Tag Archives: islam

Hometown Heartbreak for NY Times: Mosque Opposition Spreads to Sophisticated New York City

Well fancy that: The New York Times has learned what Times Watch has been pointing out for weeks: Not even New Yorkers want a large mosque built two blocks from the site of the 9-11 terrorist attacks. New York City residents were previously praised by Times reporters like Sheryl Gay Stolberg as better informed and thus more tolerant of the idea of a mosque at Ground Zero than ignorant outsiders. But a New York Times poll conducted last week showed that New Yorkers don’t like the idea of building a mosque near the site of the 9-11 terrorist attacks anymore than the rest of the country. In fact, New York City residents (that includes Manhattan and the outer boroughs) oppose it by a 50 margin. Yes, the nationwide opposition to the construction, twice declaimed as a ” nativist impulse ” by the paper’s main political writer Matt Bai, has infected even the tolerant, sophisticated liberals of Manhattan. Building its story around the poll, reporters Michael Barbaro and Marjorie Connelly reported on last Friday’s front page: ” New Yorkers Divided Over Islamic Center, Poll Finds .” (Actually New Yorkers are more than merely divided but are mostly opposed to the mosque being built near Ground Zero.) Two-thirds of New York City residents want a planned Muslim community center and mosque to be relocated to a less controversial site farther away from ground zero in Lower Manhattan, including many who describe themselves as supporters of the project, according to a New York Times poll. The poll indicates that support for the 13-story complex, which organizers said would promote moderate Islam and interfaith dialogue, is tepid in its hometown. …. Over all, 50 percent of those surveyed oppose building the project two blocks north of the World Trade Center site, even though a majority believe that the developers have the right to do so. Thirty-five percent favor it. Opposition is more intense in the boroughs outside Manhattan — for example, 54 percent in the Bronx — but it is even strong in Manhattan, considered a bastion of religious tolerance, where 41 percent are against it. The poll was conducted Aug. 27 to 31 with 892 adults. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points. It suggested that Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, the center’s most ardent and public defender, has not unified public opinion around the issue. Asked if they approved or disapproved of how he had handled the subject, city residents were evenly split. Indeed, Times reporters took to Twitter to gush over NYC Mayor Bloomberg’s weepy speech in defense of building the mosque near the site of terrorist attacks committed in the name of Islam. The Times worked in its standard jab against Newt and Palin as outsiders (albeit outsiders who are on the side of the majority of New Yorkers on this issue): While a majority said politicians in New York should take a stand on the issue, most disapprove of those outside the city weighing in: Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin, among others, have tried to rally opposition to the center. The article was accompanied on the editorial page by a righteously concerned editorial, ” Mistrust and the Mosque ,” moaning over how New Yorkers have failed to teach a moral lesson to the ignorant masses. The furor over the proposed Islamic cultural center and mosque near ground zero keeps giving us new reasons for dismay. As politicians and commentators work themselves and viewers into a rage, others who should be standing up for freedom and tolerance tiptoe away. To the growing pile of discouragement, add this: A New York Times poll of New York City residents that found that even this city, the country’s most diverse and cosmopolitan , is not immune to suspicion and to a sadly wary misunderstanding of Muslim-Americans. …. Tolerance, however, isn’t the same as understanding, so it is appalling to see New Yorkers who could lead us all away from mosque madness, who should know better, playing to people’s worst instincts.

See the original post:
Hometown Heartbreak for NY Times: Mosque Opposition Spreads to Sophisticated New York City

Dallas Pastor Defends Claim That Islam ‘Promotes Pedophilia’

Prominent Pastor Robert Jeffress of the First Baptist Church of Dallas gave a sermon a few weeks ago saying, among other things: “The deep, dark, dirty secret of Islam: It is a religion that promotes pedophilia – sex with children. This so-called prophet Muhammad raped a 9-year-old girl – had sex with her.” Now Jeffress has doubled down on his claim in a sermon on Sunday, responding to a column by Steve Blow in The Dallas Morning News that condemned the pastor's remarks. “It is our love for Muslims that demands we speak the truth about Islam,” Jeffress said Sunday. Here's what happened: First Baptist's Sunday evening service on August 22 featured an “Ask the Pastor” segment, in which Jeffress called Islam “oppressive” and violent.” He also said that “around the world today, you have Muslim men having sex with 4-year-old girls, taking them as their brides, because they believe the prophet Muhammad did it.” “I believe,” Jeffress added, “as Christians and conservatives, it's time to take off the gloves and stand up and tell the truth about this evil, evil religion.” added by: TimALoftis

