And promptly lost my job.

I had that happen two more times in the next four years. I’ve been spit upon, had fecal matter thrown in my face and into the gas tank of my car, and been shot at. I’ve had bricks (with King James Bibles tied on) thrown through my apartment window and through my car window. I woke up one morning to find my door and the entire outside of my car layered in lard.

And this was while living in a large, “liberal, progressive” American city.

I’ve been moving around Asia as work permits (Vietnam, Malaysia, China, Singapore) and have never, ever run into that sort of full-bore religious hatred since. (Racial bigotry, well… but that’s a different story altogether.) Few if any of my Muslim friends in Asia, even in countries that nominally frown on Islam (like Vietnam), have ever gone through the sort of hell that has been par for the course in the current “Taster’s Choice commercial” version of America, and become dramatically worse since 2001.

I miss home. But I’m absolutely convinced that, to whatever small degree the country that I grew up in still exists, that things are going to get far, far worse before they get better. Precisely how that’s possible, I can’t say. But experience and study have taught me that it’s ALWAYS possible; all that’s required is for the extremists to run roughshod while the ordinary people do nothing whatever to stop them.

Your other source is a well-known Islamophobic source. The burden of proof is on them to support their claim, not on me to disprove it.

For Ruslan, those Tibetan Buddhists are every bit as dangerous as Radical Muslims…and for you, Muslims good, Sikhs good, Hindus, baaaad….(and good God folks, beware of those Southern Christians!)

An informed, objective observer would be shaking his/her head in incredulity.

RESPONSE: I never said it was. It was wracked by a succession crises from the get-go, which formed the basis of the Shia-Sunni schism. But this in no way detracts from my original assertion, that Islam has been at war with the non-Muslim world continually since its inception. They only exception was the 19th and 20th centuries, when the West eclipsed Islam to such an extent that Jihad was temporarily abandoned as a survival mechanism (though even in this period, there was a degree of conflict).

RUSLAN: “Here’s the part where I ask you for proof.”

RESPONSE: Read it and weep. Your ‘poverty is the root cause’ canard simply doesn’t hold water…..

http://www.tuftsgloballeadersh.....erhood.pdf

“By the Mid 1980s, the Muslim Brotherhood….submitted a list of candidates for the election of leadership within the country’s NATIONAL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS and SUCCEEDED in GAINING A CONTROLLING MAJORITY on the boards of several associations.”

“Changes wrought by the Islamic leadership, upon its initial occupation of a seat MAJORITY on the ASSOCIATION‘S EXECUTIVE BOARDS, were both practical and symbolic.”

“The movement {Muslim Brotherhood) emerged from the 80s as a LEADING FORCE in Egyptian society; the THOUSANDS OF PROFESSIONALS within the associations that connected to the Muslim Brotherhood volunteered their time….”

“The PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS gave the Brotherhood activist the opportunity to hone their leadership skills…”

“By the early 90s, EGYPT’S PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS remained among the major sites of Islamic political experimentation….”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2280.....-the-Egypt

“1995 Egyptian Syndicates:
Doctors….20 of 23 seats were Islamist; Engineers……45 of 61 seats; Scientists…..17 0f 25 seats; Pharmacists…….17 of 25 seats; Lawyers….18 of 25 seats.”

RUSLAN: “Actually you are missing something because Islam doesn’t have “millions of extremists”, nor are they killing thousands every year.”

RESPONSE: OK, there are HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Jihadists killing over a THOUSAND every year. We should all sleep easier, eh?…

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm

Examine the number of Islamic terrorist groups in the list. Multiply that number by membership. If it’s not in the millions, it’s certainly in the hundreds of thousands. Then you can add those unaffiliated Muslims in places like Egypt and Indonesia that episodically riot and murder Christians and other non-Muslims over issues large and small (sometimes in protest over the existence of unofficial churches that Christians must resort to for lack of building permits for bonafide churches).

http://www.thereligionofpeace......heList.htm

Since 911, the average number of victims of Islamic terrorism is between 4 and 5 a day, which translates to well over 1000 a year. You may not like the source, but I challenge you to contest the actual documentary evidence.

RUSLAN: ” Of course they usually end up killing Caucasians, Russians, Indians, Israelis, in other words, people you don’t care about.”

