Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    May 2024
    S M T W T F S
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘moderate islam’

The Third Jihad

Posted by Richard on October 24, 2008

Tonight, I attended a special Denver screening of the Clarion Fund's new film, The Third Jihad, along with members of the Jewish Republicans of Colorado, Colorado fans of Dennis Prager, and others like me concerned about the Islamists' war against Western Civilization.

I'm tired and not up for a detailed review, but I highly recommend this film. You can see a 30-minute version on the website and pre-order the full-length film, which ships Oct. 29. This film is more low-key than Obsession because it's focused on the "soft" or "political" jihad instead of violent jihad. But in many ways, it's even more compelling and disturbing.

The film is narrated by a real moderate — and heroic — Muslim, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser. I've posted about (and donated to) his organization, American Islamic Forum for Democracy in the past. The film also features Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Walid Phares, Joe Lieberman, Mark Steyn, Bernard Lewis, and Melanie Phillips. 

I suspect that viewers of The Third Jihad will fall into three groups: (1) those who go into denial, say to themselves that none of it is true or real, and just put it out of their heads; (2) those who get quite depressed, discouraged, and hopeless (this is an unfortunate, but understandable reaction; the film suggests that Western Civilization faces a grim future if things don't change); and (3) those who are motivated (or even more motivated) to take action to defend the values of liberty and democracy against barbarism.

I'm in the third group. As soon as I got home, I made online donations to the Clarion Fund, The Third Jihad, the new associated site,, and AIFD. Please check out these fine organizations and watch the short online version of The Third Jihad. See if there's a theatrical screening in your area — or contact them about scheduling one! Or order the full-length DVD and then have some friends over to watch it with you. 

I'd really like you to join me in the third group.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Michael Yon: Come Home

Posted by Richard on November 16, 2007

So you think that the war is lost and Iraqis just aren't ready to live in an open, tolerant, pluralist democracy? Then go look at Michael Yon's new dispatch, Come Home, a photo essay about the mass at St. John's Church in Baghdad yesterday (you might want the tissues handy). You really need to go look at the whole thing, but here's something to think about:

LTC Michael told me today that when al Qaeda came to Dora, they began harassing Christians first, charging them “rent.” It was the local Muslims, according to LTC Michael, who first came to him for help to protect the Christians in his area. That’s right. LTC Michael told me more than once that the Muslims reached out to him to protect the Christians from al Qaeda. Real Muslims here are quick to say that al Qaeda members are not true Muslims. From charging “rent,” al Qaeda’s harassment escalated to killing Christians, and also Muslims. Untold thousands of Christians and Muslims fled Baghdad in the wake of the darkness of civil war.  Most of the Christians are gone now; having fled to Syria, Jordan or Northern Iraq.

Today, Muslims mostly filled the front pews of St John’s. Muslims who want their Christian friends and neighbors to come home. The Christians who might see these photos likely will recognize their friends here. The Muslims in this neighborhood worry that other people will take the homes of their Christian neighbors, and that the Christians will never come back. And so they came to St John’s today in force, and they showed their faces, and they said, “Come back to Iraq. Come home.” They wanted the cameras to catch it. They wanted to spread the word: Come home. Muslims keep telling me to get it on the news. “Tell the Christians to come home to their country Iraq.”


Don't forget, Michael Yon's reporting is entirely reader-supported. Please contribute a little something to help support the next dispatch. 

UPDATE (11/17): Two comments from Vodkapundit's 11/16 post about Michael Yon's dispatch:

What makes the picture and the people so moving to me is the background of this cross raising event. St. John's Chaldean Catholic Church was car bombed along with two other churches all within minutes of each other exactely one year ago on November 8, 2006. The congregation took down the cross and bells and put them in storage. They cleaned up the interior of the church, and at an Easter liturgy this year they welcomed a Shiite notable, who spoke movingly of the unity of Iraqis. I am touched by the generosity of spirit of these Muslims. The cross and bells are hated by reactionary Muslims. What a magnificent rebuke is this event of neighborliness. This is an icon of tolerance and mutual acceptance and,yes,love.

Posted by Michael Barger at November 16, 2007 10:56 PM
Again, wow. Thank you, Michael, for the additional background information. 

I am neither a Christian nor a Muslim, but this makes me happy for both. "One foot in front of the other"… that is what it takes. How wonderful it is that those feet are usually walking alongside a strong young American idealist. I am so proud of my country and its young warriors for peace.