CNN’s Chetry to Koran Burning Pastor: You’ll Have Blood on Your Hands

On Tuesday’s American Morning, CNN’s Kiran Chetry used General David Petraeus’s denunciation of a planned Koran burning by a church to blast the church’s pastor for any subsequent deaths of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan: ” Are you willing to have the blood of soldiers on your hands by this demonstration? ” Chetry also lectured Pastor Terry Jones over his apparent lack of “refined” Christianity. Chetry interviewed Pastor Jones 41 minutes into the 7 am Eastern hour. After asking him why he and his church were planning to burn Korans, the anchor launched into her critique of the minister: “I wanted to let you say your piece, because when I first read this story, I thought there’s no way that this could be as bad as it sounds. It appears that it is . You’re saying that you’re going to burn the holy book of another religion to send a message to the radical elements of that religion, with no thought to the fact that you’d obviously be highly offending everyone in that religion. How do you justify that?” Later in the segment, Chetry turned theologian and quoted Scripture to Pastor Jones as she continued to question his planned action: ” What about turn thy cheek? I mean, this is- you know, Christianity at its most- you know, refined. It’s that you just don’t act out in violence. You don’t act out in any manner of hate, that you turn thy cheek, that you don’t rise to the nastiness or the level of payback that your perceived enemies do. I mean, isn’t this the exact opposite of what Christ taught all of us to be and to do? ” The CNN anchor’s “blood on your hands” remark came moments later: CHETRY: I just want to ask you this: does it bother you that the military and the military leaders believe that by doing this, you are very likely putting the risk- the lives of U.S. soldiers at risk in Muslim countries? David Petraeus, the general- this is what he said: ‘Their actions will in fact jeopardize the safety of young men and women who are serving in uniform over here, and also undermine the very mission that they’re trying to accomplish.’ Are you willing to have the blood of soldiers on your hands by this demonstration? As she wrapped up the interview, Chetry again questioned Pastor Jones’s Christianity. After the minister emphasized that Islamists “must be shown a certain amount of force, a certain amount of determination,” the anchor replied, ” That doesn’t sound like the Christianity most of us were taught .” Earlier in the segment, Chetry stated how “freedom of religion is…one aspect of what makes our country so great and different from many countries around the world,” in the context of Muslims’ right to worship and build mosques, such as the Ground Zero mosque, but didn’t once raise how Pastor Jones and his church have the First Amendment right to burn Korans. This isn’t surprising, given how CNN has been using their coverage to press how “Islamophobia” is apparently sweeping the nation. The full transcript of Kiran Chetry’s interview of Pastor Terry Jones on Tuesday’s American Morning: CHETRY: This morning, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan says that a Florida church’s plan to burn the Koran on 9/11 could put the U.S. mission there and our troops at risk. Hundreds of Muslims in Afghanistan are protesting the decision, chanting, ‘Long Live Islam;’ ‘Death to America,’ we saw. That’s the latest video of the Kabul protests. There’s been others in Indonesia, as well as other places. Joining us now from the Dove Outreach World Center in Gainesville, Florida, is Terry Jones, a reverend of the church, senior pastor and the man behind the event. Thanks for joining us this morning to talk more about this, Terry. One of the things I’m wondering is- PASTOR TERRY JONES: Thank you. CHETRY: This rally is set to take place Saturday- of course, that’s September 11th. It’s also the last day of the Ramadan fast, the holiest day known as Eid in the Muslim religion. Why are you going to burn Korans? JONES: Yeah, we first declared September 11th, ‘International Burn a Koran Day’- actually, for two reasons. Number one, we wanted to remember those who were brutally murdered on September 11th. And actually, we wanted to send a very clear message to the radical element of Islam. We wanted to send a very clear message to them that we are not interested in their Sharia law. We do not tolerate their threats, their fear, their radicalness. We live in the United States of America. We want to send a clear message to the peaceful Muslims. We have freedom of speech. We have freedom of religion. They are more than welcome to be here- more than welcome to worship- more than welcome to build mosques. But our 9/11 demonstration- our 9/11 protest is to send a clear message to the radical element of Islam that we will not tolerate that in America. CHETRY: Well, I wanted to let you say your piece, because when I first read this story, I thought there’s no way that this could be as bad as it sounds. It appears that it is. You’re saying that you’re going to burn the holy book of another religion to send a message to the radical elements of that religion, with no thought to the fact that you’d obviously be highly offending everyone in that religion. How do you justify that? JONES: Well, we realized that this action would indeed offend people- offend the Muslims. I am offended when they burn the flag. I am offended when they burn the Bible. But we feel that the message that we are trying to send is much more important than people being offended. We believe that we cannot back off of the truth of the dangers of Islam- of the dangers of radical Islam just because people are going to be offended. Overseas, we see they have no problem burning our flag. They have no problem calling for the death of America- the death of our president- CHETRY: Right, but this isn’t overseas, this is America. I mean, part of- JONES: So we feel it’s time to stand up. CHETRY: But this isn’t overseas, I mean, this is America, and you just said that you welcome peaceful Muslims and you welcome people who build Korans [sic]. I mean- you know, freedom of religion is what- is one aspect of what