October 23, 2006

The World Needs More Muslims Like This Guy

This guy tells it like it is. Of course, many Muslims are going to hate his words, but hopefully he and those like him will inspire the reformation that is badly needed in the Islamic world.

Interesting that he blames the Imams and Mosques. This is what Walid Shoebat has been telling us for years:

Mosques in the West need to be bugged. And those preaching hate should be jailed or deported. This isn't a solution, but it is a good start.

Thanks to Jaakobou for sending me the first video.


  1. I hope that guy likes living in hiding... heh...

  2. "And those preaching hate should be jailed or deported."

    Outlawing speech on the basis of its emotional content allows anyone with sufficiently powerful enemies to be turned into a criminal. "Hate speech" laws are notorious for turning unpopular points of view into crime. If you're in Turkey and say the Armenian holocaust happened, you're guilty of "hate speech." If you're in France and say it didn't happen, you're guilty of "hate speech."

    If it were permissible to bug buildings on the basis of the religion practiced there, Christians would soon use the same logic to get warrants to bug atheist gatherings. (Christians often claim atheism is a religion.)

  3. Gary, this is an extraordinary circumstance due to the War on Terror.

    Atheists, Jews, Christians, etc do not preach hate in their places of gathering that results in suicide bombings.

    France just did something wise. They fired 4 airport workers for being Muslim.

  4. I don't know if I would go so far as bugging mosques yet. But I would definitely send in people posing as potential converts to Islam (either African-Americans or Christian Arab-Americans) and report on what is being preached in the sermons and then take it from there.

  5. Mosques in the West need to be bugged. And those preaching hate should be jailed or deported. This isn't a solution, but it is a good start.

    Bacon, I'm so proud of you!!

  6. I have to agree with Gary somewhat on this one. What constitutes hate speech is different for everyone, and the line is so blurred, that I feel all attempts to adequately define it would become muddled by too many differing opinions. It is like trying to set up a universal system of morals, which, as was discussed in the last post, is impossible.

    The "extraordinary circumstance" argument has been used before, most recently when the Congress of the US passed the latest military commissions act, effectively ruining habeas corpus for, the bill says non-citizens, but who knows really.

    If we allow "extraordinary circumstances" to cause us to be so caught up in fear that we agree to give up liberty, then we have lost what makes the Western world so great. We have become like the people who live in chaos under totalitarian rule. I understand that is not what you are advocating, but taking away even some of what we consider essential liberties sets us up for a slippery slope, that always leads to more being taken from us.

  7. Flamingo, civil liberties are great as long everyone respects what we have and doesn't abuse the right.

    Unless you want more 9/11, which I know you don't, sacrifices in freedom have to be made. Personally, I don't mind if I had to put a chip in my neck, if everyone else did, as long as it prevented terrorism from occurring. If that is what it comes down to.

  8. Liberals believe that those who call for the murder of civilians can be stopped with gentle pleading and loving kindness. The truth is, liberty can only be sustained with a very high price, lest it be ravaged by the wicked. Pacifism in the face of terror is not justice.

    "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater

  9. I'm sure the British people during WW2 had to give up a lot of their liberty. Didn't seem to do them too much harm.

  10. "Personally, I don't mind if I had to put a chip in my neck, if everyone else did, as long as it prevented terrorism from occurring."

    BEAJ, I think this is the one time I've balked at something you wrote.

    And now I return to my comically detached state.

  11. I agree that once someone engages in speech that is meant to incite violence, or priase violence that is already occured, they have given up their rights and should be prosecuted. I am not, however, sure that the ends justify the means in the case of planting bugs in Mosques.

    I think you would be surprised at how many non-Muslims would be upset at this. If we bug mosques, what is to stop us from bugging synagogues or churches. Just like, when you deny habeas corpus to illegal aliens, what is to stop someone from accusing someone of being an illegal alien say, simply because they are hispanic, and denying them habeas corpus as well.

  12. Of course you shouldn't be allowed to incite violence. In the UK you're not - you will be arrested and put in jail.

    In the UK the invasion of Iraq is being used to recruit suicide bombers. That's not to say they wouldn't have used something else to recruit them if we hadn't invaded.

    You have to think of it in terms of getting exposure for your "product". If you're trying to sell suicide bombing, having pictures of Muslims getting killed or abused in Iraq on TV everyday is very useful.

  13. Bugging mosques can't be done. It's "racial profiling".

    Instead we should look for Islamic terrorists in the bookshops in little Italy. Anything else would be racist.