Posted by sherlock at November 17, 2007 12:49 AM

Like sherlock, I'm neither a Christian nor a Muslim. But I enthusiastically second his comment. There are, as I said recently, many "decent people of good will" in Iraq, and I'm so very proud of them and of the brave and dedicated Americans who are helping them. The scale is smaller, but looking at Michael Yon's photo essay evoked in me many of the same emotions I felt when I watched the Berlin Wall fall — a tremendous feeling of joy and pride about the greatness and glory that we humans are capable of, and a sense of optimism and hope for the future. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Michael Yon: Thanks and Praise

Posted by Richard on November 8, 2007

As regular readers are no doubt aware, I'm not religious. Nonetheless, Michael Yon's latest dispatch from Iraq, Thanks and Praise, moved me. It's yet another example of basically decent people of good will coming together in that country — at great risk to themselves, I'm sure — to declare that they want to live together in peace:

A Muslim man had invited the American soldiers from “Chosen” Company 2-12 Cavalry to the church, where I videotaped as Muslims and Christians worked and rejoiced at the reopening of St John’s, an occasion all viewed as a sign of hope.

The Iraqis asked me to convey a message of thanks to the American people. ” Thank you, thank you,” the people were saying. One man said, “Thank you for peace.” Another man, a Muslim, said “All the people, all the people in Iraq, Muslim and Christian, is brother.” The men and women were holding bells, and for the first time in memory freedom rang over the ravaged land between two rivers. (Videotape to follow.)


By all means, click the link and look at Yon's wonderful, heartwarming photograph. And please make a donation so that his reporting can continue. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Film botched by Fox

Posted by Richard on June 26, 2007

I had high hopes for Muslims Against Jihad, Martyn Burke's second documentary about moderate Muslims standing up against the radical Islamists. I was rather disappointed, and I blame Fox News. The film's continuity and impact were undermined by the many breaks and awkward edits, E.D. Hill's annoyingly hyperbolic commentary, and her relentless focus on PBS instead of the film during the interview segments with Burke and Frank Gaffney. Overall, it seemed more like Fox Against PBS than Muslims Against Jihad.

The film had some good segments, and even the interview had a few interesting moments. Chief among the latter was Burke recounting the meeting with a PBS vice president who wanted him to fire Gaffney for being a conservative and who asked Burke incredulously, "Don't you check into the politics of the people you work with?" Burke said he replied, "No. No, I do not. I check into their journalistic integrity." 

I suppose I'm not really surprised, but it's an outrage that a high-ranking executive at the taxpayer-funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting believes that of course producers should "check into the politics of people."

As for Burke's work, I'd like to see Muslims Against Jihad uncut and uninterrupted. And I still have high hopes for the first of the two documentaries, Islam vs. Islamists, which may finally be shown by individual PBS stations (probably at 3 AM). It got a glowing review from Oscar-nominated screenwriter Roger L. Simon, who knows a little something about good film-making. Simon especially liked that the film is not didactic or propagandistic, but "riveting and creatively made."

Time to start bugging the local PBS affiliates to show Islam vs. Islamists. I suppose I have to send them a check to get their attention, huh?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Must-see TV: Muslims Against Jihad

Posted by Richard on June 23, 2007

Islam vs. Islamists: Voices from the Muslim Center is a documentary about moderate Muslims and the intimidation and threats they're subjected to by the radical Islamists. It was made by Canadian documentary filmmaker Martyn Burke, with a $700,000 grant from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, for the 11-part PBS series America at the Crossroads. But PBS removed the film from the series because it was "alarmist" and not fair to the radical Islamists. 

Read this interview with Burke, who's certainly not a raving neo-con, for the remarkable story. The film's critics at PBS and its D.C. affiliate, WETA, argued that the moderate Muslims in the film weren't "true" Muslims because they believed in democracy and were "Westernized" — the anti-democratic, sharia-promoting Islamists were the truer representatives of Islam and weren't treated fairly in the film! They also demanded that Burke fire co-producers Frank Gaffney and Alex Alexiev because they're conservatives.

Alyssa Lappen posted some interesting details at American Thinker last month about the folks at WETA (which produced the Crossroads series) who nixed Burke's work. One of the five-member committee that killed the documentary is associated with the Nation of Islam. Another is Crossroads producer Leo Eaton, whose father, Charles Eaton, a.k.a. Hassan Abdul Hakeem, is a Muslim convert with numerous ties to radical clerics. 