makes our country so great and different from many countries around the world. So why would you want to play into that? JONES: We’re not playing into it at all. I just made a very clear statement. Muslims are welcome here. They are welcome to worship, as long as they submit to- obey the Constitution of the United States- do not, sooner or later, try to institute Sharia law in America. Our message is very clear- it is not to the moderate Muslim. Our message is not a message of hate. Our message is a message of warning to the radical element of Islam, and I think what we see right now, around the globe, proves exactly what we’re talking about. CHETRY: What about turn thy cheek? I mean, this is- you know, Christianity at its most- you know, refined. It’s that you just don’t act out in violence. You don’t act out in any manner of hate, that you turn thy cheek, that you don’t rise to the nastiness or the level of payback that your perceived enemies do. I mean, isn’t this the exact opposite of what Christ taught all of us to be and to do? JONES: I agree with you exactly. I think, most of the time, we as Christians are indeed called to turn the other cheek. I believe that, most of the time, talk and diplomacy is the correct way. But I also think that once in a while- I think you see that in the Bible- there are incidents where enough is enough and you stand up. Jesus went into the temple and he threw all of the money-changers out. He did not ask them to leave. He was not peaceful. He was at that time very, very upset. Even when this very close friend and disciple, Peter- even when he tried to stop Jesus from fulfilling his will- from fulfilling the father’s will, Jesus called him the devil. Jesus called the religious leaders of that time serpents and snakes. So I agree that, most of the time, diplomacy and turning the other cheek is the proper way, but sometimes not. CHETRY: Are you- you don’t care- I mean, yes or no- you don’t really care if you’re offending Muslims by burning the Koran, right? That doesn’t bother you if they’re offended? JONES: We realize that we are definitely offending them, yes. CHETRY: Okay. So I want to ask you this: does it bother you though- JONES: But we actually think that Muslims should- CHETRY: I just want to ask you this: does it bother you that the military and the military leaders believe that by doing this, you are very likely putting the risk- the lives of U.S. soldiers at risk in Muslim countries? David Petraeus, the general- this is what he said: ‘Their actions will in fact jeopardize the safety of young men and women who are serving in uniform over here, and also undermine the very mission that they’re trying to accomplish.’ Are you willing to have the blood of soldiers on your hands by this demonstration? JONES: Yeah, we are actually very, very concerned, of course, and we are taking the general’s words very serious. We are continuing to pray about the action on September 11th. We are indeed very concerned about it. It’s just that we don’t know- I mean, how long do we back down? When do we stop backing down? CHETRY: So you’re saying that you very might- you’re saying that you might well go through with this? You’re saying that you’re praying about it, you may not burn the Koran on September 11th? JONES: I’m saying that we are definitely praying about it. We have firmly made up our mind, but at the same time, we are definitely praying about it. But like I said, I mean, how long- I mean, when does America stand for truth? I mean, instead of us being blamed for what other people will do or might do, why don’t we send a warning to them? Why don’t we send a warning to radical Islam and say- look, don’t do it. CHETRY: Well, I’m not questioning- JONES: If you attack us- if you attack us, we will attack you. CHETRY: I am not questioning your intelligence, but I am wondering if you thought through the consequences of doing this, of what may happen, and whether or not you’ll end up doing far more harm than good? JONES: We are definitely doing that. We are definitely weighing the situation. We are weighing the thing that we’re about to do, what it possibly could cause, what is our actual message, what are we trying to get across, how important is that to us right now- that is very, very important that America wakes up. It’s very important that our president wakes up. It’s very important that we see the real danger of radical Islam. That’s what we’re talking about. Actually, everyone should be in agreement with us. CHETRY: All right. We have to go. JONES: There should be no disagreement there. We are not against Muslims. We’re not against the mosque. We’re against the radical element of Islam. Even moderate Muslims should be on our side. CHETRY: No moderate Muslim is going to be on your side when you’re burning their holy book. I mean, that just sounds silly. JONES: Of course, it’s not silly. You can separate yourself from that- CHETRY: You’re burning their holy book. They’re supposed to be on their side. I don’t get that part. Listen- JONES: You can say- we are not for the burning of the book, but we are for what this man is saying. What he is doing, we’re not for that. We don’t believe in burning our holy book, we don’t believe in burning the Koran- CHETRY: Just reasoning this through, don’t you think you could possibly reach out to more people by not burning the Koran on September 11th? JONES: But what he is saying- we are actually for that. We are against radical Islam. Excuse me? CHETRY: I said, don’t you think you could possibly do more good about bringing attention to your concerns about radical Islam by not burning the Koran on September 11th, by saying, you know what? We’re going to take the higher road here- we’re not going to do this? JONES: At this time, no. CHETRY: All right. JONES: I believe that we are dealing with an element that you cannot talk to. We are dealing with an element- they must be shown a certain amount of force, a certain amount of determination, and putting a stop to it. CHETRY: That doesn’t sound like the Christianity most of us were taught, but, you know what? I thank you for your time and your perspective this morning. Dr. Terry Jones, thanks for being with us. JONES: Thank you.

