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">NIF donors support extremists’ viewpoints with barely any support amongst the democratic electorate of Israel. While one constantly hears about donors on the right, why is the left given a pass when they help fund anti-democratic behavior?</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Irwin Jacobs, a co-founder of Qualcomm is a major donor to The New Israel Fund, as is his fellow San Diegoan, The Leichtag Foundation.  While The Fohs Foundation claims that their position is “not to look back, not to criticize Israel or place blame, but rather to promote opportunity going forward,”, yet by supporting the New Israel Fund, they stand with calling Israeli soldiers war crimes.  That is out of bounds – and responsible donors <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/ronn-torossian/celebrating-anti-israel-extremists/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">must reject these extremists</span></a>.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">From the Edith and Henry Everett  Foundation who fund The Jewish Book Council, Joint Distribution Committee, American Friends of Israel Sci-Tech Schools and others, one fails to comprehend why they would want to be associated with the New Israel Fund, which Professor Gerald Steinberg recently described as an organization that “..claim to support Israel and human rights principles, they enable the highly destructive activities that do the opposite. By the time these funders acknowledge this failure and end their support, the damage will be done.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">From the Lisa and Douglas Goldman Fund to The Irving Harris Foundation, Arnold Hiatt to many others, <a href="http://www.nif.org/about/financials"><span style="color: #1255cc;">The New Israel Fund annual report</span></a> is a study in those who seek to fund campaigns which support boycotts of Israel, supporting Anti-Semitism on campus, and prosecuting Israeli war crimes.  The supporters of these causes are all visible in the New Israel Fund annual report.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The New Israel Fund has decreased in funding from $37 Million in 2010 to $27 Million in 2013. This dangerous extremist organization neglects the reality on the ground and the will of the people. America’s closest Middle East ally, Israel, faces a grave enemy of terrorists and despots, and supporting organizations which undermine the Israel Defense Forces and encourage boycotts of Israel are simply dangerous.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ronn-torossian/the-extremist-radical-new-israel-fund-and-its-funders/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The British Royal Family and the Islamist Terrorists</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/howard-rotberg/the-british-royal-family-and-the-islamist-terrorists/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-british-royal-family-and-the-islamist-terrorists</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/howard-rotberg/the-british-royal-family-and-the-islamist-terrorists/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2014 05:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Howard Rotberg]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[british]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prince Charles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Royal Family]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245324</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are British Royals committed to defending the homeland? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/prince-charles.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-245325" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/prince-charles.jpg" alt="prince-charles" width="338" height="278" /></a>Four men aged 19-27 were arrested by British police on Thursday, November 6<sup>th</sup>, for allegedly planning a terror attack in London against Queen Elizabeth during the Remembrance Day ceremony that took place on Friday, November 7th.</p>
<p style="color: #323333;">The terrorists were seized by the police following months of surveillance and police were said to be interrogating the suspects – who are thought to have hatched a plot to assassinate the Queen with a knife.</p>
<p style="color: #323333;">England, of course, under Prime Minister Cameron is a leader in tolerance and respect for Islam and even allows Sharia Law-governed “no-go” areas. After the ISIS beheading of British citizen David Haines, Cameron was quoted as feeling the need once again, just as after every terrorist murder, to emphasize that such terrorism was not done by the “religion of peace”:  <span style="color: #101010;">&#8220;They are killing and slaughtering thousands of people… they boast of their brutality… they claim to do this in the name of Islam, that is nonsense, Islam is a religion of peace. They are not Muslims, they are monsters.&#8221;</span></p>
<p style="color: #101010;">In my book, <i>Tolerism: The Ideology Revealed </i>(Mantua Books, second edition), I discuss how the endless tolerance of the intolerant illiberals endangers us all if these intolerants take power and end all tolerance.  Britain has quite an ambivalent relationship with Islam and especially those who commit violence, or otherwise attack British historic liberties and freedoms, for the purpose of conquest and a jihadist caliphate.</p>
<p><span style="color: #101010;">Britain, of course, had its own version of 9/11, t</span>he July 7, 2005 London bombings (often referred to as 7/7)  which were a series of coordinated <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_attack"><span style="color: #0433ff;">suicide attacks</span></a> in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_London"><span style="color: #0433ff;">central London</span></a>, which targeted civilians using the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_in_London"><span style="color: #0433ff;">public transport system</span></a> during the morning rush hour.</p>
<p>As well as the four bombers, 52 civilians were killed and over 700 more were injured.</p>
<p>So, when threats were discovered against the Queen, British police and armed forces took the matter seriously and thwarted the proposed attack.    It all brought to mind, however, just how the British have related to radical or militant Islam, or Islamism, however you term it.</p>
<p>In view of the recent thwarted attempt against the Queen, perhaps, we should take a look at the views of Prince Charles, the heir to the British throne. Is there anything that should concern us?    Has he become what I call a “tolerist” – one whose tolerance of evil seems to have been exacerbated by terrorism; that is, do we have another case where we see terrorism being successful in creating <i>more </i>tolerance and more submission to the demands of radical Muslims both inside and outside Britain, with every terrorist attack?</p>
<p>The royal wedding between Prince William and the beautiful Kate Middleton on April 29<sup>th</sup>, 2011, seemed, to many, a turning back in time to when the British monarchy really mattered, and Britain itself mattered.   The Queen herself, resolute in her dedication to duty and country, with a mother who had lived to 101, seemed to be ready to carry on for years to come.</p>
<p>The striking young couple and the 85 year old monarch, brought the monarchy into a perhaps unexpected place of honour and excitement in a Britain, beset by economic problems and social tensions relating to its increasing Islamic population. The very popularity of the young couple and the elderly monarch made the public’s disdain of William’s father and Elizabeth’s son, Charles, all the more apparent. It prompted me to research a bit about Prince Charles and his views.</p>
<p>Charles was the one who was mostly famous for ditching the popular and beautiful Diana for the plain and somewhat unappealing Camilla. An eccentric, seemingly in search of a cause in life, his interest in architecture and the environment was about to come into fashion again, when he made the turn in his career which seems somewhat puzzling:  his interest in promoting the cause of Islam.</p>
<p>In this, he might be seen by his critics as taking after no one so much as his eccentric uncle Edward, the Nazi sympathizer who abdicated the throne to marry the divorced American Wallace Simpson.</p>
<p>In both cases, it did not help that the public was not at all enthralled with the choice of woman.   Neither did the uncle or the nephew appear to be a strong and ideal candidate to lead the British  people (even though the monarchy’s power is symbolic only) in a time of crisis in world affairs – with the Nazis in Edward’s time, and with Radical Islam, terrorism, and attempts to create a new caliphate to include Europe, in Charles’ time.</p>
<p>Charles seemed to latch onto the defence of Islam as his pet project and his standing in the Islamic world increased accordingly, at least until Islamist demands, as they do invariably, start to increase with every step of tolerance.</p>
<p>By the time of William’s engagement, polling showed an overwhelming majority of the British public believed Prince Charles should make way for his eldest son and allow him to be the next king.</p>
<p>The story of Charles’ infatuation with Islam was not followed closely by the press, but here are the basics:</p>
<p>The grand mufti of Cyprus has said: &#8220;Did you know that Prince Charles has converted to Islam. Yes, yes. He is a Muslim. I can&#8217;t say more. But it happened in Turkey. Oh, yes, he converted all right. When you get home check on how often he travels to Turkey. You&#8217;ll find that your future king is a Muslim.”</p>
<p>Assuming that Charles remained a member of the Church of England, however, he made many worrying statements that seemed to go above and beyond wishes for peaceful relations:</p>
<p>1. Charles made several strong public statements endorsing Islam as the solution to the spiritual and cultural ills of Britain and the West. In 1989, when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against Salman Rushdie, a British citizen, for blaspheming the Prophet Muhammad in his novel <i>The Satanic Verses. </i>Charles did not defend Rushdie&#8217;s freedom of speech, but reacted to the death decree by reflecting on the positive features that Islam has to offer the spiritually empty lives of his countrymen.</p>
<p>2. Similarly, in the matter of the riots after the publication of cartoons about Mohammed, Prince Charles again took the Muslim side:   The Times of London reported that in front of an audience of more than 800 Islamic scholars at Cairo&#8217;s Al-Azhar University, Charles made a &#8220;serious, impassioned 30-minute speech&#8221; that &#8220;The recent ghastly strife and anger over the Danish cartoons shows the danger that comes of our failure to listen and to respect what is precious and sacred to others. In my view, the true mark of a civilised society is the respect it pays to minorities and to strangers.&#8221;   He of course made no comments on how minorities are treated in Muslim countries.</p>
<p>3. Back in March 2000, Prince Charles visited the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/743894.stm"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Islamia Primary School</span></a> in North-West London. This, Britain&#8217;s first state-funded Muslim school, was founded and is headed by Yusuf Islam (a.k.a. Cat Stevens), an Islamist who threatened Salman Rushdie&#8217;s life during the <i>Satanic Verses</i> controversy and has since been banned from entering the United States. The Prince told the children: &#8220;You are ambassadors for a sometimes much misunderstood faith. I believe that Islam has much to teach increasingly secular societies like ours in Britain.</p>
