New Information on 911 Memorial ~ You’re NOT Going to Like This!

Most of us remember 911 as a tragic and devastating day in American history. A day in which approximately 3000 people were struck down in the name of Islam. Searching the Internet this morning I have obtained new information about a 911 memorial. But there is major problem with this 911 memorial. It is a dedicated to the victims of the US War on Terror and NOT those who were murdered by the Islamic terrorist attacks on 911! To make matters worse the people running this show have obtained a city permit, and will be holding a rally at City Hall on 911! (Besides being a virtual memorial)

Events Taking Place in New York City During September

12:00 NOON

City Hall Park, Rally & March against Anti-Muslim Bigotry

They are using this event to counter protest against the Stop Islamization of America’s (SIOA) dynamic duo, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer’s 911 Freedom Rally at Ground Zero.

Extreme right-wing, racist forces, who last year whipped up a climate of hate against the Islamic Prayer Center at 51 Park Place, have announced ugly new plans for this year — the 10th anniversary of 9/11 — at the same location near the World Trade Center site.

What race is Islam?

(From last year’s Geller/Spencer 911 rally)

This is a very dangerous threat. Anders Breivik, the racist, rightwing Norwegian responsible for the recent mass murder of 77 mostly young people in Norway, has quoted extensively from the writings of Pamela Geller of Stop Islamization of America and Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch. These are the two organizations opposing the Islamic Prayer Space at 51 Park Place.

Once again, what race is Islam? I strongly condemn what Breivik did, but he is a grown man who is responsible for his own actions. NOT Geller or Spencer!

Last year the media claimed that these well-financed hate groups represented the views of a great majority of the population. Many of us considered it a responsibility to show that they do not speak for the people of New York City. We organized, with the help of many thousands who responded, a far larger and dignified outpouring to stand for unity, respect and solidarity and against racism, war and anti-Muslim bigotry.

For the third time, what race is Islam? STRIKE THREE!
If the people who supported that rally were really against war, why are they supporting a religion/ideology that calls for perpetual war?

Bukhari Hadith Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:

Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have.”

A person is not a bigot for refusing to be dominated by Islam. But Islam certainly is a bigoted ideology.

Koran verse 005.051
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

This year it is more important than ever that we do not allow these racist hate mongers to be the only voices speaking to the media and to the world. It is especially important to counter, in this period of economic crisis, the forces that want to blame immigrants and Muslims for the growing cutbacks in social services, rising unemployment and continuing wars. We will hold a rally, a march and a cultural exhibition.

Keep playing the race card. All you are doing is devaluing its meaning. Brilliant…

I have not seen one person blame Muslims for rising unemployment. I guess in their desire to submit to Islam they will say anything.

Part of the “cultural exhibition” will be the Gitmo Dance.

(Photo by Adam Bennett)

The Gitmo Guys were used at a April 9Th rally in NYC.

As you can see, the supporters of Islam are organized, and they need to be countered. I encourage all readers to come out and support America, Geller, and Spencer on 911! Thank you!

Warn the World



48 comments for “New Information on 911 Memorial ~ You’re NOT Going to Like This!

  1. August 31, 2011 at 8:28 am

    It’s hard to argue with androids and the Far Left. I have found that secretly androids, and the Far Left actually enjoy evil.

    These are the same creatures that call upright people racists. To them, the androids and the Far Left, it’s “racism” when upright people condemn the atrocities committed by the Crime Syndicate of Islam. These androids and Far Left are incapable of differentiating.

    Androids and the Far Left enjoy to see that Muslims, as Suicide Bombers, explode themselves in the middle of a crowd of innocent people.

    Androids and the Far Left enoy it when Muslims stone women to death.

    Androids and the Far Left enjoy it when Muslims murder apostates, who no longer wish to participate in Criminal Activity committed in the name of Islam like that mentioned above.

    Androids and the Far Left enjoy to see that the Crime Syndicate of Islam chops off clirtorises of little girls. They’ll call upright people “racists” when upright people condemn this Muslim atrocity.

    Androids and the Far Left enjoy to see the Crime Syndicate of Islam punish petty thieves by chopping of their hands, feet, and gouging out their eyes. These satanic creatures become very defensive when upright people condemn such cruelty. They become furious and call upright people all sorts of names when good people condemn such Muslim atrocities. Their favorite mantra is “you racist.”

    • Robin Shadowes
      August 31, 2011 at 1:09 pm

      Androids was a new analogy for me. I’ve seen them been called zombies more or less frequently but not androids.

      • September 9, 2011 at 9:23 am

        I would think androids would be smarter than that.

    • September 9, 2011 at 9:49 am


  2. Chris
    August 31, 2011 at 8:35 am

    Religion is a choice, even though many Muslims have had that choice made for them when they were too young to reason. Just the same, they can choose to leave Islam. There are many organizations devoted to helping Muslims escape from that ideology.