See the rest here:
CNN’s Chetry to Koran Burning Pastor: You’ll Have Blood on Your Hands

Funny picture of the day – Bra busters

Funny picture of the day – Bra busters http://www.signsfunny.com/2010/09/07/funny-picture-of-the-day-bra-busters/ added by: susuru

Gib mir dein Rot

Art Vernissage Berlin-Mitte janinebeangallery.com + twowindowproject.com Gib mir dein Rot Tanja Selzer + Klaas Bosch solo exhibition. Muscic composed by Stefan Lischewski perfomed by Kornelia Tamm. All artists are present. added by: modezone

Slate: Free Exercise of Religion? No, Thanks. | The Taming and Domestication of Religious Faith Is One of the Unceasing Chores of Civilization

Free Exercise of Religion? No, Thanks.The taming and domestication of religious faith is one of the unceasing chores of civilization. By Christopher Hitchens Posted Monday, Sept. 6, 2010, at 11:39 AM ET A recent blizzard of liberal columns has framed the debate over American Islam as if it were no more than the most recent stage in the glorious history of our religious tolerance. This phrasing of the question has the (presumably intentional) effect of marginalizing doubts and of lumping any doubters with the anti-Catholic Know-Nothings, the anti-Semites, and other bigots and shellbacks. So I pause to take part in a thought experiment, and to ask myself: Am I in favor of the untrammeled “free exercise of religion”? No, I am not. Take an example close at hand, the absurdly named Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. More usually known as the Mormon church, it can boast Glenn Beck as one of its recruits. He has recently won much cheap publicity for scheduling a rally on the anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s March on Washington. But on the day on which the original rally occurred in 1963, the Mormon church had not yet gotten around to recognizing black people as fully human or as eligible for full membership. (Its leadership subsequently underwent a “revelation” allowing a change on this point, but not until after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.) This opportunism closely shadowed an earlier adjustment of Mormon dogma, abandoning its historic and violent attachment to polygamy. Without that doctrinal change, the state of Utah was firmly told that it could not be part of the Union. More recently, Gov. Mitt Romney had to assure voters that he did not regard the prophet, or head of the Mormon church, as having ultimate moral and spiritual authority on all matters. Nothing, he swore, could override the U.S. Constitution. Thus, to the extent that we view latter-day saints as acceptable, and agree to overlook their other quaint and weird beliefs, it is to the extent that we have decidedly limited them in the free exercise of their religion. One could cite some other examples, such as those Christian sects that disapprove of the practice of medicine. Their adult members are generally allowed to die while uttering religious incantations and waving away the physician, but, in many states, if they apply this faith to their children—a crucial element in the “free exercise” of religion—they can be taken straight to court. Not only that, they can find themselves subject to general disapproval and condemnation. Advertisement It was probably the latter consideration that helped impel the majority of American Orthodox Jews to give up the practice of metzitzah b'peh, a radical form of male circumcision that is topped off, if you will forgive the expression, by the sucking of the infant's penis by the rabbi or mohel so as to remove any remaining blood or debris. A few tiny sects still cling to this disgusting ritual, which in New York a few years ago led to a small but deadly outbreak of herpes among recently circumcised babies. On that occasion, despite calls for a ban on the practice from many Jewish doctors, the