<p>4. The idea that Christians and Jews must learn from Islam became a recurring theme from Charles:   “Islam can teach us today a way of understanding and living in the world which Christianity itself is poorer for having lost. At the heart of Islam is its preservation of an integral view of the Universe. Islam-like Buddhism and Hinduism refuses to separate man and nature, religion and science, mind and matter, and has preserved a metaphysical and unified view of ourselves and the world around us. . . . But the West gradually lost this integrated vision of the world with Copernicus and Descartes and the coming of the scientific revolution. A comprehensive philosophy of nature is no longer part of our everyday beliefs.”</p>
<p>5. In a speech at the Foreign Office Conference Centre at Wilton Park in Sussex on December 13, 1996, he called on Islamic pedagogy and philosophy to help young Britons develop a healthier view of the world.   Praising Islamic culture in its traditional form for trying to preserve an &#8220;integrated, spiritual view of the world in a way we have not seen fit to do in recent generations in the West,&#8221; he went on to say:  “There is much we can learn from that Islamic world view in this respect. There are many ways in which mutual understanding and appreciation can be built. Perhaps, for instance, we could begin by having more Muslim teachers in British schools, or by encouraging exchanges of teachers. Everywhere in the world people want to learn English. But in the West, in turn, we need to be taught by Islamic teachers how to learn with our hearts, as well as our heads. The results of this study will help Westerners to rethink, and for the better, our practical stewardship of man and his environment-in fields such as health-care, the natural environment and agriculture, as well as in architecture and urban planning.”</p>
<p>6. As noted by Gordon and Stillman, “Prince Charles of Arabia”, <i>The</i> <i>Middle East Quarterly, </i>September, 1997, Charles took steps to give Islam a special status. He set up a panel of twelve &#8220;wise men&#8221; (in fact, eleven men and one woman) to advise him on Islamic religion and culture.  This caused much talk, especially as the group was reported to have met in secret. Some noted that no comparable body exists to inform the crown prince about other faiths practiced in his future realm.</p>
<p>7. To Charles, it was Islam that can best implement his cherished environmentalism: In an hour-long speech on &#8220;<a href="http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=News&amp;id=22350511"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Islam and the Environment</span></a>&#8221; at Oxford University&#8217;s Sheldonian Theatre on behalf of the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, reported Rebecca English of the<i> Daily Mail</i>, &#8220;the heir to the throne argued that man&#8217;s destruction of the world was contrary to the scriptures of all religions &#8211; but particularly those of Islam.&#8221; He &#8220;spoke in depth about his own study of the Koran which, he said, tells its followers that there is &#8216;no separation between man and nature&#8217; and says we must always live within our environment&#8217;s limits.&#8221; He also said:  “The inconvenient truth is that we share this planet with the rest of creation for a very good reason &#8211; and that is, we cannot exist on our own without the intricately balanced web of life around us. Islam has always taught this and to ignore that lesson is to default on our contract with creation.”  He did not comment on the environmental aspects of Islamic harvesting of its vast oil wealth, nor the environmental aspects of suicide bombing and other violent acts of Islam as it implemented Jihad at its every border.</p>
<p>8. In 2007, after watching ten whirling dervishes perform at a cultural centre in Turkey, Charles stated:  &#8220;Whatever it is, it seems to me that Western life has become deconstructed and partial.&#8221; The East, on the other hand, he went on, had given us &#8220;parables of the soul.&#8221; He also cited the Koran and Hadith.</p>
<p>9. Among the many titles borne by the British sovereign is &#8220;Defender of the Faith,&#8221; a reference to the fact that the monarch heads not only the government but also the Church of England. But the prince had reservations about this title. In a June 1994 television documentary he declared his preference to be known as &#8220;Defender of Faith&#8221; rather than &#8220;Defender of the Faith,&#8221; which prompted then Prime Minister John Major to quip, “it would be a little odd if Prince Charles was defender of faiths of which he was not a member.’</p>
<p>10. We note that in 2004, the Sultan of Brunei awarded Charles a $50,000 prize chosen by an international jury set up by the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies for his contribution to understanding Islam in the West, being the first non-Muslim to receive the prize.  Some years earlier, at a private dinner with prince Charles in May 1997, Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia announced a donation by King Fahd of $33 million to Oxford University to construct a new Centre for Islamic Studies at Oxford, a gift designed &#8220;to establish Islamic studies at the heart of the British education system.&#8221;</p>
<p>11. Finally, it appeared that Charles made dozens of trips to Muslim countries (Turkey being a special favourite), but when invited to visit Israel (no member of the Royal Family has made an Official Visit to Israel), Charles’ advisors were quoted in a 2007 story in Israel’s <i>Ha’aretz </i>newspaper as saying that there was &#8220;no chance&#8221; the prince would ever visit Israel &#8211; so as not to boost Israel&#8217;s international image.  One famous trip of Charles was the eight day tour of the U.S. in 2005 where he tried to persuade George W Bush and Americans of the merits of Islam because he thought that the United States had been too intolerant of the religion since September 11. The Prince voiced private concerns over America&#8217;s &#8220;confrontational&#8221; approach to Muslim countries and its failure to appreciate Islam&#8217;s strengths.</p>
<p>However, Charles&#8217; efforts to promote Islam did not do his mother any good in Al-Qaeda&#8217;s eyes. The organization&#8217;s number two, <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1869849,00.html"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Ayman al- Zawahiri</span></a>, called Queen Elizabeth II &#8220;one of the severest enemies of Islam&#8221; and blamed her for what he called Britain&#8217;s &#8220;crusader laws.&#8221; In addition, he criticized British Muslims who &#8220;work for the pleasure of Elizabeth, the head of the Church of England&#8221; and ridiculed them for saying (his words, not theirs): &#8220;We are British citizens, subject to Britain&#8217;s crusader laws, and we are proud of our submission . . . to Elizabeth, head of the Church of England.&#8221;   Such was the attitude towards a woman Ruler who failed to “submit” to Islam, in contrast to her son who knew how to plead Islam’s case.</p>
<p>Moreover, there was an earlier plot to assassinate his mother, the Queen.   In 2007, Al-Qaeda plotted to kill the Queen during her state visit to Uganda.  Security services foiled the plot, which involved hiding inside two vans belonging to the Ugandan Broadcasting Corporation and setting off bombs, as the Queen came to Kampala on an official visit in November.</p>
<p>Lately, the world has been stunned by the violence and murder and torture of religious minorities by the brutal Islamists of ISIS – beheadings, rapes, mass killings.   And it has finally dawned upon people that Christians, as well as Yzedis, Kurds and Jews, are being targeted by Islamists.</p>
<p>And so, Prince Charles woke up: After the release of a new report which concludes that Christians are the “most persecuted religious minority” in the world and that Muslim countries dominate the list of places where religious freedom is most under threat, Prince Charles was forced to speak out.</p>
<p>Muslim leaders have a duty to warn their own followers about the “indescribable tragedy” of the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11027065/Video-shows-scale-of-Yazidi-suffering-on-Iraqs-Mount-Sinjar.html"><span style="color: #0433ff;">persecution of Christians in the Middle East</span></a> and around the world, the Prince of Wales has insisted.</p>
<p>He said that faith leaders must ensure their followers respect believers in other faiths “rather than remaining silent.” But again Charles espoused a supposed role of Defender of (all) Faith(s), rather than the monarchy’s historic role as Defender of the (Christian) Faith.</p>
<p>While emphasizing the importance of his own personal Christian faith, he also signalled that he saw his role as to “defend” followers of other faiths including Islam.</p>
<p>Britain’s “future as a free society” depends on recognizing the “crucial role” played by people of faith, he said.  “First and foremost, rather than remaining silent, faith leaders have, it seems to me, a responsibility to ensure that people within their own tradition respect people from other faith traditions.</p>
<p>Prince Charles is to be praised for noting that:  “Sadly, in many other countries, an absence of freedom to determine one’s own faith is woven into the laws and customs of the nation.”</p>
<p>But even this modest criticism of Islam, in the context of a speech emphasizing that he sees himself as a Defender of all religions, including Islam, was too much for some British Muslim leaders:   Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, said: &#8220;Prince Charles is somebody who is deeply respected in the Muslim community and he is absolutely right about Christians being oppressed &#8211; but the point is when innocent Iraqis were being killed by British bombs Prince Charles was quiet silent.</p>
<p>&#8220;I would like him to have spoken about Muslims being oppressed in a stronger way.&#8221;</p>
<p>And so in the context of the increasing number and influence of Muslims in Britain, we must scrutinize the words of the man next in line for the throne. And we note, that after showing such extreme tolerance, and much advocacy for Islam, Prince Charles is still criticized for making comments about ISIS and the murder of Christians.</p>
<p>For those of us in Britain (or myself in Canada, a member of the British commonwealth), it is apparent that the Queen remains a target for Islamist terrorists even as her son, the heir apparent, leans over backwards to compliment the religion of Islam and seeks to “Defend” it as well as the Monarchy’s (Church of England) Christianity. Whether his actions are naïve and foolish “tolerism” or an example of moderation and peaceful dialogue, only time will tell.</p>
<p><b><i>Howard Rotberg</i></b><i> is a Canadian writer with a special interest in ideologies, values, and cultures.   His latest book is </i>Tolerism:  The Ideology Revealed (Second Revised Edition, 2013).  <i>He is founding president of publishing company Mantua Books.</i></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/howard-rotberg/the-british-royal-family-and-the-islamist-terrorists/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>32</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Paranoid Madness of the Democratic Party</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/the-paranoid-madness-of-the-democratic-party/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-paranoid-madness-of-the-democratic-party</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/the-paranoid-madness-of-the-democratic-party/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 04:50:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HATE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liberal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paranoid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[violence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223104</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Democrat may no longer believe in God, but he believes in racism.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/seiu_protest_ap_218-1.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-223105" alt="seiu_protest_ap_218-1" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/seiu_protest_ap_218-1.jpg" width="289" height="218" /></a></span><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The Democrat may no longer believe in God, the Constitution or even motherhood and apple pie, but he devoutly believes that somewhere out there Republicans are sitting in a sealed room and plotting to bring back the 50s. </span></p>