You can't see the original Islam vs. Islamists yet, although PBS has relented just a bit and will allow the Oregon PBS to show it and make it available to other PBS stations. But tonight Sunday night, the Fox News Channel is airing Burke's companion/spinoff documentary, Muslims Against Jihad. Tune in, Tivo, or fire up the DVR or VCR. It's on at 9 PM Eastern (that's 7 Mountain) and again Sunday morning at 3 AM Eastern.

UPDATE: Fox News rescheduled Muslims Against Jihad for Sunday night at 9 PM so they could give Geraldo and a gaggle of shyster "criminal justice consultants" an extra hour to blather about the breaking news in this week's Crime of the Century. Sheesh.

UPDATE 2: I was disappointed, and I know who to blame: Film botched by Fox


Muslims Against Jihad

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Islam, feminism, and fecklessness

Posted by Richard on May 13, 2007

Happy Mother's Day! If you are a mother, have a mother, or know a mother, if you care about mothers, if you're at all interested in or concerned about women's rights, please go read Christina Hoff Sommers' outstanding essay, "The Subjection of Islamic Women." Subtitled "And the fecklessness of American feminism," it's the cover story in the May 21 issue of The Weekly Standard. It's not a screed or diatribe, and it's not a catalog of atrocities and outrages. It does point its finger at the feckless, but more in sadness than in anger, and it gives credit where it's due. It's a thoughtful look at a shameful situation, but with a hopeful ending:

The subjection of women in Muslim societies–especially in Arab nations and in Iran–is today very much in the public eye. Accounts of lashings, stonings, and honor killings are regularly in the news, and searing memoirs by Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Azar Nafisi have become major best-sellers. One might expect that by now American feminist groups would be organizing protests against such glaring injustices, joining forces with the valiant Muslim women who are working to change their societies. This is not happening.

… During the 1980s, there were massive demonstrations on American campuses against racial apartheid in South Africa. There is no remotely comparable movement on today's campuses against the gender apartheid prevalent in large parts of the world.

… For a brief period before September 11, 2001, many women's groups protested the brutalities of the Taliban. But they have never organized a full-scale mobilization against gender oppression in the Muslim world. The condition of Muslim women may be the most pressing women's issue of our age, but for many contemporary American feminists it is not a high priority. Why not?

One reason is that many feminists are tied up in knots by multiculturalism and find it very hard to pass judgment on non-Western cultures. They are far more comfortable finding fault with American society for minor inequities (the exclusion of women from the Augusta National Golf Club, the "underrepresentation" of women on faculties of engineering) than criticizing heinous practices beyond our shores. The occasional feminist scholar who takes the women's movement to task for neglecting the plight of foreigners is ignored or ruled out of order

Sommers offers a number of examples and cites some women's rights champions critical of their peers to back up her thesis. What most bothers me is the pervasive attitude of moral equivalence. Feminist leaders speak of "Christian Wahhabism" and equate Focus on the Family with the Taliban. The Penguin Atlas of Women in the World describes both the United States and Uganda as having extreme restrictions on women. In Uganda, a man can claim an unmarried woman by raping her. The U.S. got the same rank, according to author Joni Seager, because "state legislators enacted 301 anti-abortion measures between 1995 and 2001." Never mind that U.S. abortion laws are still among the most liberal in the world. 

Sommers takes on Nation columnist Katha Pollitt for her moral equivalence argument:

Soon after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Katha Pollitt wrote the introduction to a book called Nothing Sacred: Women Respond to Religious Fundamentalism and Terror. It aimed to show that reactionary religious movements everywhere are targeting women. Says Pollitt:

In Bangladesh, Muslim fanatics throw acid in the faces of unveiled women; in Nigeria, newly established shariah courts condemn women to death by stoning for having sex outside of wedlock. . . . In the United States, Protestant evangelicals and fundamentalists have forged a powerful right-wing political movement focused on banning abortion, stigmatizing homosexuality and limiting young people's access to accurate information about sex.

Pollitt casually places "limiting young people's access to accurate information about sex" and opposing abortion on the same plane as throwing acid in women's faces and stoning them to death. Her hostility to the United States renders her incapable of distinguishing between private American groups that stigmatize gays and foreign governments that hang them. She has embraced a feminist philosophy that collapses moral categories in ways that defy logic, common sense, and basic decency.

It's not just an essay about the depressing state of American feminism, though. In the final third, Sommers describes the growing Muslim feminist movement: 

The good news is that Muslim women are not waiting around for Western feminists to rescue them. "Feminists in the West may fiddle while Muslim women are burning," wrote Manhattan Institute scholar Kay Hymowitz in a prescient 2003 essay, "but in the Muslim world itself there is a burgeoning movement to address the miserable predicament of the second sex." The number of valiant and resourceful Muslim women who are devoting themselves to the cause of greater freedom grows each and every day.

The courage of Muslim women fighting for their rights is inspiring. As Sommers notes, early American feminists risked being shunned or ridiculed; Muslim feminists risk imprisonment, beatings and torture, even death. But their cause is important not just for women and not just for the Islamic world, as Sommers, quoting Canadian journalist and human rights activist Irshad Manji, observes:

In her 2004 feminist manifesto, The Trouble with Islam Today, Manji writes, "We Muslims . . . are in crisis and we are dragging the rest of the world with us. If ever there was a moment for an Islamic reformation, it's now."

Manji is right: In particular, a feminist reformation could be as dangerous to the dreams of the jihadists as any military assault by the West. After all, the oppression of women is not an incidental feature of the societies that foster terrorism. It is a linchpin of the system of social control that the jihadists are fighting to impose worldwide. Women's equality is as incompatible with radical Islam's plan for domination and submission as it is with polygamy. Women freely moving about, expressing their opinions, and negotiating their relationships with men from a position of equal dignity rather than servitude are a moderating, civilizing force in any society. Female scholars voicing their opinions without inhibition would certainly puncture some cherished jihadist fantasies.

Go read the whole thing. I think it's a truly important essay, and I felt hopeful and uplifted at the end. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Iraqi Shi’ites split from Iran

Posted by Richard on May 13, 2007

This strikes me as very, very good news, so don't expect to see much coverage in the mainstream media:

Iraq's largest Shiite political party split from Iran this week and pledged allegiance to the moderate pro-secularist Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani:

Iraq's biggest Shi'ite party on Saturday pledged its allegiance to the country's top Shi'ite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, in a move that would distance it from Shi'ite Iran where it was formed.

The Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) said it had introduced significant policy changes and changed its name to the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC) — dropping the word "Revolution."

The party, which makes up about a quarter of Prime Minister al Maliki's ruling Shi'ite Alliance, used to take its guidance in religious, social, and political matters from an Iranian religious institution led by Ayatollah Khameini, but not any more:

"We cherish the great role played by the religious establishment headed by Grand Ayatollah Sayed Ali al-Sistani … in preserving the unity of Iraq and the blood of Iraqis and in helping them building a political system based on the constitution and law," said Rida Jawad al-Takki, a senior group member, who read out the party's decisions to reporters.

The party pledged to follow the guidance of the Shi'ite establishment, he said.

Yeah, I know — this will prompt the radical Sunni insurgents and al Qaeda to redouble their efforts to increase the body count and shake America's resolve (such as it is). But it's still a great development that may eventually make a big difference. So, I'll say bravo and best wishes to the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Muslim group defends passengers

Posted by Richard on March 25, 2007

Remember the imams who were removed from a US Airways flight in Minneapolis? They did virtually everything they could to make themselves appear suspicious and frightening, in what I and many others believe was a deliberate attempt to create an incident. Several passengers reported their behavior (members of the air crew had already identified the imams as highly suspicious).

The imams are suing not only US Airways, but also the "John Doe" passengers who reported the suspicious behavior, which is what air travelers are asked to do. 

Rep. Steve Pearce has introduced a bill in Congress to protect airline passengers from lawsuits for reporting suspicious behavior. A religious liberties group that's litigated on behalf of Muslims in the past has condemned the CAIR-backed lawsuit:

"This is a first for us," Kevin Hasson, president of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, wrote in a letter to Nihad Awad, president of CAIR. "We have never opposed someone else's claim for religious discrimination.

"But this tactic of threatening suit against ordinary citizens is so far beyond the tradition of civil rights litigation in the United States that we must oppose it to defend the good name of religious liberty itself," Mr. Hasson said.

A Minneapolis attorney offered to represent the passengers pro bono. But here's the really terrific news — a Muslim organization came to the defense of the passengers:

Meanwhile, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, based in Phoenix, said it will raise money for passengers' defense should they be named and targeted.

Zuhdi Jasser, a Phoenix doctor who is spokesman for the Arizona group, said the imams and their supporters at the Council for Islamic-American Relations in Washington, "are trying to exploit this situation for political ends."Who are the real victims here?" he said of the US Airways incident. "Airports are the front line in the war on terror, and it's outrageous that citizens acting in a neighborhood-watch fashion are targeted."

Bravo, Dr. Jasser! AIFD looks like a fine organization with admirable founding principles. Here's their mission statement (emphasis added):

We proud citizens of the United States of America join together as devoted and patriotic citizens and as devout Muslims in this forum in order to serve as a vehicle for the discussion and public awareness of the complete compatibility of America's founding principles with the very personal faith of Islam which we practice. 

AIFD supports the "separation of religion and state," "equality of the sexes," and the existence of Israel.

I've made a small contribution to AIFD. If, like me, you want the voices of moderate Islam to grow louder and stronger, why not do the same?


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Whither Europe?

Posted by Richard on March 23, 2007

I was stunned a few days ago when I read about the judges in the German state of Hesse who imposed a bizarre Islamic restriction on Muslim girls in the public schools. Little Green Footballs stunned me yet again yesterday with the story of the German judge whose ruling in a divorce case was based on what the Koran says:

The nihilistic dead end of multiculturalism has been attained in Germany, where a female judge seemingly forgot which culture’s laws she was supposed to uphold: German judge rules Koran allows wife abuse. (Hat tip: LGF readers.)

BERLIN (AFP) – A German woman judge has refused a Moroccan-born woman permission to file for divorce by interpreting the Koran as allowing husbands to beat their wives.

It seems there's been a significant uproar over this decision, and the judge has been removed:

BERLIN – Politicians and Muslim leaders denounced a German judge for citing the Koran in her rejection of a Muslim woman's request for a quick divorce on grounds she was abused by her husband.

The judge was removed from the case on Wednesday and the Frankfurt administrative court said it was considering disciplinary action.

… The latest uproar comes amid an ongoing debate in Germany about integrating its more than 3 million Muslims, most of them from Turkey. A decision last year to cancel an opera featuring the severed heads of the Prophet Muhammad and other religious figures out of security concerns caused a furor and was later retracted.

Lawmakers from Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats said traditional Islamic law, or Sharia, had no place in Germany.

"The legal and moral concepts of Sharia have nothing to do with German jurisprudence," Wolfgang Bosbach, a lawmaker with the Christian Democrats, told N24 television.

"One thing must be clear: In Germany, only German law applies. Period."

Ronald Pofalla, the party's general secretary, told Bild: "When the Koran is put above the German constitution, I can only say: Good night, Germany."

The mass-circulation Bild daily asked in a front-page article: "Where are we living?" The left-leaning Tageszeitung headlined its Thursday edition: "In the name of the people: Beating allowed." 

Not everyone's outraged, however. Notice how the AP reporter helps a Muslim group try to put a good spin on a very ugly aspect of their beliefs (emphasis added):

While the Koranic verse cited does say that husbands are allowed to beat their wives if they are disobedient, Germany's Institute for Islamic Questions noted that such an interpretation was no longer standard.

"Of course not all Muslims use violence against their wives," the group said in a statement.

Let me attempt to restate that for you: "Yes, the Koran says 'husbands may beat their wives if they disobey,' and we usually insist on unquestioning 100% obedience to every word in the Koran. But, umm, there's this other interpretation. Really. And besides, some Muslim women don't need to be bea… I mean, some Muslim men don't beat their wives at all. Hardly."

These incidents are just two more data points in the growing mountain of evidence that all is not well in Europe. Daniel Pipes recently considered "Europe's Stark Options" regarding its growing Muslim population and saw three possibilities:

  1. The high religiosity, high fertility, and high cultural confidence of the Muslims will win out over the Europeans' low religiosity, low fertility, and alienation from their own heritage. Europe will become Islamicized.
  2. Many Europeans (outside of the intelligentsia) are becoming resentful of radical Islam's increasing insistence that non-Muslims conform to and accommodate fundamentalist Muslim standards, and this will lead to a backlash that becomes increasingly ugly. In the words of Ralph Peters,  Muslims in Europe "will be lucky just to be deported."
  3. Europeans and Muslim immigrants could follow Rodney King's advice and "just get along." Muslim immigrants would assimilate more, or at least stop pushing for the Islamization of Europe, and would become more tolerant of and integrated into the free, democratic, pluralistic societies in which they've chosen to live.

Pipes seems to think option 3 is not very likely, and it's too soon to tell whether option 1 or 2 will prevail. I hope he's wrong. But there are certainly plenty of people in the European intelligentsia who are furthering option 1, as these German judges illustrate. And there are even more ordinary Europeans who are becoming angry and radicalized, as is clear from the reaction to such instances of dhimmitude and the growing nationalism and anti-immigrant sentiment in many parts of Europe.

I have to believe that there are lots of Muslim immigrants in Europe who don't want Sharia — who emigrated at least partly to escape from the oppressive feudal strictures of their homeland. But the Saudi-funded radical Wahhabists at the mosques are turning some of their kids into jihadists. Are these people just too scared to stand up and speak out?

We're constantly reminded that most Muslims are peaceful, tolerant people. I'd like to think it's true, but in Europe as in the U.S., those peaceful, moderate Muslims are virtually invisible. So Europe's many appeasers and cowards keep submitting to the threats of the violent and intolerant Muslims, and everyone else gets angrier and angrier. It's a path to disaster, and it's those peaceful, moderate Muslims — if they exist in large numbers — who must act to stop it. For their own sakes, if not for everyone else's.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

An Arab-American Jack Bauer fan

Posted by Richard on February 9, 2007

Opinion Journal has a very nice column entitled "In defense of ’24’" by Syrian-American writer Emilio Karim Dabul. Dabul is a fan of both the fictional Jack Bauer and his real-life counterparts:

I am an Arab-American as well as a fan of "24." The two things are not mutually exclusive, despite what the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other such groups have to say about this season’s opening episodes possibly increasing anti-Muslim and anti-Arab prejudice in American society.

Most of the terrorists represented in "24" through the years have been Arab Muslims. Why? Well, probably because most terrorists today are, in fact, Arab Muslims. …

There is a dangerous trend in the U.S. today that involves skirting the truth at the risk of offending any individual or group. When Bill Cosby talks to African-Americans about self-respect and responsibility, and says publicly what many have been saying privately for years, he’s branded a "reactionary," "misinformed," "judgmental," and so on. When "24" confronts America’s worst fears about al Qaeda–whose goal remains to kill as many Americans as possible whenever possible–the show is said to be guilty of fueling anti-Muslim and anti-Arab prejudice.

Well, here’s the hard, cold truth: When Islamic terrorists stop being a threat to America’s survival, viewers will lose interest in "24," because it will have lost its relevancy. Until such time, I will continue to watch "24"–because, believe it or not, the idea that there are Jack Bauers out there in real life risking their lives to save ours does mean something to me.

Dabul is decidedly not a fan of CAIR. Bravo for him, and I’m glad he’s speaking out. I only wish that an Arab-American speaking out unequivocally against terrorism and its apologists, aiders, and abettors like CAIR weren’t so noteworthy. I wish this were commonplace, a "ho-hum" event instead of a rarity.

Go read the whole thing.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Muslims rally against terrorism

Posted by Richard on May 15, 2005

Free Muslims Against Terrorism held a rally today in Washington, D.C. Here’s how the group describes itself:

The Free Muslims Against Terrorism is a nonprofit organization made up of American Muslims and American Arabs of all backgrounds who feel that religious violence and terrorism have not been fully rejected by the Muslim community in the post 9-11 era.

Free Muslims was created to eliminate broad base support for Islamic extremism and terrorism and to strengthen secular democratic institutions in the Middle East and the Muslim World by supporting Islamic reformation efforts.

Over 70 organizations endorsed the rally, from the Alliance for Democracy In Iran to the Objectivist Center. But the big "mainstream" Muslim groups, like CAIR and MSA (which Daniel Pipes says are Wahhabi/Saudi funded and controlled) opposed it.

The Autonomist live-blogged it. Sadly, only about 150 people showed up (they had hoped for 1000).

As a Life Member of the Libertarian Party, I was saddened — and embarrassed — by this, too (emphasis added):

1:29: Rocco just spoke with a representative of the Libertarian party who described Mr. Nawash [founder of Free Muslims] as a "dupe of the neocons." She went on to state that the neocons will use his speech to boost their cause." "Their cause" was defined by her to be making war with Iran and Iraq. When asked for evidence of this she simply stated: "Just go on to some websites and read about it." Real specific, huh?

With representation such as this, no wonder the Libertarian party membership is in a downward spiral.

Rocco also stated that he has been handed a flyer with not only the Green party info, but also with Libertarian info as well. He asked if this was usual for the two parties, and was told "no, only in cases of war."

Well, maybe she wasn’t an official representative of the LP… (Although there were those flyers…)

Does the LP now think the US government is so eeevil that Islamofascists and socialists are more palatable?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »