For years I have subscribed to Steve Emerson's website Investigative Project on Terrorism. To me Islam, however, based on the Qur'an a doctrine of the sword, yet to reform is a problem. And Islam likely never will reform in my life time. The Muslim organizations try everything to spread their words, particularly the soft-sell of Sharia. The CBC has continued with Little Mosque in the Prairie as part of the promotion of Muslims are like us. I don't think so. They become like us when they accept freedom, democrary, separartion of mosque and state, and assimilate. One of the biggest problems we have in North America is the homegrown jihadis. A sane voice in the wilderness - Peter Worthington, Toronto Sun U.S. author warns jihadism a threat to moderate Muslims, too TORONTO - Last week, on Michael Coren’s Agenda show on Sun News TV, Steve Emerson discussed realities of Islam in America in a way that is seldom heard, but is hard to dispute. Coren, himself, seemed somewhat shaken by his guest’s knowledge and warnings about the future. Not many speak with Emerson’s authority. According to Emerson, something like 95% of the mosques and Muslim organizations in America, are dominated or influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest Islamist party and extends throughout the world with links to terrorism and jihadism. Started in Egypt in 1928, the MB began as politically activist involved in Islamic charities. Its slogan “Islam is the Solution” viewed Sharia law as the basis of society. Although it preached peace and non-violence, the Brotherhood has been linked with terror and assassinations. It has been banned in some countries (Syria, for one, Russia for another), but its tentacles are everywhere. Emerson is Executive Director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, and is arguably America’s most knowledgeable expert on terrorism and Islamic extremism. His books and TV documentary Terrorists Among Us(itls) (updated after 9/11), stress that while most Muslims are moderate, Islamic extremism (or radicalism, or jihadism), are America’s greatest threat -- not only to Jews, Christians and democratic institutions, but to moderate Muslims who resist the call to wage holy war. Emerson has long been on jihadist death lists. During the Coren interview, he noted that Canada has largely escaped — or resisted – Islamic extremism. That is, the pervasive influence of radical Islam has not achieved the same traction in Canada as it has in the U.S., Britain and Europe. Perhaps that is because Muslim numbers here are not as great as elsewhere. Then again, perhaps it is because life in Canada is more balanced and accommodating than other places. Or perhaps Islamic extremists don’t have the same support here – especially when we have moderate Muslims with the courage to stand up, like Tarek Fatah founder or the Muslim Canadian Congress, and Farzana Hassan who (among other things) opposed the idea of a $100 million, 13-storey Islamic Centre and mosque near the site of New York’s Ground Zero. Would that the Canadian media and politicians were as resolute as Fatah and Hassan and other quieter Muslim voices of restraint and sanity. Emerson’s books, documentaries and research have put him in the bullseye of jihadists. He routinely testifies before Congressional and intelligence committees. Even the New York Times(itls) defers to him as an expert of Islam activities in America, despite preferring to avoid apocalypse thinking when it comes to Islamic extremism. Emerson rarely pulls punches. He thinks U.S. President Obama is more sympathetic to Islam than he should be, and notes that when he assumed office, Obama’s first goal was to build bridges to the Islamic world. Fair enough, but he says Obama has never, not once, used the phrase or condemned “radical Islam.” Obama’s gestures towards Islam (witness his speech of conciliation in Cairo, prior to the “Arab Spring” rebellion and ousting of Hosin Murbarak) have largely been unproductive, and reduced America’s influence. I first came across Emerson at the time of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Centre, which the Clinton administration insisted on treating as a domestic crime and not as an international terrorist incident. With some difficulty, I got Emerson’s phone number and we talked about the 1993 World Trade bombing. He was reasonable and factual, with none of the paranoid fixations that conspiracy buffs often have regarding their convictions. He was adamant that downplaying the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing was wrong, and a guarantee that something similar would happen again — as it did on 9/11. Emerson is basically a journalist, having worked for U.S. News and World Report(itls) and CNN as an investigative correspondent, concentrating on security and terrorism. He’s also been an investigator for the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Some 20 years ago, Emerson discovered that what was being discussed and preached in mosques was contrary to the benign façade that was displayed to the public. His watershed 1994 documentary, Terrorists Among Us(itls), provoked the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) to call it “a wild theory about an Islamic terrorist network in America.” The FBI wasn’t so dismissive, and informed Emerson that a militant Muslim group in South Africa was intent on sending a hit-team to assassinate him. In 1996, Emerson testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that something called the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) was the prime fund-raising body in the U.S. for Hamas. Eleven years later, in 2007, charges were laid against the Holy Land Foundation for funding Hamas and terrorist organizations. Then, in 2009, the founders of HLF were given life sentences for directing $12 million to Hamas. Richard Clarke, former boss of counter-terrorism for the U.S. National Security Council, has called Emerson “the Paul Revere of terrorism.” Not a bad description. Some newspapers in the Arab world have accused, or blamed Emerson for “Islamaphobia” they think infects the West. In response, Emerson’s documentary, Terrorist Among Us(itls) (available from amazon.com) points out that as a faith, Islam condemns acts of terrorism. It’s Islamic extremists who wage jihadist war who are as great a threat to moderate Muslims as they are to those they regard as infidels (i.e. Western countries). One hopes Michael Coren and Sun TV have Steve Emerson on again – Canada needs periodic doses of realism. It’s unlikely the CBC would give Emerson a platform. It prefers CAIR. Michael Coren with Steve Emerson: Jihad In America [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiOfOxdNXxM"]Michael Coren with Steve Emerson: Jihad In America - YouTube[/ame]
Woah, woah, woah. Stop for a second. Couldn't get past the shot you take on Little Mosque on the Praire... That's a good show. I mean seriously, how can't you not like it. It's funny. Okay, maybe it is a secret plot by Jihadists who now run CBC to get people to convert to Islam and turn Canada into Canarabia, BUT it could also just be a show on CBC for peoples entertainment. Now, I realize that is even crazier than the Jihad plot, but you have to admit it could be a possibility. But why would the CBC want to make us look equal to everybody else. Wait, who's everybody else? We are equal. Unless there is a new species of super humans out there? Or is the inequality us being superior to all somehow, like Muslims have different Muslim-genes in their DNA and when you convert we inject this Muslim-gene, Gene SalaM, into your DNA to make you better than everybody else? Just can't get over you taking a cheap shot at little Mosque on the Praire, that was dirty. Floyd Mayweather dirty. Lol. Salam
PS: I couldn't help but notice you ditched your previous thread, theres no hope for Islam. Should I expect the same in this thread? Salam
I think this is the most important part of the story. "In response, Emersons documentary, Terrorist Among Us(itls) (available from amazon.com) points out that as a faith, Islam condemns acts of terrorism. Its Islamic extremists who wage jihadist war who are as great a threat to moderate Muslims as they are to those they regard as infidels (i.e. Western countries)."
Jihadist attacks are also happening in Sweden. If you think it is unfair to call if "Jihad", then you should know that many of the muslim businesses, such as driving lessons, are actually have the word in their official names. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfxSfol6uj4"]Muslims in Sweden shooting rockets at passing cars like in Israel - YouTube[/ame] Malmo. January 17
Ah, I remember that. A few disgruntled youths had bought new years fire crackers and fireworks. And then they burned one car. I agree, we can't have people running around destroying other people's stuff, but this is hardly organized, even less a Jihad. There was the guy one or two years ago who planted a bomb in Stockholm though, that was probably a Jihad action. But then he managed to blow only himself up instead.
The terrorist did not create the Koran. The Koran created the terrorists. When Muslims reform the Koran, then it can stop being blamed.
The lesser Jihad is a Jihad against others, the greater Jihad is a Jihad against yourself. - Prophet Muhammad, Peace and Blessings Be Upon Him The greater Jihad is the struggle one faces to fight the evil within themselves. To fight the urge to sin. To fight the Shaittan (Satan) who wants us to sin. The lesser Jihad is the struggle against others. Fighting persecution, for example. But Jihad is a generally defensive term. It literally means struggle. A struggle is a defensive act. There is this misconception that Jihad means "holy war". But it just so happens, neither Jihad nor Holy War are mentioned once in the Quran. And one cannot struggle offensively. Salam
Peter Worthington, who I have met, is one of my favourite columnists. He was a war veteran, fought in Korea, then worked for the Telegram, and after that was one of the founders of the SUN Newspaper. However, I believe Islam is one of the problems, then there are the different interpretations, but the fact that the medieval Arab and Muslim cultures and nations are ruled by Jew haters, and, not so fond on the rest of the infidels. We are a bit more fortunate in Canada that we have not been attacked such as other countries and our glorious neighour. Thanks to our intelligence, counter-intelligence and Canadian Muslim informants. Canadians should be more critical of militant Islamists http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/26/canadians-should-be-more-critical-of-militant-islamists Most would agree with Winston Churchill’s observation in 1899: “The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until Islam has ceased to be a great power ... Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social unadmiring development of those who follow it ... a militant and proselytizing faith.”
Sorry but what's Mohammedans Law? The influence of the religion is part of why Muslims are such good people. سلام
Mohammedans Law is the Koran, and in this case he's referring to sura 4:34, 2:223. 4:11, 2:282, et al. The influence of the Koran is why many Muslims have been mass murderers, rapists, wife-beaters, enslavers, pedophiles, etc.
There is this misconception that Jihad does not mean "holy war". Jihad and Holy War are mentioned all throughout the Koran. (8:12, 9:5, 3:28, 2;286, 3:148, 9:73, 22:19-20, 48:29, 5:33, 47:4, 8:59-60, 98:6, et al) Never trust an Islamist on the subject of the Koran.
Post all of those verses. Bold the words "Holy War" while you're at it. Also, post the translation of "Jihad" from Arabic to English.
No need to do that. We all know what the words mean, and they mean the same thing as the many suras I cited, and lots of other suras. Here's what jihad (holy war) means plain & simple (no mystery here) > "Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them. Know that God is with the righteous." (Quran 9:123, "Repentance," Dawood, p. 206)
You have no argument. Post all the verses in the previous post, or stop talking. You can't prove anything you say. Lol. Salam
I've never heard anyone who knows Arabic say that Jihad doesn't mean "struggle". That given, struggle can be interpreted as war, so it's no guarantee that it doesn't mean war, but it also means it doesn't have to mean war. As far as I know, there is not enough information in the verses to exclude any meaning. What you supplied is an example, not a definition. That means it can still have other meanings.
Nobody said it couldn't have other meanings. That wasn't the question. Question was > does the Koran advocated jihad (Holy War) ? Answer : Of course it does, all through the book, and has been doing so for 1400 years. Plain and very clear - not a matter of "interpretation" (one of the Islamapologist primary defense mechanisms).
No... Exactly. As far as war goes in the Quran, the Quran is clear that a Muslim can only start war in an act of self-defense. In response to persecution and discrimination. And in these wars, the only people we are given permission to kill are the men of their army. We are forbidden from harming women, children, and the elderly. And we must stop attacking if the other group stops attacking and persecuting us. This is why 9/11 and other actions by al-Qaida aren't Islamic, and why Jihad isn't an act of Holy War. Rather it is Holy Struggle. And as you pointed out, struggles can and do involve (defensive) war. سلام
The interpretation problem is where jihad can mean struggle without meaning war. I don't have a complete list of all mentions of jihad in the Quran, but the ones I see most often can easily mean either. Therefore it's a matter of interpretation. However, this doesn't solve the problem, it just moves it around. There are still people who teach Islam with the martial interpretation. That's what I cannot tolerate and that's where I would focus my efforts. Blaming Islam or Muslims in general just reinforces hatred. The Bible also says some nasty things, but is not taught aggressively as often. That suggests that it's not the content, but the focus that needs to change, especially since most Muslims, and most Muslims I know are just as decent as anyone else.
Self-defense has NOTHING to do with it. The Koran is clear all right - for Muslims to kill those who dwell around them (not who's attacking them - 2:223) According to this denialist Islamist, the sky is red, rivers flow from bays to mountaintops, and winters in Alaska are hot. Didn't you know all those things ?
It is NOT a matter of interpretation. Interpretation is nothing but one of Islamists' primary talking gimmicks to whitewash the vile Koran, and it's also one of the oldest. The've been using it for 20 years that I've seen. Yawn***. As for blame, it needs to be put where it belongs. Squarely on Islam and the Koran. This doesn't reinforce hatred it identifies it, and hopefully that will lead to a reform of the terrible book. Trying to excuse it just just encourages more Islamism, and perpetuates the hate in the book, and spreads it onto the people it is Islamizing, and victimizes them (like for example : Sibel Edmonds, Major Stephen Coughlin, Lina Morales, and Paramount Pictures, etc etc, and hundreds of others). There is no such thing as a decent "Muslim". Many people who claim to be Muslims are decent, but they're not Muslims, because they aren't following the Koran. If they were, they couldn't be called decent. I don't call wife beating, genocide, pedophilia, kidnapping/slavery, rape, robbery, animal cruelty, torture, and mutilation "decent", do you ? If the people you know aren't doing these things, they're not Muslims.