    Race is not a choice, and discriminating on the basis of race is not only illegal but also a form of bigotry. That is why it is offiensive to me that the classic manual of Islamic sacred law, ‘Umdat al-Salik, states that non-Arab men are not suitable matches for Arab women because Muhammad had said, “Allah has chosen the Arabs above others. (para. m4.2(1)) If any ideolgy has a racist problem, it’s Islam.

  3. Tonto
    August 31, 2011 at 8:35 am

    I don’t know what arrogance allows people that follow the teachings of an illiterate, pedophilic, land based pirate and reaver to tell ME what the Word of God is and how I need to live. All I have to say to muslims is “Nyeek Halek!” (arabic for “go f*** yourself”)……that and “bring it on bitch!” are about the only reaction I have to their BS. I have the God given right to Free Choice in all things…..and I refuse to “submit” and become a slave to islam and their terrorist ways. If that means slaughtering every muslin that threatens a US citizen, so be it. I have no problem with that concept at all.

    • Tom
      September 1, 2011 at 9:02 am

      Like it, Tonto!

      • Tom
        September 1, 2011 at 9:10 am

        Here’s how they’ll understand it:
        اللعنة تذهب نفسك

  4. Melanie
    August 31, 2011 at 9:19 am

    Victims of the War on Terror?????????? UM, is that like BLAMING US Policies for 9/11????? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

  5. Charlie
    August 31, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    God said many would be deceived. I guess he was right as usual.

  6. August 31, 2011 at 12:59 pm

    It’s easy to prove that those crazies that flew those planes into the World Trade Center Towers were stupid Muslims.

    Do Catholics commit suicide in order to murder innocent people? Not a chance.

    Do Protestants commit suicide in order to murder innocent people? No way.

    Do Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, and other members of different religions, besides Islamists, commit suicide in order to murder innocent people? They, too, like the Catholics and Protestants are well balanced. They would not commit suicide.

    However, with the evil, stupid Muslims it’s an entirely different story. Evil Muslims are so stupid, so satanic, so wicked, that they will commit suicide in order to murder innocent people. Muslims are the only disordered creatures that can do that. Thanks to Muhammad the Sex Pervert, and prophet of the stupid, evil Muslims.



  7. Robin Shadowes
    August 31, 2011 at 1:16 pm

    I have figured out their game from debating an arselifter on a swedish news blog the last couple of days. The way he told me it is irrelevant how many thousand years our people has lived on the scandinavian peninsula. Land deeds is the true game. The people who quite literally owns the land, owns the nation. So what they are doing is buying up land, bit for bit for bit. This guy I was debating was fluent in swedish, for once and he has studied swedish law. That made him confident there was no way we could stop them. At least not lawfully. I’m convinced they are doing the same MO all over. So beware mussies buying up land.

    • Anne
      August 31, 2011 at 5:37 pm

      And it’s not just the land, it’s the space around the land- once they have a mosque, they always “need” to expand. Then the whole neighborhood gets the muslim “flavor”…They just got the go-head to build one in Sheepshead Bay, NY in a residential neighborhood of RUSSIAN JEWS. Is that deliberately provocative or what?

      • Anne
        August 31, 2011 at 5:45 pm

        The MAS- tied mosqueteers bought the land, but the space the Russian Jews and other non-muslims have to live in freedom will be severely compromised.

        Halal meat stores will come in, the call to “prayer” blaring at everybody, no liquor stores, no dogs, no music.

        In other words, no peace.

      • eib
        August 31, 2011 at 6:07 pm

        Heydrich and Himmler are probably smiling.

  8. August 31, 2011 at 1:19 pm

    Robin, they started buying up land near me 15 years ago. Quietly, discretely buying it up…

    • New Crusader
      August 31, 2011 at 1:35 pm

      Their Zakat at work. I wonder how much of our foreign aid (borrowed from the Chinese) ends up in jihad.

      • August 31, 2011 at 7:21 pm

        Probably a lot of it New Crusader

        • eib
          September 1, 2011 at 5:07 am

          Where their poverty dictates a charitable course, Muslims choose to fund war, war, and more war.

        • eib
          September 1, 2011 at 5:07 am

          Even by Daoist standards, they would be considered fools.

  9. August 31, 2011 at 1:33 pm

    When it comes to murder, evil Muslims are at their best during the month of Mad Dog Ramadan. You see, murder is the job of true Muslims. That’s when they’re not raping someone.

    This is the final tally of murders committed by Muslims during Mad Dog.
    There were 180 Muslim Terror Attacks, and 785 dead bodies.

    All other religion combined: No Terror Attacks and no dead bodies.