RESPONSE: Completely unfair. Why is it liberals must resort to personal put-downs when engaged in political discourse? Is it the frustration of not being able to mount an effective argument?

Depressing and mind-blogling as you say. However, did you ever stop to think that maybe the integration issues have more reasons than you say. For instance, more Pakistanis are of a darker skin color. Yet, if you attend the colleges, there are more Pakistanis in the Math department. If I’m not mistaken, a Pakistani is who started the edible fruit baskets – you know the fruit cut into shapes and set up like a flower arrangement. Also, I believe it was a Pakistani who developed and started the ceramic hair straightener – you know, like the crimp irons. And lastly, if I’m not mistaken, it was a Pakistani who bought the pro-ball team that Limbaugh was unable to buy because of the outrage with his racist ways.
India, well, Britain, Portugal and Spain has a big influence on this country – try looking into Goa. Hindus are considered the ruling class of India. India still have a caste system. Although there are some Hindus of darker skin, meaning they are not at all the lighter skin with hazel eyes, they are still considered above some of the others. Personally, I like the Sikhs better – my opinion and interaction, the Sikhs are more like christians, or should I say more friendly and they help people in need. My experience and/or opinion of Hindus, I think they are arrogant and hostile and they remind me of the racist whites.

You related to us that you have done some research on Islam/Sharia….let me give you a little direction, or should I say some tips. Google this name (it may come back in a variety of spellings) Syyed Qytub/Syed Qytub/Saed Qytub from Egypt. Here you will find that this was the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. He studied in Texas before you or I was born. This is the guy that originally had a problem with the U.S. before being imprisoned in Egypt. So, this being a problem didn’t just start within the last decade. Then also, I think this name is correct, Leila Khalid, she was the first female Palestinian highjacker, who have taken refuge in Egypt. So, again, this is interesting how people listen to word of mouth, or rumors and run with it not knowing all the facts or history. Here I am referring to some of the protesters that have appeared against the mosques in the U.S.

Did you know that some Americans where kidnapped by Muslims in the Philippines around 9-11? Did you know that CCTV (Chinese cable news) recently, about a week ago, reported two navy personnel missing in Philippines? I don’t understand why is it that Muslims in the Middle East are not given a pass, while Muslims in Philippines and other Asian countries are! But again, that’s the problem here in America, we tend to rotate and take turns on who is flavor of the moment. Yet, when it comes to blacks, it doesn’t matter what country they are from, to America, they are all treated the same, badly.

Actually you are missing something because Islam doesn’t have “millions of extremists”, nor are they killing thousands every year. Let me ask you something, when you are browsing your anti-Islamic sites, do you ever ask yourself, “did I check to see if this information is accurate?”

“RESPONSE: Actually, that “manufactured Struggle” has been a fact of life since the inception of Islam. The only respites were periods when Islam was eclipsed by the West and so temporarily abandoned their Jihad imperative.”

Incorrect. Islam has never been a monolithic movement since death of Mohammed. You need to study history better rather than sites that purposely cherry-pick in order to create an idea of a never-ending struggle with Islam.

“Except that it’s not. An impovershed subsistence farmer in Pakistan is less likely to be a violent Jihadi than an educated engineer in Egypt. All the 9-11 hijackers were educated and middle class; the leadership of most major extremist organizations are middle class or affluent; ”

Would be significant were it not for the fact that the overwhelming majority of jihadis ARE in fact poor. Of course they usually end up killing Caucasians, Russians, Indians, Israelis, in other words, people you don’t care about.

“all the major professional guilds in Egypt – law, medicine, engineering – have elected fundamentalist leadership.

Here’s the part where I ask you for proof.

You always make an intelligent argument and I applaud you for using your full name. So far you have kept your personal insults to a minimum and ridiculed my ideas. This is acceptable in a debate and encourages a continuance.

As far as property ‘rights’ are concerned, simple logic would tell you that if a government entity can compel you to do or not do something to your property, or even confiscate it, then you have no ‘right’ to it regardless of the wisdom of regulation or a court’s opinion. You can, if you like assert your ‘right’ to property when it is threatened but only if you have the wealth to do so. Even then you cannot be sure of the outcome in court. Therefore, if your property is never secure, then you do not have a right to it. Stop paying your property taxes and see how it goes.