vastly overrated Mayor Michael Bloomberg chose an election year to say that such “free exercise” should not be interfered with. We talk now as if it was ridiculous ever to suspect Roman Catholics of anything but the highest motives, yet by the time John F. Kennedy was breaking the unspoken taboo on the election of a Catholic as president, the Vatican had just begun to consider making public atonement for centuries of Jew-hatred and a more recent sympathy for fascism. Even today, many lay Catholics are appalled at the Vatican's protection of men who are sought for questioning in one of the gravest of all crimes: the organized rape of children. It is generally agreed that the church's behavior and autonomy need to be modified to take account both of American law and American moral outrage. So much for the naive invocation of “free exercise.” One could easily go on. The Church of Scientology, the Unification Church of Sun Myung Moon, and the Ku Klux Klan are all faith-based organizations and are all entitled to the protections of the First Amendment. But they are also all subject to a complex of statutes governing tax-exemption, fraud, racism, and violence, to the point where “free exercise” in the third case has—by means of federal law enforcement and stern public disapproval—been reduced to a vestige of its former self. Now to Islam. It is, first, a religion that makes very large claims for itself, purporting to be the last and final word of God and expressing an ambition to become the world's only religion. Some of its adherents follow or advocate the practice of plural marriage, forced marriage, female circumcision, compulsory veiling of women, and censorship of non-Muslim magazines and media. Islam's teachings generally exhibit suspicion of the very idea of church-state separation. Other teachings, depending on context, can be held to exhibit a very strong dislike of other religions, as well as of heretical forms of Islam. Muslims in America, including members of the armed forces, have already been found willing to respond to orders issued by foreign terrorist organizations. Most disturbingly, no authority within the faith appears to have the power to rule decisively that such practices, or such teachings, or such actions, are definitely and utterly in conflict with the precepts of the religion itself. Reactions from even “moderate” Muslims to criticism are not uniformly reassuring. “Some of what people are saying in this mosque controversy is very similar to what German media was saying about Jews in the 1920s and 1930s,” Imam Abdullah Antepli, Muslim chaplain at Duke University, told the New York Times. Yes, we all recall the Jewish suicide bombers of that period, as we recall the Jewish yells for holy war, the Jewish demands for the veiling of women and the stoning of homosexuals, and the Jewish burning of newspapers that published cartoons they did not like. What is needed from the supporters of this very confident faith is more self-criticism and less self-pity and self-righteousness. Those who wish that there would be no mosques in America have already lost the argument: Globalization, no less than the promise of American liberty, mandates that the United States will have a Muslim population of some size. The only question, then, is what kind, or rather kinds, of Islam it will follow. There's an excellent chance of a healthy pluralist outcome, but it's very unlikely that this can happen unless, as with their predecessors on these shores, Muslims are compelled to abandon certain presumptions that are exclusive to themselves. The taming and domestication of religion is one of the unceasing chores of civilization. Those who pretend that we can skip this stage in the present case are deluding themselves and asking for trouble not just in the future but in the immediate present. added by: EthicalVegan