    In the name of “anti-Muslim” Right Wingers: No Terror Attacks and no dead bodies.

  10. August 31, 2011 at 1:46 pm

    This is a very dangerous threat. Anders Breivik, the racist, rightwing Norwegian responsible for the recent mass murder of 77 mostly young people in Norway, has quoted extensively from the writings of Pamela Geller of Stop Islamization of America and Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch.

    And killer Muslims quote extensively from the Koran. What’s this writer’s point exactly? Is this a call to shun Muslims who read and quote the Koran?

    Well, damn, why didn’t you say so in the first place…

    • eib
      August 31, 2011 at 4:45 pm

      Anders Breivik, the racist, rightwing Norwegian responsible for the recent mass murder of 77 mostly young people in Norway, has quoted extensively from the writings of Pamela Geller of Stop Islamization of America and Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch.

      So who is responsible for the Norway bombing/shooting?
      Anders Bering Breivik!!
      NO ONE ELSE!

  11. eib
    August 31, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    It is a dedicated to the victims of the US War on Terror and NOT those who were murdered by the Islamic terrorist attacks on 911!

    This is a serious historical and emotional deficit– it truly obfuscates the facts.
    And the facts are these.
    19 Arab Muslim zealots, with the support of Muslims everywhere, flew their planes into the Pentagon, the Pennsylvania Countryside, and the Twin Towers in Manhattan.
    They did so deliberately.
    They were facilitated by Americans sympathetic to the Arab Muslim cause and by Americans who were deceived as to their true participation in the attack.
    There were little Eichmanns everywhere, and their strings were being pulled by the Arab Muslim elite, an axis reaching from Egypt to Pakistan.
    The men who trained these Arabs to fly were little Eichmanns.
    Those who accepted their money were little Eichmanns.
    The West is full of little Eichmanns– traitors. And we must confront them and their Muslim masters– and call them out.

  12. Arthur
    August 31, 2011 at 9:10 pm

    I posted this today on the JihadWatch website. I hope you put this on the front page of your website:

    Last year’s rally was effective to the extent that people who already agree with Mr. Spencer’s point of view found that there were many others who had the same perspective. But we already knew that, since various polls have shown that 70% of the American population opposes the Ground Zero mosque. There is little evidence suggesting that last year’s rally changed the minds of many people, or that it ignited a national discussion about the consequences of Islamic expansion, or even that it triggered some action that would effectively deter the Ground Zero mosque from being built.

    I had predicted in advance that the strategy proposed for last year’s rally, namely honoring the victims, shedding tears, and waving flags, would have little long-term consequence. This was based upon several factors. First, there were many nationally prominent people doing the same thing on that day (e.g. important government officials and various social groups), and they would get all the media attention as far as flag-waving and shedding tears goes. Second, the rally provided no significant drama (even the speech by Mr. Wilders seemed somewhat watered down from what I had expected), and the media will only cover such rallies if there is some drama to display on video. Third, as we all know the media is dishonest on the subject of Islam and actively attempts to downplay any honest criticism of Islamic expansion. Thus, they predictably underestimated the number of people who attended last year’s rally.

    In my judgment, one individual last year (namely the mustachioed pastor who threatened to burn the Koran) quickly got worldwide attention, and sparked much more discussion about what Islam actually is and the consequences of Islamic expansion, as compared to the thousands of participants at last year’s rally promoted by Mr. Spencer. The mustachioed pastor did that by bringing out Islamic insanity as a consequence of a relatively trivial act (which actually was not even carried out by him until much later). Another individual who actually burned the Koran in New York last year on September 11 was fired from his government job. Both of these courageous individuals received a lot of FREE SUPPORT from a large number of people, including attorneys, even though the supporters may not themselves have wanted to engage in Koran-burning.

    I raise these points to support my main conclusion, which is the following: TO OVERCOME THE NEXT HURDLE IN REDUCING ISLAMIC EXPANSION IN THE UNITED STATES, THE MOST EFFECTIVE STRATEGY IS TO BRING ISLAMIC INSANITY IN THE UNITED STATES TO THE FOREFRONT OF AMERICAN CONSCIOUSNESS AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE. As a general matter, Americans are so conditioned to thinking thoughts such as everybody is a nice guy, all the religions should be equally respected, someone’s religion should not be criticized, a religion is a matter of personal faith so Islam could not possibly have a political ideology, nothing intensely foul could happen in a country such as the United States, etc. etc. Because of such programming of the American mind, which begins in elementary school classrooms, Americans will take no effective action to oppose Islamic expansion until Islamic insanity IN THE UNITED STATES becomes so overwhelming that it cannot be ignored. (Americans pay little attention to Islamic insanity, or even other important events, elsewhere in the world.) Unless people who oppose Islamic expansion make active efforts to bring out Islamic insanity, that insanity will not spontaneously manifest itself at a large scale until there is a much higher percentage of Muslims in the United States, or until there is some major international incident. (Obviously, even the September 11 terrorist attacks were insufficient to trigger effective action by the American population to oppose Islamic expansion.) For this reason, stealth jihad and creeping sharia will continue in the United States unabated unless something effective is done.