You have no ‘right’ to practice your religion either. You argue well and give many examples of your own experience in observing people practicing their faith freely. I only have to cite one instance where religious practice was forbidden, asserted and lost in court to prove there is no religious freedom, only a privilege you may or may not be granted. And I can do that multiple times.

Of course, total freedom and unrestricted ‘rights’ make up the concept of anarchy. This is as dangerous as totalitarianism. We make compromises on our ‘rights’ to avoid anarchy. The point I am making is that we allow third parties to determine the extent of our rights to anything. It is the strength of the debate that will influence the decision maker. So far the Cordoba Mosque is losing the debate, but as we have all seen, it only takes one arrogant judge to deny ‘the will of the people’.

Reading the minds of Muslims to ascertain how they see things isn’t necessary when they record their thoughts in books, histories, opinions and other means of expression. Islam has not had its reformation. Christianity was just as barbaric 500 years ago and ruled Europe as a Theocracy. It had its own version of Sharia and was every bit as brutal. But it did reform itself. We can see pockets of that effort in Islam, mainly from its women. It does them no good to keep excusing the radicals because most Muslims sit on the fence waiting for a winner. So far the radicals have the upper hand.

You cannot be a Sharia compliant Muslim and a loyal American citizen. But you can be a reformed Muslim and respect the laws and traditions of this country.

Your denial is mind-boggling and depressing.

Of course there is sexism in every culture, but only in Islam is that sexism codified into law (the examples I cited in my post at 3:39PM).

Here in America and elsewhere in the non-Muslim world, men sometimes beat their wives, but there are laws that penalize such behavior with jail time, restraining orders, etc. In Islam – as per Quran 4.34, it is perfectly legal.

As for honor killings, worldwide, they are overwhelmingly committed by Muslims (and for the record, India has a huge Muslim population). It was only after the large-scale Muslim immigration into Europe, America and Canada over the last 20 years that we began to see cases of honor killings regularly in the West. Britain alone had over 17,000 honor crimes last year (mostly beatings and assaults, but a smattering of killings). Almost all were attributed to Muslim immigrants.

Interesting how in Britain, Sikhs and Hindus have integrated so nicely. On average, they earn as much as native Brits and have a similar percentage of their people on welfare. But Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh are far less willing to integrate, have far lower incomes, and a far higher percentage of their people on welfare.

Why is this? The Islamo-Left blames it on discrimination. But Hindus and Sikhs are ethnically identical to Pakistanis and yet, they’ve prospered in their new society. The only difference is religion. Instead of blaming the Brits, couldn’t the blame lie with Muslims themselves and their cultural/religious proclivities?

It’s so bad now that Hindus and Sikhs in Britain wish to be identified in the media by their RELIGION because the established moniker – “Asian” – associates them with Muslims, which they resent…NOT because of fears of discrimination, but because of their own disdain for Muslim behavior…behavior such as riots in the early 90s throughout northern Britain, constant angry demonstrations and public expressions of disaffection and supremacism.

It’s eerily similar in France. Indochinese immigrants and those from sub-Sahara Africa are integrating nicely, doing quite well economically and otherwise. But Muslim immigrants from North Africa are perpetually disaffected, frequently rioting and burning cars (by the thousands last year), and stubbornly unwilling to integrate.

I’m not for a minute saying all Muslims are bad. I’m just pointing out the obvious, that Islamic religion/culture is uniquely resistant to integration and at its heart, is fundamentally incompatible with a free society. This is one reason there are so few Democracies in the Islamic world (Turkey is the only one I can think of, and its secular freedoms are being steadily constricted by the elected Islamist government).

Islam presents a HUGE problem and challenge to Western concepts of democratic secularism and gender equality. That’s all I’m asking you to acknowledge. It pains me that you are unable to do so.

You won’t awaken until you’re good and ready. That may be months, years, or never. Anyway, I wish you the best.

Now to use the excuse that women don’t have any rights, they are dominated by men…..this just doesn’t happen in Islamic countries. I’ve had several Chinese neighbors, and at times I get the impression they cannot join the conversation without permission from their husband. I’ve worked with Korean women that need permission from their husbands to spend money. But who are we (Americans) kidding, this can happen in any country, including here. I’ve also had neighbors from India, and it appears the husband must approve of who the wife speaks to – as well, it appears they also don’t like the police.