<p>And if not the 50s, then at least the early 60s.</p>
<p>The left accuses the right of being deeply paranoid. Meanwhile the left is convinced that every Republican sneeze is a racial putdown of America&#8217;s first black president since Bill Clinton.</p>
<p>Forget about looking for Communists under every bed. The proper progressive never lies down with his or her partner of choice and their government mandated birth control from the Catholic institution with no choice in the matter without first checking their privilege and checking for conservative bigotry.</p>
<p>Sometimes, somewhere in Kentucky or Alaska, a minor Republican functionary forwards an email depicting ObamaCare as the work of a voodoo witch doctor and the first lefty to discover it dines out on that triumphant accomplishment for a year before writing a book about it. The rest of the time, the McCarthyists of the left have to work to unpack the subtext of a random remark.</p>
<p>When Mitch McConnell complained that Obama plays too much golf, MSNBC&#8217;s chief late night lunatic, Lawrence O&#8217;Donnell, barked that “Well, we know exactly what he’s trying to do there. He is trying to align to Tiger Woods and surely, the lifestyle of Tiger Woods with Barack Obama.”</p>
<p>The Calibnasian Woods didn&#8217;t actually identify as black, but that was probably because of the way Republican racism stigmatizes black people. Will the right-wing bigotry never stop?</p>
<p>The reinvented Democratic Party runs entirely on conspiracy theories about Republican bigotry. It complains that Republicans secretly believe that they&#8217;re a Communist conspiracy to destroy America, while their entire platform is an accusation that the Republican Party is a secret conspiracy to enslave black people.</p>
<p>Or as the famous admirer of articulate, bright and clean-looking African-Americans, Joe Biden said, &#8220;He is going to put y&#8217;all back in chains.&#8221;</p>
<p>The chains would be redundant considering that he and his boss have run up the national debt to $17.6 trillion or a post-racial slavery of $55,234 by every American, regardless of race or creed, owed to China, Japan and the Muslim world.</p>
<p>The Democratic Party runs on racial paranoia, on class paranoia, on gender paranoia; obsessed with portraying the Republican Party as a Nazi cult dedicated to serving Southern racists, the Koch Brothers and Israel.</p>
<p>Conspiracy theories aren&#8217;t a fringe element in the Democratic Party; they&#8217;re the entire ticket.</p>
<p>The War on Women, the constant claims of racism (according to ex-MSNBC&#8217;er Martin Bashir IRS was the new &#8220;N Word&#8221;) and the invocation of class warfare by wealthy residents of entirely white bedroom communities is a litany of conspiracy theories. The frenzied search for new IRS and Tiger Woods &#8220;dog whistles&#8221; that prove the Republicans really are out to bring back the 50s is the psychological breakdown of an entire political party taking refuge in political paranoia.</p>
<p>The bible of the left&#8217;s conspiracy theory is a Lee Atwater interview from 1981 in which he described politics becoming post-racial. Since conspiracy theorists can always locate that one frame that proves that the plane heading for the World Trade Center was a hologram and the magic bullet that shot JFK was really fired by Jackie Kennedy, they carefully excerpted a part of the interview to make it look like Atwater <a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/06/what-did-lee-atwater-really-say.php">was saying the exact opposite</a> of what he was saying.</p>
<p>The left built up its pyramid of racial paranoia, its obsession with a Republican &#8220;Southern Strategy&#8221; to prove that the real racists weren&#8217;t the Democrats who fought for segregation, but the Republicans who fought against it, and its claim that since then the Republicans hid their racism in calls for small government and lower taxes, which, if you own a special Noam Chomsky decoder ring, really means Supermegaracism.</p>
<p>If Republicans are covertly disguising their racism in low taxes and small government, anyone who believes in low taxes and small government is probably a racist. And since Republicans hide their racism in innocuous policies, any conservative policy must be another racist Trojan horse.</p>
<p>Everything is a conspiracy. Everyone is a conspirator. If a Republican supports X, it must be racist. If he says Y, it must be racist.</p>
<p>Understand that and you understand why MSNBC&#8217;s cast of lunatics insist that IRS is the new N Word and that the Republican Party keeps mentioning Obama&#8217;s golf game to suggest to its base of racist voters that he&#8217;s really off having affairs with a string of blonde women.</p>
<p>Progressive racial paranoia makes perfect sense if you assume that your opponents are part of a conspiracy whose defining feature is a paranoid projection of your own racism.</p>
<p>The racial Atwaterization of the Democratic Party, its Northeastern Strategy, is typical of conspiracy theorists, whether it&#8217;s the Muslim Brotherhood&#8217;s front groups or the LaRouche zombies, who engage in byzantine conspiracies and vicious underhanded attacks that are justified by their own worldview in which a vast conspiracy is being waged against them.</p>
<p>Think of Hillary Clinton invoking a &#8220;vast right wing conspiracy&#8221; in public while justifying her husband&#8217;s adultery as being caused by Republican attacks in private, targeting women who complained about her husband&#8217;s sexual harassment in private, while claiming to be a role model for women in public.</p>
<p>That gap between ideals and actions, ends and means, is typical of the conspiracy theorist who projects every evil onto a single enemy, an Emmanuel Goldstein or Dick Cheney, and acts out every horrifying power fantasy in order to destroy him without ever acknowledging that he has become the thing he hates the most. He has become, not Dick Cheney, but Dick Cheney as he envisions him, an abuser of the Constitution who uses the IRS as a political weapon, invades countries unilaterally and destroys political enemies with lies, smears and innuendo.</p>
<p>The Dick Cheney of the left&#8217;s paranoid imagination sits in the White House.</p>
<p>Political paranoids are totalitarians&#8230; and totalitarians are political paranoids. The Democratic Party has become both. Its paranoid totalitarianism runs on conspiracy theories that justify its abuses of power. It has accepted the left&#8217;s classic formula of the conservative political opposition as a reactionary force that is the source of all evils in society.</p>
<p>If the Republican Party and the conservative opposition embody racism so thoroughly and covertly that there is nothing non-racist about them, there is nothing left to do but to destroy them. Having reduced the right to a total evil with no redeeming qualities, destroying them seems benevolent.</p>
<p>The average MSNBC viewer, <i>New York Times</i> reader and progressive suburbanite is not interested in a close look at his political movement. Instead of giving him something to believe in, his party&#8217;s media outlets give him someone to hate. His political identity is shaped not by what he stands for, unsustainable debt and an incoherent foreign policy of platitudes, but by his resistance to the Tea Party hordes who want to put black people back in chains, put women back in the kitchen and put homophobes back in the CEO’s office at the Mozilla Foundation.</p>
<p>The politics of paranoid hatred is the crutch of mental cripples who protect the source of their dysfunction by projecting it onto phantom enemies. It&#8217;s Hillary Clinton with her unfaithful husband, her list of enemies and her conviction that the Republicans made him cheat on her multiplied a million times over. It&#8217;s the frenzied MSNBC talking head who sees the N Word everywhere because it&#8217;s inside him. It&#8217;s an Attorney General who pursues racial grudges without ever admitting it while calling the country &#8220;a nation of cowards&#8221; on race.</p>
<p>The Democratic Party has been contaminated by the madness of the left through its alliance with the left and the entire country is paying the price.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/the-paranoid-madness-of-the-democratic-party/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>77</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The False Dichotomy: Moderate Muslims vs. Radicals</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/majid-rafizadeh/the-false-dichotomy-moderate-muslims-vs-radicals/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-false-dichotomy-moderate-muslims-vs-radicals</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/majid-rafizadeh/the-false-dichotomy-moderate-muslims-vs-radicals/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2014 04:05:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Majid Rafizadeh]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moderate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mohammed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radical]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=222641</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Qur'an is not open to interpretation. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/islam-will-dominate-the-world.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-222642" alt="islam-will-dominate-the-world" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/islam-will-dominate-the-world-450x319.jpg" width="315" height="223" /></a>The liberal mainstream media has long portrayed a picture of moderate (&#8220;good&#8221;) Muslims versus extremist Muslims. This narrative has been institutionalized in the thinking of Western Muslim scholars, who advocate for Islam as well. This has led to the thought that Islam is an ideology and religion of peace, because a majority of Muslims fall in the category of moderate or good Muslims.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">If we analyze this dichotomy in depth, we can see how this understanding of Islam develops. Besides analytical and theoretical frameworks, I will also draw on my own experience growing up in the Muslim world.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">We were taught in school that the Qur&#8217;an has descended, word for word, from the creator Allah, through Muhammad. This is accepted throughout the entirety of the Islamic word. If we take this speculation as accurate information of Islam, then every Muslim is supposed to follow Allah’s verses exactly in order to be a good Muslim and to be considered a representative of the real ideology and religion of Islam.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Secondly, if we take the assertion that the Qur&#8217;an is made up of Allah’s words as being true, then Qur&#8217;anic verses should be followed for eternity, as long as human beings exist in this universe. No changes are allowed to Allah’s rules and words because Allah, as Muslims say, is perfect and his knowledge is absolute. As a result, his words cannot be relative and every word he utters or reveals should apply in any time of human history.