Petraeus "Planned Burning of Qur’ans Could Endanger Troops"

KABUL—The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said the planned burning of Qurans on Sept. 11 by a small Florida church could put the lives of American troops in danger and damage the war effort. Gen. David Petraeus said the Taliban would exploit the demonstration for propaganda purposes, drumming up anger toward the U.S. and making it harder for allied troops to carry out their mission of protecting Afghan civilians. “It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort,” Gen. Petraeus said in an interview. “It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community.” Hundreds of Afghans attended a demonstration in Kabul on Monday to protest the plans of Florida pastor Terry Jones, who has said he will burn copies of Islam's holy book to mark the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Afghan protesters chanted “death to America,” and speakers called on the U.S. to withdraw its troops. Some protesters threw rocks at a passing military convoy. Military officials fear the protests will likely spread to other Afghan cities, especially if the event is broadcast or ends up on Internet video. Mr. Jones, head of the 50-member Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Fla., said in a statement that “We understand the General's concerns. We are sure that his concerns are legitimate.” Nonetheless, he added, “We must send a clear message to the radical element of Islam. We will no longer be controlled and dominated by their fears and threats.” Mr. Jones has been denied a permit for the demonstration, but has said he plans to go forward with the protest. Rev. Stephanie Sapp, spokeswoman for the center, said no one from the Pentagon or other federal agencies had expressed concern or asked that the event be canceled. She did say that the Federal Bureau of Investigation had discussed security measures. Pentagon officials said they were not aware that any Defense officials have reached out directly to Mr. Jones. But military officers said they hoped that Gen. Petraeus's statement—an unusual move since military commanders rarely get involved in politics—would convince Mr. Jones to change his plans. Gen. Petraeus declined to elaborate on the nature of the threats or violence that could occur, but westerners in Afghanistan have been warned away from restaurants and other public places amid the rising tensions. Other senior military leaders echoed Gen. Petraeus commentsMonday. Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, who oversees the effort to train Afghan security forces said he was informed of the planned Florida protests several days ago by a senior minister in the Afghan government. (more at link) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703713504575475500753093116.html?m… added by: existentialist

Africans have ‘child rape gene’: Sweden Democrat

A blog post by a local Sweden Democrat politician, Per T K Wahlberg, in which he claims that black Africans are genetically programmed to rape children, has raised questions about the party's attempts to distance itself from open racism. Wahlberg occupies 26th place on the Sweden Democrats list for municipal elections in Landskrona in southern Sweden and he currently sits on the culture committee and election commission. The party claimed 11 seats in Landskrona municipality at the last election in 2006. On his blog “Landskronabackspegel” (Literally: Landskrona rearview mirror) Wahlberg, a 76-year-old retiree and one of the party's more experienced members, published a post on the genetic characteristics of black Africans: “For many thousands of years, the Negro could chill out in the heat, eat some bananas, rape some passing woman or child, fight with other negro males and eat them up, play the drums a little, run around a bit, catch an antelope, eat a few bananas, love a bit, get drunk on fermented fruits or herbs, and so on. This has been going on for millennia without any evolutionary pressure in the form of environmental factors forcing the negro to develop in another direction.” Wahlberg told The Local on Friday that the quotes are all taken from the provocative Swedish political and media discussion forum Flashback, and are written “ironically”. Nevertheless, he declined to distance himself from the broad content of the post. “You could say that some parts have some truth to them. But generally speaking it is written with irony,” he said. In a prior recent interview with the local Helsingborgs Dagblad (HD) daily, Wahlberg was more forthright over his personal views. “I think that it was quite an accurate description. If we look at history, then humanity began in Africa once upon a time, and then there were some who emigrated to Europe and Asia. But at what level are they now? Not much has happened over these thousands of years,” he told the newspaper. Wahlberg's blog furthermore includes several recent posts critical of Islam and Muslims. Despite the nature of his blog, Wahlberg told The Local late Friday morning that he has not received any internal criticism from the party hierarchy. However, in the wake of the attention given to Wahlberg's blog by Sweden's mainstream media, he has since left the party. Sweden Democrat party secretary Bj

Inconvenient Truth: 10 Times More Hate Crimes Against Jews Than Muslims

If you believed the media, you would think that hate crimes against Muslims was a growing epidemic in America. Just Monday, the New York Times had a front page story hysterically noting a “torrent of anti-Muslim sentiments and a spate of vandalism.” “The knifing of a Muslim cab driver in New York City has also alarmed many American Muslims,” wrote Laurie Goodstein in the second paragraph of her article titled “American Muslims Ask, Will We Ever Belong?” Unfortunately, as Michael Doyle reported on August 28, the most recent data concerning hate crimes in this country paint a very different picture than what Goodstein and others in the media have been dishonestly portraying of late: Hate crimes directed against Muslims remain relatively rare, notwithstanding the notoriety gained by incidents such as recent vandalism at the Madera Islamic Center. Jews, lesbians, gay men and Caucasians, among others, are all more frequently the target of hate crimes, FBI records show. Reported anti-Muslim crimes have declined over recent years, though they still exceed what occurred prior to the 9-11 terrorist attacks. In 2008, 105 hate crime incidents against Muslims were reported nationwide. There were 10 times as many incidents that were recorded as anti-Jewish during the same year, the most recent for which figures are available. The San Francisco Examiner broke those numbers down a little further: According to the latest hate crime statistics available , there were 1,606 hate crime offenses motivated by religious bias in 2008. A closer look: 65.7 percent of them were committed against Jews. Against Muslims? 7.7 percent. Another interesting data point: 4.7 percent of hate crimes in 2008 were motivated by anti-Catholic bias. Another 3.7 percent were anti-Protestant. So from a raw numbers perspective, there were more hate crimes against Christians in America in 2008 than there were against Muslims. Given our large Christian population, it’s true that each Christian is far less likely to be victimized, but the numbers still show that religious haters have not been singling out Muslims. Some data provided by USA Today last November also helps to put this in perspective: The number of attacks on blacks increased 8% to 2,876, accounting for seven of every 10 race-motivated crimes. Hate crimes based on sexual orientation increased 3% to 1,297,although the number of people victimized went up 13% to 1,706. So, in 2008, the last year such statistics were available, there were 2,876 hate crimes against blacks, 1,297 against gays, and 1,055 against Jews. Yet, with only 105 such disgusting acts committed against Muslims, America’s media want you to believe this nation is Islamophobic. Consider their premise as you watch the following video of a pro-Palestinian rally that took place in Washington, D.C., Friday (h/t Right Scoop ): Imagine the wall-to-wall, 24 hour media coverage that would ensue if rabbis at a pro-Israel rally spoke with such vitriol about Muslims. On the flipside, filmmaker Oliver Stone in July said America’s “Jewish-dominated media” prevent Adolf Hitler from being portrayed in his proper context. The prior month, the historically anti-Semitic Helen Thomas said Jews should go back to Germany or Poland and “get the hell out of Palestine.” A month before that, Comedy Central’s website offered an astonishingly anti-Semitic video game wherein one character said, “You lied to me, Jew producer.”    A month before that, a report was released showing that anti-Semitic acts around the world had more than doubled in 2009 reaching levels never seen since figures started being kept on such things, and our media almost totally ignored these disturbing findings.  Yet America’s an Islamophobic nation – don’t you ever forget it!

View post:
Inconvenient Truth: 10 Times More Hate Crimes Against Jews Than Muslims

NPR Compares Palin, Gingrich to Historic Anti-Semites, Sympathizes with Former CAIR Publicist

National Public Radio is strongly urging America to get over its apparently rabid case of Islamophobia. On Sunday night’s All Things Considered  newscast, anchor  Guy Raz played audio clips of Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin opposing the Ground Zero Mosque, and then launched into how much this resembles historic anti-Semitism: In his column today, New York Times writer Nicholas Kristof points out that in 1940, 17 percent of the population considered Jews to be a menace to America. Almost every ethnic group in this country has gone through a period of transition when they had to fight to prove that, indeed, they were Americans. Rabiah Ahmed and a group of Muslim leaders thought their community had to do the same today. So this week, they launched an online video campaign called “My Faith, My Voice.” What Raz does not point out is that Rabiah Ahmed is a former publicist and prominent national spokesperson for the Council for Islamic-American Relations (CAIR), a group named as an un-indicted co-conspirator in a terrorist funding case. Raz didn’t so much conduct a news interview with Rabiah Ahmed as much as he joined her in condemning the sad and bigoted state of America today:    RAZ: Rabiah, how did it get to this point, you know, where, in a sense, you’re stating what should be painfully obvious, that people who practice the Muslim faith in America are Americans just like anyone else ? Ms. AHMED: You know, it is sad that it has to be said, but it’s necessary nonetheless because this rhetoric, these anti-Muslim feelings, they’re not just coming from the usual right-wing or agenda-driven circles. Polls indicate that these fears are widespread. They’re in the hearts of average Americans, moderate Americans. And that’s what’s so concerning about this. In the post-9/11 climate, there was anti-Muslim backlash, but it wasn’t so open. It wasn’t so hostile, and it wasn’t so widespread. And whatever the Muslim community has been doing in the past 10 years, it’s been a good effort, but for some reason, it’s not achieving its goal. RAZ: Do you think, as a society, we’re in the midst of maybe a passing storm, you know, something that we will look back on in 10 or 20 years from now and wonder how it ever came to this ? Ms. AHMED: I hope so. I hope it is a passing storm. I hope that it’s just a matter of time where Muslims are seen as part and parcel of the society. You know, if we look back at our history, other communities have faced this kind of discrimination or these kinds of feelings, and they’ve been able to overcome. But it’s not going to happen by itself. The Muslim community is going to really have to reach out in different ways, you know, through interfaith relations, through public service announcements, through whatever way that people can contribute and try to address these issues because if it’s not done, then there’s a potential of it just getting worse. RAZ: That’s Rabiah Ahmed. She’s one of the people behind a new online video campaign called “My Faith, My Voice.”  Rabiah Ahmed, thank you so much. Ms. AHMED: Thank you for having me. The “My Faith, My Voice” organizers claimed they are absolutely unaffiliated. But is Ahmed or her Mirza Public Relations firm being paid, and if so, by whom? NPR’s anchor didn’t care enough to ask, at least not for the public. Before this sympathetic exchange, Raz explained “In a few moments, we’ll find out why Muslims in one grassroots movement have decided to remind their fellow Americans that, well, they’re Americans too.” But first, he found some American Muslims who found the current rhetorical environment is endangering their safety: HUSSEIN NAGAMEA(ph): My name is Hussein Nagamea. I have no time since my immigration to the United States felt that I was unsafe in this country until now, recently. BARBARA KHANDAKAR: I am careful about who I talk to in public, not so much just talking to them, but other Muslims that I greet, I don’t automatically go say, hi, assalamu alaikum, because I don’t want to draw attention to myself that I’m Muslim or that they’re Muslim, just in case someone out there might be crazy. ZIYA NASIR: You kind of feel afraid that everyone thinks that way, you know, everyone who’s not Muslim believes that. That is probably the most frightening out of everything. So this is how it works at taxpayer-supported radio. If you’re non-Muslim and think Muslims are endangering your safety, you’re a bigot. If you’re Muslim and you think non-Muslims are endangering your safety, you’re handed a microphone and a pat on the back.

The rest is here:
NPR Compares Palin, Gingrich to Historic Anti-Semites, Sympathizes with Former CAIR Publicist