Again, there are some good things about Islam as well as bad, but that’s with all religions. One good thing about Islam, depending on the country, some women must be chaparoned on dates, a man is not to enter a home if the women is alone (or, if the woman’s hair is uncovered) – in this country, it’s the opposite, and the women are often sexually assaulted. In Islam, if a woman is without a husband, then most times a son, brother, uncle…will take the responsibility of the woman, in this country it is the opposite and women are frequently victim of non-related/related men who either scam/manipulate…the woman. I’ve met women from Latin America that are fearful of their husbands – then I later saw that yes, SOMETIMES this is with good reason. But this is the same here in America, there are spouses that are fearful of the other, whether it’s male or female.

So again, in every religion, country, culture, there are things we agree with and things we do not. I am bringing this to your attention, because, as it stands, some of the practices of Islam is also the same with Hinduism – example, if a daughter or son marry someone other than what the parents approve of, it can mean death for the outsider or the daughter of the Indian family.

Indeed. Somehow, I don’t see Tibetan Buddhism as a global movement with millions of extremists, killing thousands every year. Maybe I just missed that one.

RUSLAN: “The manufactured struggle between the Islamic and non-Muslim world…”

RESPONSE: Actually, that “manufactured Struggle” has been a fact of life since the inception of Islam. The only respites were periods when Islam was eclipsed by the West and so temporarily abandoned their Jihad imperative.

RUSLAN: “…has created a situation where poor, exploited Muslims find some kind of false solidarity with a dishonest ruling class. Instead of noticing the terrible conditions in their own countries, they feel they must rally to the defense of Islam.”

RESPONSE: Ahhhh yes, that old familiar refrain, ‘it’s all about poverty’.

Except that it’s not. An impovershed subsistence farmer in Pakistan is less likely to be a violent Jihadi than an educated engineer in Egypt. All the 9-11 hijackers were educated and middle class; the leadership of most major extremist organizations are middle class or affluent; all the major professional guilds in Egypt – law, medicine, engineering – have elected fundamentalist leadership.

But I don’t expect you to know any of this.

There’s quite a difference between culinary diversity and cultural differences that include polygamy and legalized discrimination against women. I love Mexican and Chinese food, I like Latin and African music, I have an appreciation of the beauty of exotic women (I married outside of my race).

But I have a problem with inheritance laws that discriminate against women (Quran, 4.11), legal strictures that confine a woman’s testimony to the worth of HALF that of a man, (Quran 2.282), edicts that elevate man over women (Quran 2.228), and legalized spousal abuse (Quran 4.34). These are not theoretical concepts and/or allegory like those you might find in the old testament, they are – according to Muslims – immutable commandments from God that are etched in stone for all eternity. In short, they are the LAW.

Your feel-good multiculturalism takes none of this into account. Please inform yourself. You may have been taught in university that America is an institutionally sexist, racist country, but the reality is, women and racial minorities from other countries continue to flock here because of the opportunities and freedoms afforded them. I would hate to be a woman or a religious minority in the Islamic realm…and my guess is, you would too.

As far as the schools in California, did you check to see which Congressional district it was in? But again, who cares? As I stated before, when people migrate to this country, they want to bring their culture with them. Example, they want their foodstuffs – hence, you have stores/restaurants that target Vietnamese, Middle Eastern, Chinese, Mexican, Caribbean, Brazilian, Italian…..

That being said, there are many more backward religious doctrines which receive almost no attention at all. Take Tibetan Buddhism for example, which is often looked at as totally peaceful. The real history is far darker.

This goes to show that religious dominance in society in general is a problem, but what many atheists don’t understand is that you don’t defeat religion by focusing on it and attacking it. Islamophobia has done little more than hurt innocent people and fed the flames of fanaticism. The manufactured struggle between the Islamic and non-Muslim world has created a situation where poor, exploited Muslims find some kind of false solidarity with a dishonest ruling class. Instead of noticing the terrible conditions in their own countries, they feel they must rally to the defense of Islam.