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">In fact, even Muhammad himself repeatedly said that two things a Muslim should follow are the Qur&#8217;an (words of Allah) and the Hadith (Muhammad’s teachings). </span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Considering this information and based on these standards, a true Muslim, who represent the real Islam, should be the one who follows and obeys Allah’s words (from the Qur&#8217;an) completely.  As a result, anyone who ignores some of the rules is not, and cannot be, considered a reflection of Islam, a good Muslim, or even a Muslim. Accordingly, Allah’s words and rules are not a basket of vegetable to choose from, meaning that one cannot obey some orders and disregard others.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Following this reasoning, it is clear that the whole dichotomy of good Muslims vs. extremist Muslims, as portrayed by the mainstream media, must be altered. By this definition, real, true, and good Muslims who represent Islam are people such as Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Ayatollah Khomeini (the founder of Iran’s political theocracy), Osama Bin Laden, Hassan Nasrullah (the leader of Hezbollah), Ayman Alzawaheri, Hasib Hussein, Mahmoud Ahmadinjead, and the like, because they follow the Qur&#8217;an and Allah’s social and legal rules word for word. All these people, who have committed crimes against humanity, will be considered to be the real Muslims, representing the actual ideology of Islam, the Qur&#8217;an, Allah’s words, and Muhammad’s teachings, because they follow the rules of Islam.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">To give you a concrete example, during a speech I gave that criticized the underlying philosophy and ideology of Islam and that argued that Islam is not a religion of peace, a young American-British Muslim man stood up and responded by interrupting. Some of his points, which echoed what other Western Muslims usually state, were that Islam is the religion of peace, millions of Muslims like him do not commit those violent acts, and that they represent Islam.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">When he finished, I asked him if he believed that he should beat his wife after she disobeys him one time, two times or three times. He said no. Then I conveyed to him that one cannot be representative of the true philosophy and ideology of Islam, a good or real Muslim, if he or she doesn’t follow Allah’s words stated in Qur&#8217;an.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Allah specifically says, &#8220;Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.” (Qur&#8217;an 4:34)</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">A real and “good” Muslim, who represent the ideology of Islam, would follow Allah’s words in Qur&#8217;an regarding this specific rule. Therefore, he or other Muslims like this young British-American man cannot introduce themselves as a real reflection and representation of Islamic ideology or speak on behalf of Islam.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">This verse is not open to interpretation. It clearly says what a man must do with a disobedient wife. I cannot imagine that this verse can have another meaning than what it exactly states. Many Muslims use the interpretation card to legitimize and defend Islam and call themselves the real reflection of Islamic ideology. Growing up in Islamic societies, I am aware that many Muslims in the West or East have not even read Allah’s words in the Qur&#8217;an completely, and are not following the real Islam. (A blessing that they have not read it and that they are not following the real Islam!)</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The underlying reason for considering people such as Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Ayatollah Khomeini, Osama Bin Laden, Hassan Nasrullah, Ayman Alzawaheri, Hasib Hussein, Mahmoud Ahmadinjead, and others as the real image of Islam is that these people follow Allah’s verses and orders word for word. They also have hundreds of thousands of followers who consider them as the true Muslims. If Muhammad was alive, these people would be considered the real spokespeople for Islam, the best, true, and real Muslims, for following Allah’s rules exactly. So what about other Muslims?</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Other Muslims who obey some of the verses and disregard others cannot be called good Muslims, representatives of Islamic ideology, or even true followers of Islam, based on the Qur&#8217;an and Muhammad’s teachings. Therefore, they cannot in fact, represent any categories. Every word of Allah should be obeyed.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">These people who call themselves the representatives of real Islam are in fact a representative and reflection of certain socio-political, socio-economic and cultural traditions mixed with some glimpses of Islamic teachings, not the real truth of Islam. Their identity and character is a mixture of these aforementioned qualities rather than the actual ideology of Islam.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">This means that those Western Muslim scholars — who claim that Islam is a religion of peace and that people like Khamenei, Khomeini, Bin Laden and the like, are not true Muslims— cannot introduce themselves as representatives of real Islam.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Usually, when a terrorist or suicide attack by a Muslim occurs, a women is raped and forced to marry the rapist, a woman is stoned for having sex with another man (namahram), a woman is beaten for disobeying her husband or father, the Western Muslim scholars who were born, raised, or educated in the West excitedly point out that the majority of “Muslims” do not conduct these acts and people who carry out these acts are minimal. As a result, they argue that those few people cannot represent Islam.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">But the paradox is that those people who commit such inhumane and brutal acts are the actual Muslims who represent the real Islam because they follow Islam, Allah’s words, the Qur&#8217;an, and Muhammad’s principles word for word. The rest of Muslims are the ones who do not represent real Islam and its truth. In other words, for Muhammad and Allah, those Muslims who commit such criminal acts will be considered totally good Muslims because they obey the rules stated in Qur&#8217;an in full detail.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Muslims argue that Allah’s words in the Qur&#8217;an are open to interpretation. Below are some samples of Allah’s words that are not open to any interpretation. A real Muslim, and a representative and reflection of real ideology of Islam, should follow and full-heartedly accept these social rules word for word. Otherwise, he or she cannot claim that they represent the truth of the ideology of Islam, Muhammad, and Allah.</span></p>
<p><em><b style="line-height: 1.5em;">Execute Those Who Wage War Against Allah and His Messenger:</b></em></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">“The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter” (Qur&#8217;an 5:33).</span></p></blockquote>
<p><em><b style="line-height: 1.5em;">Men Can Marry Four Wives:</b></em></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">“If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice” (Qur&#8217;an 4:3).</span></p></blockquote>
<p><em><b style="line-height: 1.5em;">Men Can Have Sex with Captives:</b></em></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">&#8220;O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee; and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makka) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her;- this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess;- in order that there should be no difficulty for thee. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful&#8221; (Qur&#8217;an 33:50).</span></p></blockquote>
<p><em><b style="line-height: 1.5em;">A Man Can Marry Wife of Adopted Son:</b></em></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">&#8220;Allah has not made for any man two hearts within him; nor has He made your wives whose backs you liken to the backs of your mothers as your mothers, nor has He made those whom you assert to be your sons your real sons; these are the words of your mouths; and Allah speaks the truth and He guides to the way&#8221; (Qur&#8217;an 33:4).</span></span></p></blockquote>
<p><em><b style="line-height: 1.5em;">A Woman Inherits Only Half as Much as a Man Does:</b></em></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">&#8220;Allah enjoins you concerning your children: The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females; then if they are more than two females, they shall have two-thirds of what the deceased has left, and if there is one, she shall have the half; and as for his parents, each of them shall have the sixth of what he has left if he has a child, but if he has no child and (only) his two parents inherit him, then his mother shall have the third; but if he has brothers, then his mother shall have the sixth after (the payment of) a bequest he may have bequeathed or a debt; your parents and your children, you know not which of them is the nearer to you in usefulness; this is an ordinance from Allah: Surely Allah is Knowing, Wise&#8221; (Qur&#8217;an 4:11).</span></p></blockquote>
<p><b style="line-height: 1.5em;">Fight with Those Who Do not Believe in Islam</b></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">&#8220;Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.&#8221; (Qur&#8217;an 9:29)</span></p></blockquote>
<p><em><b>Witness Testimony of a Woman Is Half of That of a Man in Court:</b></em></p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;O you who believe! when you deal with each other in contracting a debt for a fixed time, then write it down; and let a scribe write it down between you with fairness; and the scribe should not refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so he should write; and let him who owes the debt dictate, and he should be careful of (his duty to) Allah, his Lord, and not diminish anything from it; but if he who owes the debt is unsound in understanding, or weak, or (if) he is not able to dictate himself, let his guardian dictate with fairness; and call in to witness from among your men two witnesses; but if there are not two men, then one man and two women from among those whom you choose to be witnesses, so that if one of the two errs, the second of the two may remind the other; and the witnesses should not refuse when they are summoned; and be not averse to writing it (whether it is) small or large, with the time of its falling due; this is more equitable in the sight of Allah and assures greater accuracy in testimony, and the nearest (way) that you may not entertain doubts (afterwards), except when it is ready merchandise which you give and take among yourselves from hand to hand, then there is no blame on you in not writing it down; and have witnesses when you barter with one another, and let no harm be done to the scribe or to the witness; and if you do (it) then surely it will be a transgression in you, and be careful of (your duty) to Allah, Allah teaches you, and Allah knows all things&#8221; (Qur&#8217;an 2:282).</p></blockquote>
<p><em><b style="line-height: 1.5em;">A Man Can Marry Girls Who Have Reached Puberty Age or Have Not Reached Yet. (As Muhammad married Aisha before puberty age):</b></em></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">&#8220;Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs), their period “is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy.&#8221; Qur&#8217;an 65:4</span></p></blockquote>
<p>These are only a few examples of Allah’s words, which are not open to interpretation, according to the definition of the religion and its explicitly set eternal rules.</p>