    I believe that the 10th anniversary of the September 11 attacks is a good opportunity to trigger some national debate on Islam, and possibly to initiate some effective actions against Islamic expansion. Waving flags and shedding tears alone will not do the job, even if accompanied by speeches. (The media uses sound bites, and they are likely to play only those parts of the speeches that serve the biases of the media.) I suggest a strategy, which I believe has never been done before in world history (Mr. Spencer should correct me with the facts if I am wrong), of CONFRONTING THE PUBLIC AND MEDIA WITH THE DEVASTATING FACTS ABOUT ISLAM IN A MANNER THAT THEY CANNOT AVOID.

    I think the best way to do this is by using gigantic (e.g. 6 feet x 20 feet) signs containing the devastating facts. These signs can be made inexpensively (e.g. painted on bedsheets or large poster boards fastened together), and they may need two or more people to carry them, possibly mounted on large poles or wooden sticks. Below is the analysis that I posted last year regarding this strategy. (I believe that if my analysis had not been ignored, last year’s rally would have been much more consequential.)



    I THINK THAT THE BEST WAY TO HONOR THE 3000 PEOPLE WHO WERE KILLED THAT DAY IS TO PUBLICLY IDENTIFY, FOR THE FIRST TIME, WHO THEIR REAL KILLER WAS. See if you agree with me on this. I say the 19 hijackers were merely hired hit men. I SAY THAT THE REAL KILLER WAS THE PROPHET OF ISLAM. That prophet made an offer of eternal paradise, limitless pleasure, and glory to people who would kill the unbelievers for the sake of Allah. His offer has been in place for 14 centuries. The hijackers merely accepted his offer. It was a contract killing on a massive scale, and not really much more. (I think that the hijackers have found out that they got cheated in that contract.)

    If this point of view makes sense to you, or if you have other thoughts you want to express, I am offering the following suggestions for your consideration as to how to make your speech the most effective.


    If a lot of people appear at the rally, wave flags, and express sympathy for the victims, that will merely demonstrate that the organizers are able to assemble some sizable gathering. The number of people who actually appear will depend upon the weather, how many have been notified, and how easy it is for them to attend. After it is over, they will be labeled as flag-waving right wingers who are trying to capitalize upon the natural sympathy evoked by the victims of the terrorist attacks. There will be minor arguments about the estimate of how many people attended. The media will trot out Muslims who suffered in the same terrorist attacks, as well as families of the victims who are now supporting the Ground Zero mosque as a gesture of forgiveness. Muslims and mosque supporters, if they are determined to do so, will organize a counter-rally at some point which will probably have a larger number of people present. The whole affair will be seen as a competition for sympathy, and the net result will likely be no change in anybody’s behavior or decision-making. Since 70% of the population is already against the mosque, if a very large number of people don’t show up then the media will conclude that people do not feel strongly on this issue.

    Moreover, if you were interested in having your voice heard, your voice will be limited to one tiny flag waving in a sea of several thousand.

    Some people who attend such a rally try to have their voice heard by shouting slogans in a large group. While that approach may make you feel good because you have a lot of people on your side, to the media you will look like someone who is driven more by the emotion of a crowd rather than by knowledge and clear thinking. Also, Mr. Spencer’s point would come into play — namely that shouting slogans might appear to be inappropriate following a solemn ceremony. The slogans would only be heard for a short time, and the people shouting them would develop hoarse voices. There would undoubtedly be counter-demonstrators shouting opposing slogans.

    People who use signs and banners will have substantial advantages. They will be communicating an idea that the media will not be able to ignore. It will be nearly impossible to distort that idea by selective editing or an inaccurate quotation. The communication will be quiet and will not interfere with the solemnity of the occasion. (You may want to not display your banner during the memorial itself.) Furthermore, the idea will be communicated for hours as long as the sign or banner is on display.

    It is possible to make gigantic banners by stitching together bedsheets and painting your message on the banner. The banners can be suspended from windows in nearby buildings, or they may be held up by walking sticks. (You might want to check with the NYPD regarding what types of poles they will not allow, but I doubt they would seize walking sticks. I don’t know whether there are any laws or regulations pertaining to suspending banners from buildings.) If the NYPD were to take some action inhibiting your ability to express yourself, which I very much doubt that they would do, you would have a very strong case for violation of your First Amendment rights. In that situation, there would be lots of lawyers willing to represent you for free and you would become a national symbol for free speech. The bigger the banner is, the more likely that cameras will focus on it. Remember that a large number of the media representatives from around the world will probably be covering the event.