Likewise, while Americans fear the Islamic world, they too vote against their own interests.

Not in the least. It’s an admission that those who attacked us on Sept 11 were Muslims and that they made copious and detailed use of Islam’s canonical texts to justify their mass murder.

RUSLAN: “No, Christian fundemantalism does not pale in comparison, because it has far deeper roots in this country and it has far more access to power.”

No acknowledgment here of the profound difference in ethics and substance between the teachings of Jesus (as documented in the Gospel) and those of Muhammad (as documented in the Quran, Hadith and the Sirat Rasul)…that there is a secular essence to the message of the former (“render unto Ceasar”), while there is none to be found in the message of the latter…that there are numerous countries governed in part or en toto by Islamic law (Sharia), but none anywhere governed by “Christian law”.

Anyway, thanks for the discourse. It was quite informative for me (though probably not in the way you might think). Best of luck in your endeavors.

Among other ridicuolous notions Muslims believe that:

Pigs fly.
The moon is made of green cheese.
Muhammad was the messenger of Allah.

Chet if you don’t care to be sensitive towards Muslims how can you put forward an argument that they should be sensitive to your paranoid fears and hatred? It is perhaps you and your comrades who should wake up to the way your opposition to the exercise of religious freedom fans the flames of hatred in the Muslim world and highlights American hypocrisy to everyone else. Frankly I don’t much care if you and everyone else in the whole wide world believes that the attack on September 11 is the worst thing that’s ever happened, throwing the Constitution out the window now is as bad an idea as it was when the Bush administration suspended habeas corpus.

Until I get a detailed account of what actually went on in that classroom, I cannot make a ruling on this. What I do believe is that a history teacher was trying to actually get the children involved in history, which in general is a great idea. Perhaps she went too far in this case. But let’s also not forget that children are and have been “compelled” to do a lot of stupid stuff in the class-room.

Oh I almost forgot- this is totally irrelevant to the building of Park 51, because this “reciprocity” you speak of has nothing to do with US law or the constitution.

“Gentlemen, you’re both obviously intelligent individuals. How telling that you stubbornly cling to your willful denial. Christian fundamentalism certainly has its dangers, but it pales in scope and degree to its Muslim variant. Neither of you exhibit any comprehension of this reality.”

No, Christian fundemantalism does not pale in comparison, because it has far deeper roots in this country and it has far more access to power.

“PS – Mitch, as “offenses” go, I and most Americans categorize the mass murder of 3000 people as ever so slightly more egregious than a cartoon drawing of a prophet.”

Is this an admission that you see all Muslims as terrorists?

And as for the cartoons, a lot of people in the Muslim world foolishly overreacted to them and made themselves look bad. This is mainly because if some of them hadn’t reacted so badly, they would have held the moral high ground by default. These cartoons of Mohammed aren’t just about depicting Mohammed. I could draw a picture of Mohammed that would be haram on principle, but normal and dignified. These people don’t want that. They want to draw offensive stereotypical, degrading pictures of Mohammed. I support their free speech and all, but I also don’t believe they deserve the label freedom fighter or whatever nonsense they call themselves. They are no different than racists who draw caricatures of blacks, Jews, Mexicans, and what-not.

you missed the boat entirely on the textbooks. Your example of “Jesus was indeed the massiah…” was exactly point. They DIDN’T say as much, they qualified the claims of Christians with “Believe”, “claim”, etc…as was appropriate in a secular classroom. But there was no such qualifier for Muslim claims. How is this too hard to understand?

PS – Did YOU support the right of the cartoonists to depict Muhammad?

Ruslan,

Can you imagine for a moment Muslims, Hindus or Sikhs compelled to take Christian names, dress like Christians, cry out the Christian equivalent of “Allah O Akbar”, etc in public school? You and every other proponent of multiculturalism would be outraged. But because it was done on behalf of another culture, it’s all good fun and games.

Gentlemen, you’re both obviously intelligent individuals. How telling that you stubbornly cling to your willful denial. Christian fundamentalism certainly has its dangers, but it pales in scope and degree to its Muslim variant. Neither of you exhibit any comprehension of this reality.

I wish you both well, and sincerely hope that someday you’ll awaken from your slumber.