<p>In sum, my argument is that those real and good Muslims and representatives of the philosophy of the religion are those who follow the Qur&#8217;an, Allah’s words. If they do not agree with some of these rules and do not wholly follow them, they are not good Muslims and they cannot represent the real truth of Islam. In fact, based on Muhammad’s teachings and the Qur&#8217;an, if a person does not believe in one of the previous verses or any of Allah’s words, he cannot call himself a Muslim.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">And finally, as long as the ideology of Islam, as long as the Qur&#8217;an exists and is considered to be the words of Allah, people like Osama Bin Laden will resurface in human history and ideology of Islam, Allah’s words in the Qur&#8217;an will create such criminals, real and good Muslims, who represent the true ideology and philosophy of Islam.</span></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/majid-rafizadeh/the-false-dichotomy-moderate-muslims-vs-radicals/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>34</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Raymond Ibrahim Discusses Why ‘Moderate Islam’ Is an Oxymoron</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/raymond-ibrahim-discusses-why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=raymond-ibrahim-discusses-why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/raymond-ibrahim-discusses-why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2014 04:10:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moderate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oxymoron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Raymond Ibrahim]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=222365</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Controversy brews over a truth-teller's assessment of the "religion of peace."]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Raymond Ibrahim’s recent article, “<a title="" href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/raymond-ibrahim/why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron/" target="_blank">Why Moderate Islam Is an Oxymoron</a>,” has provoked controversy and many responses, including from <a title="" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/374539/moderate-islam-possible-daniel-pipes" target="_blank">Daniel Pipes on NRO</a>, who believes in the possibility of Islam’s reform.  Earlier, Ibrahim—a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center—discussed the topic of his article on CBN News. It follows:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="http://cbn.com/tv/embedplayernews.aspx?bcid=3389858191001" height="380" width="420" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">*</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong>Don&#8217;t miss Raymond Ibrahim on <em>The Glazov Gang</em> discussing his book, <em>Crucified Again</em>:</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/i-UBjuUOBHw" height="380" width="420" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/raymond-ibrahim-discusses-why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why ‘Moderate Islam’ Is an Oxymoron</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/raymond-ibrahim/why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/raymond-ibrahim/why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2014 04:05:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Raymond Ibrahim]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[koran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moderate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=222043</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The West's invention of the notions of  “moderate” and “extreme” Islam.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/PHO-06Aug03-46228.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-222112" alt="ATTACK AFGHANISTAN" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/PHO-06Aug03-46228-431x350.jpg" width="259" height="210" /></a>Reprinted from <a href="http://blogs.cbn.com/ibrahim/archive/2014/03/24/why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron.aspx"><i>CBN News.</i></a></strong></p>
<p>At a time when terrorism committed in the name of Islam is rampant, we are continuously being assured—especially by three major institutions that play a dominant role in forming the Western mindset, namely, mainstream media, academia, and government—that the sort of Islam embraced by “radicals,” “jihadis,” and so forth, has nothing to do with “real” Islam.</p>
<p>“True” Islam, <a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/cia-chief-jihad-a-product-of-injustices-economics-and-ignorance/">so the narrative goes</a>, is intrinsically free of anything “bad.”  It’s the nut-jobs who hijack it for their own agenda that are to blame.</p>
<p>More specifically, we are told that there exists a “moderate” Islam and an “extremist” Islam—the former good and true, embraced by a Muslim majority, the latter a perverse sacrilege practiced by an exploitative minority.</p>
<p>But what do these dual adjectives—“moderate” and “extremist”—ultimately mean in the context of Islam?  Are they both equal and viable alternatives insofar as to how Islam is understood?  Are they both <i>theologically</i> legitimate?  This last question is particularly important, since Islam is first and foremost a religious way of life centered around the words of a deity (Allah) and his prophet (Muhammad)—the significance of which is admittedly unappreciated by secular societies.</p>
<p>Both terms—“moderate” and “extremist”—have to do with <i>degree</i>, or less mathematically, <i>zeal</i>: how much, or to what extent, a thing is practiced or implemented.  As <i>Webster</i>’s puts it, “moderate” means “observing reasonable limits”; “extremist” means “going to great or exaggerated lengths.”</p>
<p>It’s a question, then, of doing either too much or too little.</p>
<p>The problem, however, is that mainstream Islam offers a crystal-clear way of life, based on the teachings of the Koran and Hadith—the former, containing what purport to be the sacred words of Allah, the latter, the example (or <i>sunna</i>, hence “Sunnis”) of his prophet, also known as the most “perfect man” (<i>al-insan al-kamil</i>).   Indeed, based on these two primary sources and according to normative Islamic teaching, all human actions fall into five categories: forbidden actions, discouraged actions, neutral actions recommended actions, and obligatory actions.</p>
<p>In this context, how does a believer go about “moderating” what the deity and his spokesman have commanded?    One can either try to observe Islam’s commandments or one can ignore them: any more or less is not Islam—a word which means “submit” (to the laws, or <i>sharia</i>, of Allah).</p>
<p>The real question, then, is what do Allah and his prophet command Muslims (“they who submit”) to do?  Are radicals “exaggerating” their orders? Or are moderate Muslims simply “observing reasonable limits”—a euphemism for negligence?—when it comes to fulfilling their commandments?</p>
<p>In our highly secularized era, where we are told that religious truths are flexible or simply non-existent, and that any and all interpretations and exegeses are valid, the all-important question of “What does Islam command?” loses all relevance.</p>
<p>Hence why the modern West is incapable of understanding Islam.</p>
<p>Indeed, only <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hjTgk_AQcedUAeBtq3sJE07VaRbQ?docId=7ecf51d4-238b-4787-86d9-1e4ffdfd2c1a">recently</a>, a Kenyan mosque leader said that the Westgate massacre, where Islamic gunmen slaughtered some 67 people, “was justified.  As per the Koran, as per the religion of Islam, Westgate was 100 percent justified.” Then he said: “Radical Islam is a creation of people who do not believe in Islam. <i>We don’t have radical Islam, we don’t have moderates, we don’t have extremists. Islam is one religion following the Koran and the Sunna</i>” [emphasis added].</p>
<p>Note his point that “Radical Islam is a creation of people who do not believe in Islam,” a clear reference to the West which coined the phrase “radical Islam.”  Ironically, the secular West, which relegates religious truths to the realm of “personal experience,” feels qualified to decide what is and is not “radical” about Islam.</p>
<p>Consider one example: Allah commands Muslims to “Fight those among the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth [i.e., Islam], until they pay the <i>jizya</i> [tribute] with willing submission and feel themselves subdued”  [Koran 9:29].</p>
<p>How can one interpret this verse to mean anything other than what it plainly says?  Wherein lies the ambiguity, the room for interpretation?  Of course there are other teachings and allusions in the Koran that by necessity lend themselves over to the fine arts of interpretation, or <i>ijtihad</i>.  But surely the commands of Koran 9:29 are completely straightforward?</p>
<p>In fact, Muhammad’s 7<sup>th</sup> century followers literally acted on this and similar verses (e.g., 9:5), launching the <a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/the-historical-reality-of-the-muslim-conquests/">first Muslim conquests</a>, which saw the subjugation of millions of Christians, Jews, and others, and the creation of the “Muslim world.”  Such jihadi expansion continued until Islam was beaten on the battlefield by a resurgent West some two or three centuries ago.</p>
<p>Western scholarly works, before the age of relativism and political correctness set in, did not equivocate the meaning of jihad.  Thus the authoritative <i>Encyclopaedia of Islam</i>’s entry for “jihad” states that the “spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general …  Jihad must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam … Islam must completely be made over before the doctrine of jihad [warfare to spread Islam] can be eliminated. Islamic law expert and U.S. professor Majid Khadduri (1909-2007), after defining jihad as warfare, wrote that “jihad … is regarded by all jurists, with almost no exception, as a collective obligation of the whole Muslim community.”</p>
<p>(As for the argument that the Bible contains similar war verses, yet Jews and Christians are not out to conquer the world—so why say Muslims are?—see “<a href="http://www.meforum.org/2159/are-judaism-and-christianity-as-violent-as-islam">Are Judaism and Christianity as Violent as Islam</a>” for a detailed breakdown of the similarities and differences.  Also see “<a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/islamic-jihad-and-the-doctrine-of-abrogation/">Islamic Jihad and the Doctrine of Abrogation</a>” to understand how the Koran’s more tolerant verses have been abrogated by its more militant ones, such as 9:29.)</p>
<p>In short, how can a sincere Muslim—by definition, one who has submitted to the teachings of Allah—“moderate” verses like 9:29?  How can he “observe reasonable limits” vis-à-vis these plain commands to combat and subjugate non-Muslims?</p>
<p>Must Muslims not, at the very least, admit that such teachings are true and <i>should</i> be striven for—even if they do not personally engage in the jihad, at least not directly (but they are encouraged to support it indirectly, including <a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/from-barbary-wars-to-somali-piracy/">monetarily or through propaganda</a>)?</p>
<p>Just recently, reports appeared telling of how Islamic groups in Syria were following Koran 9:29 to a tee—<a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/western-ignorance-of-the-conditions-of-omar/">forcing Christian minorities to pay them jizya</a>, i.e., extortion money, in exchange for their lives.  In fact, all around the Islamic world, Christians and other minorities are <a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/muslim-persecution-of-christians/brotherhood-imposes-jizya-tribute-on-egypts-christians/">regularly plundered by Muslims</a> who justify their actions be referring to the aforementioned verse.</p>
<p>Are all such Muslims being “extreme” in light of the commands of Koran 9:29—which specifically calls for the taking of money from Christians and Jews—or are they simply upholding the unambiguous teachings of Islam?</p>
<p>One may argue that, if Muslims are to take Koran 9:29 literally, why are Muslim nations the world over not declaring an all-out jihad on all non-Muslim nations, including America? The ultimate reason, of course, is that they simply <i>can’t</i>; they do not have the capability to uphold that verse (and Islamic teaching allows Muslims to <a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/top-muslim-cleric-qaradawi-urges-western-muslims-to-liberalize/">postpone their obligations</a> until circumstances are more opportune).</p>
<p>It would obviously be silly, if not suicidal,  for, say, Saudi Arabia, birthplace of Islam, to issue a statement to the West saying either accept Islam, pay jizya/tribute, or die by the sword.  But just because Muslim nations <a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/how-circumstance-dictates-islamic-behavior/">do not currently have the capacity to actualize Koran 9:29</a>, does not mean that they do not acknowledge its veracity and try to actualize it in <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/12/16/syria-s-saudi-jihadist-problem.html">other places when they can</a>.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/surreal-and-suicidal-modern-western-histories-of-islam/">quick survey of history</a> before the meteoric rise of Western military might put Islam in check makes this especially clear.</p>
<p>Bottom line: If Islam teaches X and a Muslim upholds X—how is he being “extreme”?  Seems more logical to say that it is <i>Islam itself</i> that is being “extreme.”  Similarly, if a self-professed Muslim does not uphold Islamic teachings—including prayer, fasting, paying <a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/the-dark-side-of-zakat/"><i>zakat</i></a>, etc.—how is he being a “moderate”?  Seems more logical to say that he is not much of a Muslim at all—that is, he is not submitting to Allah, the very definition of “Muslim.”</p>
<p>It’s time to acknowledge that dichotomized notions like “moderate” and “extreme” are culturally induced and loaded standards of the modern, secular West—hardly applicable to the teachings of Islam—and not universal absolutes recognized by all mankind.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>.   </b></p>
<p><b>Make sure to </b><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/raymond-ibrahim/why-moderate-islam-is-an-oxymoron/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>75</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Myth of Islamic Extremism</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-myth-of-islamic-extremism/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-myth-of-islamic-extremism</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-myth-of-islamic-extremism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2013 04:47:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civilization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moderate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sharia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=210510</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Searching for the meaning of moderate oppression.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Koran.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-210523" alt="Koran" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Koran.jpg" width="263" height="194" /></a>The question of Islamic extremism has more relevance to Muslims than to non-Muslims. It&#8217;s mainly Muslims who are obsessed with Islamic extremism. And with good reason. As they so often point out; they tend to be its leading victims.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not that Islamic extremism doesn&#8217;t exist. Islam, like every ideology, has its gradations. It&#8217;s that for Muslims, there is a great deal at stake in the battle over Islamic extremism. That battle will determine whether they can listen to music, play chess or watch soccer games. Whether men can shave their beards, women can drive cars, little girls can go to school and little boys can grow up learning anything except Koranic verses.</p>
<p>Non-Muslims however remain unequal no matter which brand of Islamic theocracy is in charge. And either way they remain fair game in their own countries.</p>
<p>Every leading form of Islam agrees that an Islamic society is perfect, that its laws perfect man and that imposing those laws on society is a religious duty. They may differ on whether those laws allow Muslims to vote or fly kites; but that is small consolation to the non-Muslims who lose their civil rights either way.</p>
<p>Islamic societies are built around an Islamic law that makes non-Muslims second class citizens. Whether Islamic law is the basis of all legislation, as tends to be written in the constitutions of most &#8220;moderate&#8221; Muslim countries, or whether it actually is the legislation, makes a great deal of difference to Muslims who fear losing the ability to sing or play chess at the snap of a fatwa; but has less impact on non-Muslims who are still doomed to an unequal status.</p>
<p>What Western secular liberals insist on describing as extremism is really a reform movement seeking to purge innovations from the modern Islamic admixture absorbed from the cultures and peoples whom they conquered.</p>
<p>Reform means major changes for the descendants of the Islamic conquerors who have learned to like the living standards of Islamic empires and don&#8217;t care for going back to the ways of their many times great-grandfathers. It doesn&#8217;t change things nearly as much for the non-Muslim minorities who were conquered by those Islamic empires. Life for them would become worse if the Salafists were to take over. But the difference lies in degrees of subjugation.</p>
<p>There is no Islamic option for equal rights.</p>
<p>The dilution of Islam through secularism made life more livable for the Muslim conquerors who wanted to enjoy life in their new dominions in Egypt, the Persian Empire, Byzantium or India. They were less concerned with the comfort of the conquered; the Christians, Jews, Hindus, Zoroastrians and others groaning under their rule.</p>
<p>None of the gradations of Islam are friendly to the idea of non-Muslims ruling themselves. They may differ over tactics, but even the non-violent immigration and missionary tactics of supposed moderate Islamic majoritarians would still end in a theocracy in which Western Christians and Jews would become slaves in their own countries.</p>
<p>This may perhaps be more merciful than a prolonged campaign of slaughter, but it is still oppression by any other name. (Not to mention conquest and invasion). And there is no such thing as moderate oppression.</p>
<p>The Arab Spring posed the question to middle class Muslims whether a non-violent political conquest by the Muslim Brotherhood was better than an armed conquest by its Islamic Group splinter movement. The answer that came in the Tahrir Square protests was a resounding, &#8220;No!&#8221;</p>
<p>A political conquest may be less messy for the conquerors and the conquered, but it still takes away the rights and freedoms of the conquered. If even the urban Muslims of Egypt didn&#8217;t want Islamization on that scale, even on peaceful terms, why would any non-Muslim accept an Islamization that would remove far more of his civil rights?</p>
<p>A moderate theocracy is still a theocracy. Moderate inequality is still inequality.</p>
<p>Western liberals associate moderation with secularism. Islam is indeed as moderate as it is secular. Like proofs of alcohol, Islam becomes more toxic and flammable the higher the percentage of &#8220;Islamic law&#8221; it contains. The purer the Islam, the more violent, oppressive, reactionary and brutal it becomes.</p>
<p>But the point that so many liberals miss is that even its diluted forms are still violent, oppressive and reactionary.</p>
<p>Distinguishing moderate and extreme Muslims is as useful as making distinctions between moderate and extreme Communists. These distinctions did and do exist, but they are less relevant in the context of an overall ideology whose goals are war, dominance and subjugation.</p>
<p>A moderate Communist was still a pretty terrible person. Likewise, a moderate president of Iran is still a political force in a theocracy that discriminates against non-Muslims, engages in regional religious wars and denies many civil rights to half the population.</p>
<p>Western liberals obscure this basic fact in their obsession with finding moderates to talk to. Moderate Muslims are still extreme by the standards of the West. They still support violence; the only difference is that they are more willing to try non-violent methods of conquest first.</p>
<p>In the long run, how much difference is there between the moderate slave owner who tricks his slaves into putting on their own chains and the extremist slave owner who makes them do it at gunpoint?</p>
<p>The end result is still the same. And that is the problem.</p>
<p>Post 9/11 concerns about extremism were focused on tactics with those who threatened the most immediate violence branded as extremists while everyone else was accepted as allies. Islamic terrorism triage turned Saudi Arabia into an ally because its double game of working with us and the terrorists meant that it was somehow more moderate than the actual terrorists. The Muslim Brotherhood is likewise considered an ally because it is less overtly violent, at the moment and in our general vicinity, than its Al Qaeda branch.</p>
<p>Focusing only on the most immediate threats is a sensible tactic for law enforcement in an emergency, but is a disastrous strategy for political leaders who cannot afford to become so caught up in trying to stop the next attack that they can only see single terrorists instead of mass movements that utilize a variety of strategies and tactics for the same end.</p>
<p>Islamic terrorism is not reducible to Islamic extremism. It is reducible to Islamic law. Islamic terrorism is just one means of imposing it on us. Immigration is another. Political pressure is a third.</p>
<p>During the Cold War, we understood that Communism was a multifaceted threat. The Red Army and domestic Communist organizations were just two means of accomplishing the same ends. Likewise the Megamosque and the plane hijackers are two means of reaching the same goals.</p>
<p>It will not matter much if the civilization we know is lost and if the freedoms we are familiar with are taken away by the moderates who play the long political game or the extremists who play the short and violent game. It will make a difference to the great-grandchildren of our conquerors who will be able to play chess or fly kites; but our great-grandchildren will still be as fundamentally unequal as the Copts of Egypt or the Jews of Yemen.</p>
<p>An Islam that allows chess playing, but mandates the inequality of non-Muslims should be viewed as just as extreme as any other kind.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p><em>Don&#8217;t miss <strong>Jamie Glazov&#8217;s</strong> video interview with <strong></strong> <strong>Daniel Greenfield</strong> about Obama&#8217;s Destructive Agenda, his Muslim Brotherhood Romance, the Anthony Weiner-Huma Abedin saga, and much, much more:</em></p>
<p><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/hpyoCFF-iL8" height="315" width="420" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>.   </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-myth-of-islamic-extremism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>125</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muslim Activism Done Right</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/volpe/muslim-activism-done-right/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=muslim-activism-done-right</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/volpe/muslim-activism-done-right/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 04:10:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Volpe]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CAIR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Progressive Muslims Institute Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radical]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=193811</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new Canadian Muslim group takes a stand against Islamic jihad.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/progressive_muslims_rally.jpg.size_.xxlarge.promo_.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-193812" alt="progressive_muslims_rally.jpg.size.xxlarge.promo" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/progressive_muslims_rally.jpg.size_.xxlarge.promo_-450x301.jpg" width="315" height="211" /></a>The news pages, both in print and online, are routinely splashed with a plethora of stories about groups that claim to represent Muslims (think: CAIR) and that contribute to the demonization of the Global War on Terror (GWT). Rarely are readers exposed to a Muslim group that fights this demonization.</p>
<p>But in Canada, a new group called the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/Progressive-Muslims-Institute-Canada/532732110118067">Progressive Muslims Institute Canada (PMIC)</a> has been vocal in its opposition to Islamic jihadists, and they’ve been able to build bridges with the Jewish community.</p>
<p>In a wide-ranging interview not only with PMIC but with representatives of B’Nai B’rith of Canada, one of the groups that has reciprocated PMIC&#8217;s extended hand, FrontPage Magazine was able to get a view of these activists&#8217; unique perspective of the GWT.</p>
<p>Tahir Gora is the Director General of PMIC, and he said that the goal of the group is not only to fight extremism but to make sure that there is a clearly separated marker between religious and political affairs:</p>
<blockquote><p>Progressive Muslims Institute Canada (PMIC) strongly denounces all forms extremism and terrorism in the name of Islam. The group advocates and promotes gender equality.  It promotes liberal, progressive and secular values among Muslims and believes in clear separation between religion and state.</p></blockquote>
<p>As part of its efforts, PMIC has also formed the Muslim Committee against Anti-Semitism (MCAAS), which, according to Gora, was “established to counter and discourage ideas and concepts of anti-Semitism amongst Canadian Muslim Diaspora. It conducts monthly seminars, workshops, conferences and rallies in order to curb anti-Semitism.”</p>
<p>Included in those efforts was a rally held on Sunday, June 9, 2013, at Queens Park in Toronto, Canada. That rally was organized in response to a series of terrorist attacks committed around the world by Islamic terrorists.</p>
<p>One speaker, Arshad Mahmood the PMIC honorary director, said, “I stand here today and publicly announce that I am sorry. I am sorry that I did not come here before. I am sorry that I did not stand up when my religion was being hijacked.”</p>
<p>Among those who covered that rally was the <a href="http://www.jewishtribune.ca/news/2013/06/11/i-am-sorry-that-i-did-not-stand-up">Jewish Tribune of Canada</a>, the media arm of B’nai B’rith of Canada.</p>
<p>B’nai B’rith is a worldwide organization that operates on behalf of the social welfare of Jews the world over. Sam Eskanasi handles press matters for B’Nai B’rith in Canada, and he said that PMIC is part of a number of Muslim groups in Canada, locked in a struggle between those looking to stand up to extremists and reach out to the Jewish community and others that tacitly approve of Islamic extremism while demonizing the Jewish race. According to Eskanasi,</p>
<blockquote><p>The Jewish community has a good, working relationship with the certain branches of the Muslim community in Canada. Some personalities such as Tahir Gora and, Asma Mahmood, Salma and Naseema Siddiqui &#8230; are among those with whom we work on a regular basis and on a variety of issues. We regularly interface with them through interfaith dialogues, but also express our concerns regarding radicalization.</p></blockquote>
<p>However, there are many other groups in Canada with whom B’nai B’rith has not been able to form such a nice relationship:</p>
<blockquote><p>There are groups within the community that are not as open to dialogue with us such as the Canadian Arab Federation (CAF), whose former president Khaled Mouammar, who had made hateful remarks, or the Canadian Islamic Congress, who have, with the CAF, been accused of spreading &#8220;hateful sentiments&#8221; toward Israel and Jews. This is in addition to those who hold a yearly &#8220;Al-Quds day rally&#8221; or who have held rallies blaming &#8220;Zionists&#8221; for the sectarian violence in Pakistan[.]</p></blockquote>
<p>Both Gora and Eskanasi said that Canadians in general underestimate the threat from Islamic jihadists because there hasn’t yet been a successful attack on Canadian soil. Both say that Canada’s long-time official stance against Islamic extremism makes the country an inviting target. Eskanasi noted that this is a double edged sword:</p>
<blockquote><p>There is a clear and present danger to Canada as we continue to be outspoken against the threats of Islamic extremism. One need not look much further than a recent government report or the VIA Rail Bombing plot, let alone the infamous Toronto 18 from 2006. Canada is one of, if not the only country, mentioned by Osama Bin-Laden and Al-Qaida that has not been hit.</p></blockquote>
<p>Many long-time observers of the Middle East note with great sadness that the Jewish, Arab and Muslim people have a great deal of natural similarities that aren’t being recognized as a result of longstanding bad blood and the growth of Muslim extremism. Movements PMIC are meant to counteract that dynamic and bring people  together.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/volpe/muslim-activism-done-right/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>49</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A German&#8217;s View of Islam</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/paul-marek/a-germans-view-of-islam/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-germans-view-of-islam</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/paul-marek/a-germans-view-of-islam/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 04:02:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul Marek]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fanatic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nazi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peaceful]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=190117</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The horrific consequences of the "peaceful majority" staying silent. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/islamic_jihad_w_koran_and_rifle.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-190160" alt="islamic_jihad_w_koran_and_rifle" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/islamic_jihad_w_koran_and_rifle.jpg" width="231" height="157" /></a>Reprinted from <a href="http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/6996#.UZq-RRzqskI">IsraelNationalNew.com</a>. </strong></p>
<h5><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal;">I used to know a man whose family were German aristocracy prior to World War II. They owned a number of large industries and estates. I asked him how many German people were true Nazis, and the answer he gave has stuck with me and guided my attitude toward fanaticism ever since.</span></h5>
<p>“Very few people were true Nazis,” he said, “but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.”</p>
<p>We are told again and again by experts and talking heads that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unquantified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.</p>
<p>The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars world wide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or execute honor killings. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard, quantifiable fact is that the “peaceful majority” is the “silent majority,” and it is cowed and extraneous.</p>
<p>Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China’s huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people. The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a war-mongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across Southeast Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians &#8211; most killed by sword, shovel and bayonet. And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery? Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were “peace loving”?</p>
<p>History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt; yet, for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points. Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by the fanatics. Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because, like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.</p>
<p>Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Bosnians, Afghanis, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians and many others, have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us, watching it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts: the fanatics who threaten our way of life.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/paul-marek/a-germans-view-of-islam/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Real Difference Between Islamic &#8216;Extremists&#8217; and &#8216;Moderates&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/the-real-difference-between-islamic-extremists-and-moderates/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-real-difference-between-islamic-extremists-and-moderates</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/the-real-difference-between-islamic-extremists-and-moderates/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 04:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[al Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arab Spring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moderate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tunisia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=148430</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A field guide to the Arab Spring.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/the-real-difference-between-islamic-extremists-and-moderates/libya_2269122b/" rel="attachment wp-att-148518"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-148518" title="libya_2269122b" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/libya_2269122b.gif" alt="" width="315" height="218" /></a>There were eras in human history whose great challenges lay in isolating chemical compounds, unlocking the structures of human genetic material and examining the hearts of dying stars. But the great challenge of our time is telling apart Muslim moderates and Muslim extremists.</p>
<p>Fly to Tripoli International Airport, take the Airport Highway into Tripoli, drive along the coast through all those towns and cities you heard about on the radio when the announcers were excitedly describing battles between the brave Libyan rebels and the despicable forces of the despot; Homs, Misrata, Sirte. Drive through the night while hugging the Mediterranean coastline until you reach Benghazi.</p>
<p>Benghazi is the city on whose behalf we went to war against Gaddafi. The imminent peril to Benghazi was the reason that Obama gave for the conflict. “We struck regime forces approaching Benghazi to save that city and the people within it,” he declared proudly. But the firepower that proved so potent in displacing and dismantling the Gaddafi regime could not protect Ambassador Stevens and the American consulate.</p>
<p>The Benghazi consulate’s own security forces had been stripped down to their bare essentials. Inside the compound, in their own barracks, were members of the February 17 Martyrs Brigade who were tasked with providing security for the consulate. The February 17 <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/us-relied-on-muslim-brotherhood-for-benghazi-consulate-security/">Martyrs</a> Brigade is an Islamist militia affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. The attackers firing off RPGs into the compound were members of Ansar Al Sharia, <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/islamist-militia-that-attacked-consulate-was-spinoff-of-islamist-militia-guarding-consulate/">a spinoff of the</a> February 17 Martyrs Brigade, associated with Al Qaeda.</p>
<p>On diplomatic paper the moderate February 17 Martyrs Brigade and the extremist Ansar Al-Sharia had nothing in common. In reality, the differences between the two militias were mostly cosmetic and the Martyrs Brigade <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/us-relied-on-muslim-brotherhood-for-benghazi-consulate-security/">had been contacted ahead of time</a> by an Al Qaeda politician and asked to stand down while the attack took place.</p>
<p>A month later and a thousand miles away, the moderate Free Syrian Army and the extremist Al Nusra Front captured a missile base in Syria. The base was stocked with the rather popular S-75 SAMs which may be a bit dated, but had still managed to shoot down an F-111 over Libya back in 1981 and would make short work of most commercial airliners.</p>
<p>The Free Syrian Army is the force that almost everyone agrees we should be supporting. They are almost certainly the fighters that Obama is conveying weapons and trainers to. And the Treasury Department <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/01/us/syria-rebels-us-aid/index.html?hpt=hp_t1">approved a license</a> to provide direct financial assistance to the FSA. The Al Nusra Front however is linked to Al Qaeda and waves the black flag of the Caliphate. It considers the United States an enemy of Islam.</p>
<p>The rebel spokesman for the local franchise of the Brave Syrian People ™ explained, “We don&#8217;t distinguish between the groups Al Nusra and the other militias, as long as everyone is working toward one goal of ousting the regime.” Our beloved moderates were making no distinction between themselves and the extremists. By helping the Free Syrian Army, we were really helping Al Qaeda.</p>
<p>The missile base attack was not the first time that the Free Syrian Army and the Al Nusra Front had worked together. The exploits of the Free Syrian Army were often actually the work of the experienced Jihadi fighters of Al Nusra. When gullible Westerners thought they were applauding the daring acts of freedom fighters, they were actually cheering the fanatical murderous frenzy of their own enemies.</p>
<p>The S-75s of Aleppo won’t pose much of a threat to us because the Syrian Air Force promptly swooped in and blew the missile base to bits, thereby probably saving a few hundred or a few thousand American lives—not that they did it for that reason. The real mission of the FSA and Al Nusra however had been to dismantle Syrian air defenses on its northern border clearing the way for a Turkish invasion of Syria.</p>
<p>But there is no reason to worry about that. As the media incessantly inform us, Turkey is run by the moderate AKP Islamists. The moderate AKP Islamists proudly support Hamas, which is an extremist group, and they have ties to Al Qaeda, which is an even more extremist group, but that’s just because they’re all working toward one goal on behalf of the brave peoples of Gaza and Afghanistan to oust the Great Satan and the Little Satan.</p>
<p>To make moderate matters even more confusing, the Muslim Brotherhood regime which has taken over Egypt has been designated as moderate, and yet the only difference between the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza, better known as the immoderate Hamas, is the border between them. On one side of the border the Muslim Brotherhood is moderate while on the other side of the border the Muslim Brotherhood is extreme.</p>
<p>But let’s head back along the coast through Lebanon, Israel, Egypt and Libya over to Tunisia, where the moderate ruling Islamist Ennahda Party has just had questions raised over its true degree of moderation by the release of a video that shows Ennahda leader Rached Ghannouchi collaborating with the Salafists on an Islamist takeover of Tunisia.</p>
<p>Ghannouchi’s previous declarations that America was the enemy of Islam while vowing to fight against it had been dismissed. His fatwa that “There are no civilians in Israel. The population&#8211; males, females, and children&#8211; are the army reserve soldiers, and thus can be killed” was just one of those genocidal remarks that did not discredit him as a moderate figure.</p>
<p>Tunisia was where the bloody Arab Spring had been born in a Muslim man’s fit of sexist pique at being slapped by a female police officer. Its enablers needed to believe that Ennahda was moderate while the Salafists enforcing Islamic law with their fists and storming the American embassy were the extremists. But instead, like their Libyan, Syrian and Egyptian counterparts, Tunisia’s moderate and extremist Islamists proved to be one and the same.</p>
<p>What is the true difference between the February 17 Martyrs Brigade and Ansar Al Sharia, between the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, between the Free Syrian Army and the Al Nusra Front, between the Salafists wearing suits in government buildings in Tunisia and Egypt, and the Salafists wearing robes and marching in the streets?</p>
<p>There are differences between them, but there are far fewer differences between these groups than there are between any one of them and us.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/009-friends-with-christians-jews.htm">Koran advises Muslims</a> not to take Christians and Jews as friends, “for they are friends of each other.”  When going on a safari through the Arab Spring, it might be well for us to heed that advice when it comes to all the moderate Islamists springing out of the grass.</p>
<p>We have no friends among the Islamist forces of the Arab Spring; only enemies who hate us moderately and enemies who hate us extremely.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank">Click here</a>.  </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/the-real-difference-between-islamic-extremists-and-moderates/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>66</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reflections on the Revolution in America</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/victor-davis-hanson/reflections-on-the-revolution-in-america/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=reflections-on-the-revolution-in-america</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/victor-davis-hanson/reflections-on-the-revolution-in-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 04:01:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Victor Davis Hanson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[acrimony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chinese c]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elite]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fundamental assumptions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hoi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hollywood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hollywood elite]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[housing education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Make-over]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mid nineteenth century]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pajamas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[private universities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public intellectuals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revolutionary europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revolutionary times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state legislatures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[visit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=54980</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Welcome to the efforts of the liberal well-to-do class -- who are immune from the dictates they impose on others.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/obama9.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-54982" title="obama9" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/obama9.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="254" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Visit <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/">Pajamas</a>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>America’s Extreme Make-over</strong></p>
<p>These are exciting though scary revolutionary times, akin to the constant acrimony in the fourth-century BC polis, mid-nineteenth century revolutionary Europe, or — perhaps in a geriatric replay — the 1960s. This is an era when the fundamental assumptions of the individual and the state are now being redefined, albeit in a weird, high-tech, globalized landscape.</p>
<p><strong>Radical But Well Off</strong></p>
<p>A word of caution: we are not talking about <em>hoi polloi</em> versus <em>hoi oligoi</em>, or the commune on the barricades fighting the estate owners. No, not this time around.</p>
<p>Instead, the present attempt to remake America is the effort of the liberal well-to-do — highly educated at mostly private universities, nursed on three decades of postmodern education, either with inherited wealth or earning top salaries, lifestyles of privilege indistinguishable from those they decry as selfish, and immune from the dictates they impose on others.</p>
<p>Such are basically the profiles of the Obama cabinet and sub-cabinet, the pillars of liberalism in the Congress and state legislatures, the public intellectuals in the universities and foundations, the arts crowd, and the Hollywood elite. Let us be clear about that.</p>
<p><strong>The Distant Poor</strong></p>
<p>They are all battling on behalf of “them,” the poorer half of America, currently in need of some sort of housing, education, food, or legal subsidy, whom the above mentioned elite, in the way they live, send their children to school, socialize, and vacation so studiously avoid.  (The <em>New York Times</em> owners are likely to follow the cut-throat business practices of Wall Street, live in the most refined areas of New York, and assume privileges indistinguishable from other CEOs; the difference is that they so visibly care about those they never see or seek out).</p>
<p>Note well the term “poor.” These are not Dickensian or Joads poor, but largely Americans who by the standards of the 1940s would be considered lucky. Partly because of globalized Chinese consumer goods, and partly redistributive practices of a half-century, our current “underclass” has access to clothes, electronics, entertainment, apartments, cell phones, transportation, etc., undreamed of by the middle class of the recent past. I live in one of the poorest areas of one of the poorest counties in a bankrupt state; and those I see poor are not like those I saw 40 years ago in the same locale.</p>
<p><strong>To continue reading this article, <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/reflections-on-the-revolution-in-america/">click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/victor-davis-hanson/reflections-on-the-revolution-in-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 991/1057 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 02:55:02 by W3 Total Cache -->