    If you decide to use a sign or banner, the first question that comes up is what your message should be. Some people think that strongly worded, emotionally charged messages such as “Mohammed was a pig!” or “Islam is like Naziism!” or “Send the Muslims back home!” are the most effective. But remember that your message is going to a wide audience, most of whom may not know much about Islam, and many of whom may be relatively neutral on the subject. They will have a very hard time understanding what rational basis, if any, you have for your message if it is of this type. You will be seen as an irrational hate monger if you use such a message, and it will actually work against your goal of opposing the mosque. You will be labeled as somebody who suffers from Islamophobia in that situation.

    Many people who are formulating a message don’t think about the difference between facts and conclusions. If your message consists of a conclusion, then you leave the viewer wondering about what the basis of your conclusion is and whether you are biased. You essentially deprive the viewer of the privilege of making up his or her own mind about the situation. You also do not communicate any useful information, other than the fact that you have come to a particular conclusion. Conclusions by themselves, even if they come from very influential people, are not very effective. They only have some influence upon people with a sheep-like mentality who have already decided that they will go along with whatever the influential person is saying. Most politicians speak in conclusions with relatively little facts behind them.

    A powerful fact, on the other hand, is much more effective. It forces the viewer to draw his or her own conclusion based in part upon the fact that has been expressed. If the viewer refuses to accept the fact, he weakens his own position and appears to be dishonest or closed-minded. The person expressing a powerful fact always gets the upper hand.

    I have been following the debate about the Ground Zero mosque, and it seems that the people involved have not understood this principle. I have not seen even one article in the mainstream media nor even one public presentation by any person in which the powerful facts relevant to this debate have been expressed.

    As far as I am concerned, as soon as I am told that a mosque is being planned so close to Ground Zero, the most powerful facts have to do with the character of the prophet and the holy book that will be glorified in that mosque.

    If you agree with this thinking, you might want to decide for yourself what you believe to be the most important single fact about Islam that should be known to the public. I have thought hard about this question, and in my opinion the most important fact is that the prophet of Islam beheaded over 600 captive Jews and saw their heads fall into trenches that had been dug for this purpose. (The fact that they were captive means that they posed little threat, and the fact that trenches were dug means that the prophet of Islam may have been one of the first major historical figures to make an industrial activity out of killing people.) I think this historical fact is so important that no person in the world should be considered reasonably well educated if he or she does not know this fact. (I thank Mr. Spencer for making this fact widely accessible in Western countries.) This fact goes a long way to explaining why the 19 hijackers attacked on September 11, and why every person who says that the prophet of Islam is a divine messenger in fact directly or indirectly supports violence against unbelievers.

    Now I submit that any institution that glorifies such a prophet has no rightful place anywhere near where 3000 people were murdered, and especially if they were murdered in the name of that prophet. What can any reasonable person think in the face of this fact? How can Mr. Bloomberg support a mosque that will necessarily glorify such a prophet? How can Jon Stewart make jokes about people who oppose the mosque if he is forced to confront this fact? Why has this fact never entered the public discussion about the Ground Zero mosque?

    If you believe that this fact should be known to the public, you can make a large banner that says “THE PROPHET OF ISLAM BEHEADED 600 CAPTIVE JEWS AS THEIR HEADS FELL INTO TRENCHES!” In small print below this fact, you can give the source which is the Sirah Rasul Allah (the biography of the prophet of Islam).

    Here are some additional facts that you might want to put into banners, along with their sources:

    Koran 9:5. Allah ordered Muslims to kill the unbelievers wherever they find them.

    Koran 8:39. Allah ordered Muslims to fight the unbelievers until the religion in the entire world is for Allah alone.

    Koran 8:12. Allah revealed to the angels: I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

    Koran 9:33. Allah has sent the prophet Mohammed to make Islam superior over all religions even though the disbelievers hate it.

    There are about 150 other verses in the Koran that support violence against the unbelievers.

    Sahih Al-Bukhari is universally recognized in the Islamic world as accurately describing the deeds of the prophet of Islam. Here are some of theose deeds:

    Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88: The prophet of Islam married Aisha while she was six years old and started having sex with her while she was nine years old.

    Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57: The prophet of Islam said, “If someone changes from his Islamic religion, then kill him.”

    Here is another interesting and important fact from June 2007:
    2000 highly respected Islamic scholars and clerics of the Pakistani Ulema Council gave their highest honor to Osama Bin Laden.

    There are many other similar facts to choose from, which you can find on this web site (JihadWatch) or on other web sites such as

    I don’t think the television cameras will be able to avoid such banners. If you have a large banner with such a message, there is a fairly good chance that some reporter will want to interview you. So it will be important to make sure you are knowledgeable about the source of the fact in your banner.