I, by the way, am not un-American. I just happened to think outside the box, and, of course, have empathy. At the same time, I am a kinda ‘in-your-face girl,’ especially when you try to get me to conform to your way of thinking when I know it’s wrong. Again, I have raised questions about how can people from the Right, as well as people that are anti-Muslim continue to support the republican party – when in fact, there are practicing Muslims that are republicans. What is it that you really believe in – just being a winner? Meaning as long as the republicans gain power you don’t care?

I think it is unfair, as well as unhealthy to continue on with your complaints about Muslims. Did you complain about the ‘illegal immigrants’ from Central America & Mexico? For the past few years now, I have been telling people that complain about Mexico that the day will come when they may need to go south of the border!

I think it is time for you to call it quits – Ruslan won this one BIG TIME.

I presume you also were opposed to the publication of cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed as a pig because of the sensitivity issues involved. I certainly hope you don’t support the fatwah!

Second, your sources don’t seem to be too reliable. When we look at the ABC source it seems pretty innocuous. Yes, the teacher over-stepped the line, but the court didn’t endorse what she did. Apparently learning world religions is mandatory(which is not necessarily endorsing religion), but that doesn’t mean that this particular teacher didn’t go too far.

How is this part of a huge conspiracy?

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=54522

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/sto.....id=3553898

Ruslan,

In strictly legal terms, the mosque advocates have the Constitution on their side. I’ve never denied this. Your insistence that this is the ONLY factor in the equation is a subjective opinion, as is my insistence that it is much, much more. The difference between us is that I’m open minded enough to acknowledge as much.

My position is that this issue has profound political and emotional overtones in New York and around the nation that are undeniable. If this issue is resolved in the courts, then it should be rightly decided in favor of the mosque. If it resolved in the court of public opinion, then the mosque advocates should take a page from their own book about societal “sensitivity” and look for another location.

How sad you can’t see as much.

Chet have you actually seen the “documentation” you’ve cited or are you simply parroting what you’ve read on jihadwatch? Based on your history of fair and balanced comments here I’m sure you wouldn’t try to deceive us by taking something out of context but perhaps you have been deceived by others. For instance, another way to cite your first example would be as follows:

“Jesus was indeed the messiah and had risen from the dead, or been resurrected.” — Global History and Geography: The Growth of Civilization, by Henry Brun, Lillian Forman and Herbert Brodsky, Amsco School Publications, Inc., 2008. P. 143

“Muhammad was the messenger of Allah.” — Global History and Geography: The Growth of Civilization, by Henry Brun, Lillian Forman and Herbert Brodsky, Amsco School Publications, Inc., 2008. P. 182

I’m sure privacy concerns prevent you from revealing the name or location of the “California middle school district” but rulings of the US Ninth District Circuit Court are a matter of public record so perhaps you could look here http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/ and find the ruling you are referring to.

“On the contrary, I WON because I’ve proven that this issue is NOT about constitutionality, it’s about reciprocity, fair play, and basic right and wrong.”

Nope, it’s about constitutionality.

” I’ve proven that Muslim DEMANDS for accommodation and respect are pervasive in our society. The expectation of reciprocity is an entirely legitimate call.”

And Christian DEMANDS for accomodation have been far more pervasive and successful for far longer. Again, this is a matter of private property and the constitution.

“1) The California middle school story is absolutely true. You know nothing about it because apparently, you’re uninterested in anything that doesn’t validate your world-view.”

Source please.

“2) I documented the text-book bias before you even asked for documentation. (post at 6:05, Sept 1)”

How many textsbooks is this in? Do you also complain about Texas versions of textbooks?

“3) No, cabbies CANNOT legally discriminate against fair-riders. You apparently know nothing about law.”

Then those Muslims who attempt to discriminate will be fired. Religious freedom has limits, which is why Rastafarians aren’t allowed to smoke Marijuana legally.

“4) The system doesn’t necessarily regulate itself. Multicultural sensitivities are undermining the fight to maintain the establishment clause.”

Actually I’d say it has mostly been evangelical protestants on the forefront of this. If the Muslims make any headway it will be because of their pioneering work.

“Checkmate!”

More like, fail, actually.

Again, every single case you mention has ZERO relevance to Park 51.