    If you want to have some fun with the media, and you don’t mind spending a little extra money, you can carry such a banner with a factual quotation while wearing a burqa. (Make sure that bushy eyebrows and hairy arms are not showing if you are male.) The politically correct spineless mainstream media will be very afraid to criticize the fact that is expressed in your banner, since you will appear to be a devout Muslim. Nobody will be able to accuse you of being an Islamophobe. Meanwhile, members of the general public will get an accurate idea of what Islam truly is.


    I think that there is a very short time window for having a public discussion of the facts about Islam, and this rally may be one of the last important opportunities. Here is my reasoning.

    In Europe, because of political correctness and the large influx of Muslims, it is now practically impossible to have a rational public discussion of the key facts about Islam. Mr. Wilders was on trial for doing nothing more than making an accurate movie about Islam. In the United States, I have found that practically on a daily basis there is some article in the mainstream media about so-called “Islamophobia” and about how Muslims are allegedly being victimized. This includes all major newspapers such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, USA Today, as well as the major networks such as CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. They are all taking the position that they must allegedly “educate” the public about tolerance, religious freedom, and the prevention of bigotry. They are refusing to publish any article in which the facts and the points of view of people who oppose the mosque are discussed in a rational fashion. (I have actually tested this with the New York Times for example. To show that they are open-minded, they will publish comments containing opinions and conclusions from people who oppose the mosque. But when a comment contains devastating facts about Islam, they will almost invariably censor that comment.)

    I think that the reality is that the mainstream media is suffering from “Factophobia” about Islam, which they refuse to admit.

    On top of the labels of “Islamophobia” and “bigotry” that are being applied, pressure is mounting from the government and military to not criticize Islam. Their arguments are that criticism of Islam in the United States makes it easier for terrorist organizations to recruit members (I doubt that is true), and that it makes it harder for American soldiers to operate in Muslim countries (which is likely true to some extent).

    The one thing that practically nobody talks about in full detail is the looming nuclear weapon threat from Iran. People are willing to admit that Iran is not too far away from developing a nuclear weapon, practically everybody argues against an attack on Iran, but nobody talks about the consequences when Iran has a nuclear weapon. What will happen almost certainly (and will be facilitated by the likely slow disintegration of Iraq as American forces decrease military activity) is that Iran will engage in more provocative and threatening rhetoric against the United States after it has a nuclear weapon. Right now, if a nuclear weapon is smuggled into the United States and detonated, we can be almost 100% certain that it was the work of rogue officers in the Pakistani military. This reality keeps Pakistani weapons under control. After Iran gets a bomb, and after Iranians begin making threatening comments, if a nuclear weapon is smuggled into the United States and detonated it will be very difficult to determine quickly whether it was Pakistani or Iranian. (The problem will be much worse if three Islamic countries have the bomb.) The US military will be morally paralyzed because it will not know who to retaliate against.

    Because of the likely vociferous Iranian threat, and because of the irrational (and practically suicidal) state of mind of many military and government people in the Islamic countries, Americans will be under great pressure from the media and from government officials to avoid criticizing Islam for fear of provoking attack by a smuggled nuclear weapon or a smuggled dirty bomb.

    Regarding the Ground Zero mosque, if there is not sufficiently effective opposition, the mosque supporters may actually be starting their construction work very soon. By that time, it may be too late to prevent the mosque from being built.

    All of this means that we have a very short time window in which to have a thorough public discussion about what Islam actually is. And I very much doubt that within the next year it will be possible to organize another large rally regarding the Ground Zero mosque, given that commemoration of September 11 is one of the important factors contributing to this rally.

    Finally, to my knowledge there has never been a public demonstration recorded on camera in human history in which the basic facts of the incitement to violence in Islamic religious doctrine were on public display in the form of large banners. (Mr. Spencer can correct me if I am wrong.) Those of you who choose to make your voices heard may be doing something that has never been done before. To all such people, I say:

    Make some history on September 11, 2011.


    (I think this analysis is important enough that in the interests of free speech Mr. Spencer should put it on the main page of JihadWatch, even if he disagrees with it. The number of readers of the comments section is relatively small. Others may agree with my analysis, and it may prompt them into some effective action. I am hoping that we do not have another repeat of last year’s rally, which was largely ineffective and overshadowed by the mustachioed pastor.)

    • eib
      September 1, 2011 at 5:43 am

      If I were to carry a sign, it would say “Islamo non parebo” which means, in Latin, I will not be subject to Islam.

      Or, I would carry a sign saying this:
      I believe in God, the Father …
      in his only Son Jesus Christ,
      who was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
      and born of the Virgin Mary.

      Or simply this:
      Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God.

      Or this:
      Islam is profane.

      As a Christian, I have every right to say these things.
      From a secular point of view, a whole set of expressions is possible also– most of which are not insulting, state facts, and must be seen.

    • Bob Almighty
      September 3, 2011 at 11:50 pm

      I agree 100% Arthur. We need to think strategically in light of media realities just like you are saying. You should forward this whole message to pamela and Robert and anyone else concerned. This is the kind of thinking we need.

      How about: Mohammad and his soldiers beheaded 600 and made sex slaves of the widows.

  13. Shawn
    September 1, 2011 at 5:08 am

    I am so pissed off about this shit! Who is behind this? Is it one of the usual suspects of Muslim Brotherhood front groups or a Marxist leftie hate group?

    • admin
      September 1, 2011 at 9:21 am

      It is a combination of Muslims and their far left Muslim allies. Mostly non-Muslims though.

    • September 1, 2011 at 12:55 pm

      They are essentially astroturfers. Last year the pro gzm protest was ran by a hired gun who had worked for the Johnson administration (I forget his name). They are mercenaries hired by the Cordobists and don’t really care about the issue.

      They put out adverts on campuses and in socialist media (that’s why there were so many socialists at the pro GZM rally) and some bogus print media created just so there could be pro GZM adverts. Every PR trick in the book was uesed.

      In these media they made the claim that the anti gzm people would directly and immediately cause a genocide of all muslims in America. Sounds stupid I know but it was good enough to sucker college student socialists into attending.

  14. eib
    September 1, 2011 at 5:34 am

    I just wanted to say that I’ve heard two interviews with the Rev. Terry Jones by Urban Infidel. I am deeply impressed– he is no rube.
    He has traveled in Europe and the second time in New York for him, he was with a Belgian film crew.
    He’s not doing these koran burnings because he’s ignorant.
    He’s doing them because he actually knows something of the dimensions of the threat to the West.

    • eib
      September 1, 2011 at 5:35 am

      Another thing.
      Every time he comes to NY, he is followed by the police, who have made it very clear that their duty is not to protect him at all.
      Their duty is to spy on him, to shame him, to make him feel unwelcome.
      The NYPD is in the hands of the Islamists– their compliant TOOL!!!

    • eib
      September 1, 2011 at 5:36 am

      So the police do not protect Terry Jones.

    • Bob Almighty
      September 3, 2011 at 11:55 pm

      It is absolutely necessary to burn the koran and defame islam. Any belief system that cannot be criticized will soon become very dangerous and corrupt. Christianity has only been improved by being criticized so harshly for so long. If you shield beliefs from criticism, they rot.

      • eib
        September 4, 2011 at 5:22 am

        And the rule of terror makes entire civilizations rot.
        There is no change in Islam.
        There is no reason.
        Westerners who choose to set themselves “free” from Western culture and its demands for individual self-improvement and examination guarantee the future misery of their children and descendants.

  15. September 1, 2011 at 12:42 pm

    These people are vile. They are protesting against racism only in order to paint the anti sharia crowd as racists.

    Watch out. The pro GZM astroturfers also engaged in infiltration of the anti GZM demonstration last year. They sent in people to cause disturbances so they could be filmed by the press.

    If you see people making a negative spectacle of themselves seek out reporters and tell them these are infiltrators from the pro GZM rally.

    This happens all the time at all sorts of demonstrations. I have seen the both the right wing and the left wing do it to each other. The book Toxic Sludge is Good For You, a book about PR industry dirty tricks has a chapter on this vile tactic.

    In particular look for people loudly shouting down others in front of cameras. They are most likely infiltrators as the anti sharia activists never do this. Don’t be afraid to admonish them as they are employed by the astroturfers and not really protestors and don’t want to get into anything serious over a paycheck.

    • Anne
      September 1, 2011 at 12:57 pm

      Good point! Something to watch out for.

    • September 1, 2011 at 1:13 pm

      And I mean be carefull! These are not nice people. They may be posing as namby pamby lovey doveys but they are most certainly not.

      Remeber that mush head who stabbed a muslim cab driver right before the anti GZM rally last year? The press quickly learned that he was with these groups who were working in support of the GZM mosque.

      Someone in that group saw that he was a little funny in the head and talked him into commiting a fake hate crime. This is also a common nasty trick hired PR people do in order to sabotage their clients enemies.

      They look for people who are a little off and impressionable and then seduce them into doing something extreme for the cause.

      These are seriously nasty characters.

  16. Lucy
    September 1, 2011 at 2:30 pm

    The whole thing is being “rewritten” whitewashed and revised by Obama’s islamic terror government… I feel SOOO sorry for the victims of 9/11 and their families and loved ones. This is SO disgusting and immoral.. it is treachery beyond belief. I cannot believe that people of America don’t storm the whitehouse and put the criminal in jail. Fancy Obama’s islamic govt spinning its just part of the “terror” stuff that goes on around the world…. and in that statement not to even mentioned Israel who puts up with islamic terror on a daily basis.
    Ofcourse they don’t.. because they don’t want to mention more ISLAMIC terror.

    Its time to wake up. Its time to remove Obama.

    • Robin Shadowes
      September 3, 2011 at 3:12 am

      Or dip him in tar and roll him in feathers. 😉

  17. September 3, 2011 at 10:07 pm

    Arthur on August 5th. gave very well researched profound and workable guidelines.
    May I add one more. At one rally in England, the Spokes-person over a loudspeaker system read aloud all the names and dates of Persons killed in the name of islam. The list was long. The silence of the crowd was deafening. Uncontrollable sobs were heard as the names of the honour killings and deadly rapes were read. Innocent beloved daughters, young men and the list went on and on. At the end of the list I was in stark horror.
    All cases had previously been prosecuted.

    • eib
      September 4, 2011 at 5:24 am

      This is the kind of thing that needs to happen a lot. When people are continually reminded of their losses under Islam, they will learn to question its imperatives for brutality and barbarism.
      They will learn also that there are other ways in which to live. That mere thought, “other ways in which to live” is absolutely terrifying to their despots.

  18. September 4, 2011 at 9:04 pm

    I wish many of you would come and support the conservative cause on Liberaland….a web site of Alan Colmes….who needs to have an alternative opinion expressed to the liberals on that site, it’s hard dealing with them with me against them…

    • eib
      September 5, 2011 at 5:19 am

      Try this one, Chief.

      Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah-Yazdi :
      “Democracy, Human Rights and the rights of citizenship have no place in Islam…. Until a person has converted to Islam, he is free — but democracy and Human Rights have no meaning within Islam. Everything must be under the surveillance of the government, even the way people dress. And if some people say otherwise, they don’t know Islam.”

      This is one of the advisors to President Ahmadinejad of Iran, and he means exactly what he says.
      I’ve noticed much conflict over at that board– 107 comments on the story “Do Not Fear Sharia Law,” which was run originally in the NYT.
      The weakness of the historian’s case is obvious– he sets up a false equivalency between Western societies and Jewish law and then the Western society and Sharia law.
      He seems to not understand that his own people are targeted for genocide under Sharia law if they don’t behave in certain ways, and will be forced to wear specific clothing to mark its members for systematic humiliation.
      For a historian, he has very little historical memory and does not understand in what ways the long-historical past is affecting the present.
      There is no equivalency between Jewish and Muslim communities in the history of the West.
      Muslims have fought us with the intention of conquest. Nothing has changed.
      Jews have generally been isolated enough that they could maintain their tradition here.
      In both Christendom and Islam, Jews were subject to humiliation, pogroms, scapegoating and stress.
      But Christians never had the imperative to force Muslims to submit or kill them.
      Jews who did not convert were not all killed in the West.
      The way I see it, the levels of tolerance in the medieval world of Jews were about the same– that is, not very high.
      The only safe refuge Jews have had has been in 2 things: modernism and reason.
      To embrace Islam or to further its spread is to attack both.

    • eib
      September 5, 2011 at 5:31 am

      Today, we need an Abrahamic ethic that welcomes Islam into the religious tapestry of American life.

      This is the very essence of his argument. He believes that religious doctrine is bendable to the objectives of whathever group wishes to use it. That Christianity and Judaism have no objective existence at all.
      Muslims have demanded, many times at the brandishing of a sword, that Christians cease to be Trinitarians.
      If Christians do this, then there really is no theological difference in the concept of God between Christianity and the other two monotheisms.
      Jews do worship a unitary God, and yet Jews do not convert en masse to Islam. Even when threatened and brought near to death.
      The reason fear doesn’t work in these cases, the reason all those men died at Otranto in 840, is that Christianity and Judaism have existences apart from the people who believe in them. Their doctrines and ethics are not to be pushed this way and that, they are not malleable.
      As a non-believer, this “historian” has no concept of that.
      It is the view that religious doctrines are pliable, that they can be used to justify “anything, anything you want” which is endemic to history right now, that validates a multicultural and PCMC view of Christianity and Islam.
      When Christians bring up the concrete theological and doctrinal differences between the histories of the two faiths, and how they’ve been practiced, they are accused by these cretins of “bigotry”.
      It is not bigotry if it is black letter Christian doctrine.

    • September 5, 2011 at 8:17 am

      Chief, my computer is down, I’m on a friends computer just long enough to let everyone know. You remind me when I get back online and I will be honored to come lend a hand!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *