[ April 19, 2024 ]
Where Are All the Jassers? Pamela Geller, American Thinker
In an extraordinarily lengthy article in the American Thinker yesterday, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser responded to the reservations I expressed about Congressman Peter King’s upcoming hearings on the radicalization of Muslims in the U.S., and in particular, about King’s capitulation to pressure from Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups. Methinks Jasser protests too much. The objective is bigger than just responding to me. Rather, it is an attempt to validate and advance Jasser’s preposterous narrative.
Story continues below advertisement
Jasser entitles his article “American Islamists Find Common Cause with Pamela Geller.” Equating me with Islamic supremacists is like saying that Patton found common cause with the German General Rommel, the Desert Fox, because Patton criticized the British Field Marshal Montgomery. My criticism of King’s capitulation and CAIR’s attempt to impose the Sharia in America by silencing and punishing those exposing the hidden war have nothing in common with each other. So here Jasser is intellectually dishonest and deliberately misleading. He knows this, and yet entitles his article based on this false premise. He is being at the very least disingenuous here, and is attempting to marginalize me in the most debased and dishonest fashion (as does CAIR). Placing me on the same moral playing field as those who are working toward “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within” and annihilating the Jews is very stealth jihad. It is propaganda of a kind I am very familiar with. Not good, Mr. Jasser.
Expanding on this outrageous claim, Jasser says that “Geller and Spencer’s comments in their echo chambers show that they are against any solutions from within the ‘House of Islam’. This only aids and abets all Islamists. But, then again, that doesn’t matter if the target includes all Muslims and their only viable solution is conversion of one-fifth of the world’s population.”
Echo chamber? Between the two of us, Robert Spencer and I reach just under two million people a month on our blogs. That and our book sales, regular TV and radio appearances, speaking engagements, conferences, and additional 50,000 “friends” on our various Facebook pages, Twitter and SIOA group, etc., make for quite a cacophonous echo chamber. I submit that it is Jasser’s chamber that is empty. Where are all the Jassers?
Jasser mentions “many Muslim reformers.” Where are they? Where are the Muslims who take to the streets when another girl is killed for honor, or another apostate is murdered under the Sharia? Where were all the Muslims taking to the streets after Mumbai, London, Madrid, Beslan, Bali, Times Square, Fort Hood? But they take to the streets by the hundreds of thousands, light embassies on fire, and slaughter innocents when a cartoon offends them.
Even the title of Jasser’s article, “American Islamists Find Common Cause with Pamela Geller,” plays into this false narrative. “Islamist”: what is that? What is a Christianist? A Judaist? A Hinduist?
Simply his use of the word “Islamist” here predetermines the futility of Jasser’s enterprise. It’s not Islamism, it’s Islam.
But the fact that Islam teaches violence and supremacism doesn’t mean that I am against all Muslims, as Jasser implies. This is patently untrue. Through my work with “Refuge from Islam,” we help Muslims here in America who want to leave Islam and are under threat from their families and communities. Escaping their mosque, their “faith community” and their families to safe houses is dangerous. People do not begin to know the difficulty, although Amina and Sarah Said, murdered by their father for dating non-Muslim boys, gave us a graphic window into the lives of these girls.
The safety network was covertly established, and requires utmost secrecy and security. Does Jasser do this kind of work? Does he even acknowledge it? I was raked over the coals for this work — for my campaign to save them. Did Dr. Jasser come to my defense? He was strangely silent. He lives near the spot where Noor Almaleki’s father murdered her for honor. He should talk more about that, and about why women suffer so under Islam. I am glad his wife is safe, but the world is bigger than Jasser’s home.
In my January 20 American Thinker article, “King Abdicates,” I wrote: “Jasser’s Islam does not exist. He does not have a theological leg to stand on. His mosque threw him out.” Jasser first says that neither I nor any other non-Muslim am allowed to speak about this question. He apparently thinks that only Muslims should be permitted to speak about what Islam may or may not be, despite the fact that anyone can read the Qur’an and Hadith, and the statements of Islamic jihadists and supremacists who read and quote them. Jasser says non-Muslims have to shut up and have no right to read such documents and think about them: “Frankly, it takes a lot of chutzpah for any non-Muslim, let alone one who has never met me, to insist that I am not practicing Islam.”
Nevertheless, Jasser acknowledges that he does see a “valid debate as to the prevalence and intellectual underpinnings of the Islam I and my family practice, and whether it constitutes a minority or majority of Muslims. It is an important national conversation whether most Muslims can be counted upon to lead any type of genuine, lasting reform toward modernity.”
It is a valid debate, only non-Muslims can’t participate. Got it?
Despite Jasser’s wishes, I am going to participate. What I wrote was true: Jasser’s Islam really does not exist. When I interviewed him, he spoke about moderate Muslims, saying that they should be judged by “how devout they are, how they treat other people, the Golden Rule, how honest, what their integrity is, what their character is.” That sounds good, but in reality, Islam has no Golden Rule. In the Qur’an Muslims are told to be “merciful to one another but harsh to unbelievers” (48:29). That’s a far cry from “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
In that same interview, Jasser claims that the Qur’an has “passages where God tells Muhammad if I wanted everyone to be Muslim or believe in God I could have made them but I did not.’” Jasser makes this sound like an expression of tolerance and pluralism by Allah. Actually it is something quite different. Here’s the full verse: “And if We had so willed, We could have given every soul its guidance, but the word from Me concerning evildoers took effect: that I will fill hell with the jinn and mankind together.” (Qur’an 32:13) So actually Allah is saying that he decided not to guide some people, but instead to send them to hell – apparently for no reason at all.
He also claims in that interview that “there are passages that say ‘your affairs are up to you.’ That’s the only passage actually in the entire Qur’an that refers to government. There is absolutely no passage that talks about how citizens should form their government. So to me it is completely consistent that on modern interpretation is that you can separate religion and government.”
But the Qur’an also says this: “If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) unbelievers.” (Qur’an 5:44) And unbelievers can be killed (2:191, 4:89, 9:5). So the society the Qur’an envisions is a coercive one in which people who do not “judge by what Allah has revealed” may be killed – this is hardly a pluralistic vision.
Jasser tried to blame the antisemitic passages in the Qur’an on faulty English translations: “I am not sure I agree with that translation. You have to remember that a lot of the translations that are currently being used are coming out of Wahabist interpreters.” Would he have us believe that there is some possible translation of the Qur’an that doesn’t say that the Jews are the Muslims’ worst enemies (5:82) and are under Allah’s curse (9:30)?
Also in my interview with him, Jasser even claimed that “ the passage that is being interpreted by most translation as being permission to beat your wife actually does not mean that in Arabic. Those that are experts in classical Arabic will tell you that that means…it actually means whenever you have an argument step away, take a timeout, etc. It doesn’t mean to beat them.”
Nonsense. This is a false statement. Robert Spencer explains:
Qur’an 4:34 tells men to beat their disobedient wives after first warning them and then sending them to sleep in separate beds. It is worth noting how several translators render the key part of this verse, waidriboohunna:
Pickthall: “and scourge them”
Yusuf Ali: “(And last) beat them (lightly)”
Al-Hilali/Khan: “(and last) beat them (lightly, if it is useful)”
Shakir: “and beat them”
Sher Ali: “and chastise them”
Khalifa: “then you may (as a last alternative) beat them”
Arberry: “and beat them”
Rodwell: “and scourge them”
Sale: “and chastise them”
Daryabadi: “and beat them”
Asad: “then beat them”
Pickthall, Yusuf Ali, Al-Hilali/Khan, Shakir, Sher Ali, Khalifa, Daryabadi and Asad are Muslims. All these Arabic experts, both Muslim and non-Muslim, got the word wrong, and Jasser is the only one who got it right?
Of the Islamic law that Muslim men can marry non-Muslim women, but Muslim women cannot marry non-Muslim men, Jasser said: “Most of the Shariah interpretations are that Muslim women need to marry Muslim men because of protecting their rights and because of the way the faith is transmitted paternally rather than maternally.” He makes it sound so benign. In reality Muslim women can’t marry non-Muslim men because if they did, the non-Muslim communities would grow instead of perpetually declining.
Jasser in the interview characterized Islam as “a completely personal faith between me and God. There is no institution for excommunication or communication.” Yet historically, Islam has never been this way. All sorts of authorities excommunicate Muslims they consider heretical (takfir). Islam has never taught that the Muslim is on his own as an individual before Allah – instead, he is part of the umma. He also says that Islam “accepts all of the same moral constructs” as Judaism and Christianity. But it doesn’t: Polygamy, wife-beating, honor killing, clitorectomies, suicide bombing, on and on: none of this is justified by Judaism or Christianity. Only by Islam.
So does Zuhdi Jasser have his own private Islam? You be the judge.
Jasser says in his new article: “Between the two of us, I certainly more than Geller have a far more credible perspective coming from a lifetime as a practicing Muslim from within diverse Muslim faith communities,” but the record of those “Muslim faith communities” is clear. It needs pointing out that wherever Muslims live in non-Muslim countries, there is a level of agitation, conflict if you will, the level of which is directly tied to the size of the Muslim population. That says a great deal about which brand of Islam – Jasser’s or, say, Anwar al-Awlaki’s – is more mainstream among Muslims worldwide. Aside from those Muslims in non-Muslim countries, the rest of the world’s Muslim population is already living in one of 56 Muslim nations, so the only conflict there is between differing Muslim groups, i.e., Sunni vs. Shia.
Jasser says, “To dismiss me as having a ‘private Islam’ is absurd for anyone let alone an outsider,” but can he point to “Muslim faith communities” that not only do not practice violent jihad or pursue the Islamic supremacist imperative to impose Sharia, which Muslims may refrain from doing for a variety of reasons, but also reject them in theory and have a version of Islamic theology that rejects them, as does Dr. Jasser?
Jasser also objects to my pointing out that when I interviewed him in 2007, “he referred to Israel as occupied territory in the last five minutes of the interview….He blew his cover.” He first says that “this is absolutely false,” but a few paragraphs later he admits that he did say this – or something close to it: “Geller alleges that I ‘referred to Israel as “occupied territory”’ (singular) – when, in fact, as the recording and transcript of this interview show, I actually said ‘occupied territories’ (plural).” He says this makes a big difference, because Hamas thinks of all of Israel as “occupied territory,” while he was referring only to Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) and Gaza.
In the first place, he’s wrong: I said “territories.” In my May 22, 2007 blog post about the interview, I wrote this in an update I added that same day: “The occupied territories? That says it all. Jasser refutes Islamic antisemitism and then refers to ‘the Occupied territories?’” Second, it’s just as bad to refer to “occupied territories” as it is to refer to “occupied territories.” Judea and Samaria are not occupied; they are Jewish land. Israel gave up (not back) Gaza for peace. They got nothing in return but another base for jihad attacks against them.
Also, no one complained about Judea and Samaria and Gaza being “occupied territories” when they were under the control of Jordan and Egypt between 1948 and 1967. It’s only when they were administered by Israel that they became “occupied.” That Jasser would accept this construct speaks volumes.
Jasser also tries to make a big deal out of a time lapse he claims between the interview and my pointing out that he spoke about “occupied territories”: “Well surely, you’re saying, she must have mentioned it the next day, right? Or the following week – or month? Nope. When did she finally make this allegation, for the first time? Two years later – on May 13, 2009 – just as ‘The Third Jihad’ was about to be released.”
Not true. I wrote about it the same night as the interview, May 22, 2007: see here.
On several points Jasser accuses me of fabrication. On my statement that he was thrown out of his mosque, Jasser says: “I have never been thrown out of any mosque – let alone the mosque that I and my family have attended for years, and continue to attend.” My source for this was Dr. Andrew Bostom, who had it, he said, on good authority. I don’t know who might be protecting whom in this case, but I passed along the information in good faith. That is also true of Jasser’s disputing of my statement that Geert Wilders “refused to meet with Jasser because Wilders ‘doesn't meet with Muslims'. That never happened, according to Wilders.” Bostom informed me of this also; if Jasser’s story differs, I believe Bostom.
Jasser complains that Robert Spencer had no trouble participating in a FrontPage symposium with him in May 2010, and didn’t say anything about this 2007 interview. He doesn’t mention that Spencer said in that symposium that “interpretations of Islam such as Dr. Jasser’s are personal, idiosyncratic, and non-traditional – a fact that is all too often glossed over by his enthusiastic and well-heeled non-Muslim backers, who would prefer to pretend that he represents the dominant mainstream.”
Jasser goes on: “During the twenty-four month period between our interview and this libelous assault, she conducted many more radio programs, and wrote hundreds of blog articles – yet never once mentioned this allegation. To the contrary, she posted instance after instance of positive references to my efforts to fight radical Islamism – yet not a word about how I supposedly ‘blew my cover’ on anything.”
Yes, because I do not hate all Muslims. Because I, too, wanted to believe. Those “positive references” are years old — prior to my continued reading of Ibn Warraq, Robert Spencer, Wafa Sultan, et al, and earlier in my study of Islam in the West and in the Muslim world. Who doesn’t want to believe Jasser? Yes, I was more supportive when I was less informed on Islam. We all want to believe in Santy Claus. But avoiding reality is not an option. You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.
Jasser claims that my “target includes all Muslims” and that the “only viable solution” I offer is “conversion of one-fifth of the world’s population.”
Here again Jasser echoes the stealth jihadists, in adding some implied threat against 1.5 billion Muslims threat into the pot. Conversion? Is he saying that the Muslim world will not reject the violent teachings of the Qur’an and work to expunge it of its violent texts? I never suggested conversion of one-fifth of the world’s population. But any ideology that calls for violence and oppression of those outside the fold must be defeated.
Jasser insists that he has been “one of the most outspoken American Muslims against the toxic and potent linkage of our Muslim faith community to the goals and propaganda of the Palestinian lobby in the United States.” But where has he been outspoken against the virulent Jew-hatred in the Qur’an, which is the source of and motivation for everything that Palestinian lobby does? The hatred against the Jewish homeland is not a “Palestinian” invention. (“Palestine” itself, incidentally, is a Latin word for the Jewish state.) No, it is rooted in Islamic teaching that encourages Jewish genocide. If Jasser strongly supports Israel, he must fight to expose and expunge Islamic teachings of this hate, but instead, he obfuscates on this key issue.
Above all, Jasser criticizes me for taking issue with King’s hearings. Of course I support King, but I am free to observe and opine on what I see as his mistakes. And I support Jasser’s objective of separation of mosque and state — the objective of the American Freedom Defense Initiative and Stop Islamization Of America — but the premise is false, and smoke and mirrors will not effect any change.
Regarding the fact that King is planning to call the Muslim Brotherhood-linked Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) to testify at his hearings, Jasser writes: “Testimony from Islamists would actually serve to give Americans an on-the-record understanding of the obstacles and the actual ideological diversity within the Muslim community.”
This may be — but without an understanding of true Islam, the very thing Jasser obscures, such exposure is impossible. Were that not true, Islamic supremacism would never have advanced as far as it has since 9/11 in the “hidden war.”
Jasser must know that in Islam he is a “hypocrite,” and under the Sharia that is punishable by death. He advances the idea of separation of mosque and state, but even he must know that in Islam, mosque is state.
So when Jasser writes that he wants Americans to “see the stark difference between Muslims who are part of the problem (promoters of Islamism) and Muslims who are part of the solution (anti-Islamists who promote reform and modernity),” forgive me, but who is he talking about other than himself? Daisy Khan and Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf? Jasser here sounds just like Daisy, who recently said, “The era of extremism is over.”
I understand that everyone wants moderates or secular Muslims to be the silent majority, and Jasser gives them a much-needed face. But in order for Islam to reform itself, the truth about Islam must be made known by the civilized, and the genocidal, racist aspects of Islamic teaching must be rejected (like Nazism) and those who hold it forced under the weight of international pressure to reform.
So the answer is no, Dr. Jasser, I am not aiding the “Islamists.” But it is not at all certain that you aren’t.
The Truth Must be Told
Your contribution supports independent journalism
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Please contribute here.
or
Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.
Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America's survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.
Follow Pamela Geller on Trump's social media platform, Truth Social. It's open and free.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spammy or unhelpful, click the - symbol under the comment to let us know. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
If you would like to join the conversation, but don't have an account, you can sign up for one right here.
If you are having problems leaving a comment, it's likely because you are using an ad blocker, something that break ads, of course, but also breaks the comments section of our site. If you are using an ad blocker, and would like to share your thoughts, please disable your ad blocker. We look forward to seeing your comments below.
30 Comments
13 years ago
The Zuhdi Yassers and the Irshad Manji’s believe they can cook their own private little Islam.
They haven’t got the chance of a snowflake in hell.
13 years ago
I’m not sure I see the problem if Jasser IS trying to create his own Islam, the Islam everyone SAYS exists, but doesn’t. Maybe we’d all be better of if it DID? Just sayin’. No illusions about Islam though.
13 years ago
boy…i thought kristol was catching holy hell!
13 years ago
You know the biggest joke in the whole thing …..SOLUTIONS IN THE HOUSE OF ISLAM!!! HAHA yeah we know the solutions don’t we?
13 years ago
I read his article yesterday and he goes on endlessly without convincing a soul. What was most amusing were the readers responses, overwhelmingly in favor of Pamela. He underestimates Pamela’s resolve and attention to detail; Ultimately he needs to come to grips with the ultimate reality: There may be moderate muslims, but there is no such thing as moderate Islam.
13 years ago
I agree Pamela Bill and anyone else here. islam is islam! We can’t afford to wait and see here in America! We need to let these parasites know we won’t take their crap!!!
13 years ago
To Jasser, Islam is what he says it is. I have always noticed his view of Islam, a Islam that does not exist. I would challenge him or anyone else to show us the wide spread peace, human rights, kindness and advancement that Islam supposedly is. Where is it? It exists nowhere, except in Jasser’s own echo chamber.
13 years ago
Pamela: I’m not sure that Jasser is taking the position that non-muslims can’t participate in the discussion of Muslim authenticity as you suggest with “It is a valid debate, only non-Muslims can’t participate. Got it?”
I, On the other hand, I will take that position. It is of course one thing to have the millennia old argument of what constitutes a Jew within the Jewish community, but I can’t imagine how furious the community would become if a pastor, imam, or pundit started saying “no-jew, yes-jew, bad-jew, good-jew”.
13 years ago
Jassar is just another taqiyya artist. In Looks he reminds me alot of Reza Azlan. They all have that scruffy look with the glasses to look intellectual. They don’t convince me of anything.
One thing to note about Jassar is that he is not well regarded in Islamic circles. That should be a tip off that he is one of two things;
1.) genuine in his beliefs and wants to make Islam kinder and gentler, which currently in the extreme minority.
2.) using his position of sympathy and “conservative principles” to appeal to those who are most aware of and against Islam, namely Conservatives.
His attacks towards Pamela and saying that non-muslims have no say in the affairs of Islam or Sharia tell me he is in the number 2 camp. Non-Muslims have every right to participate in any discussions about Islam in America (or anywhere in the world). We are given this right because we are included in the Shariah laws. Shariah laws don’t just apply to Muslims, they also apply to Non-Muslims. This is an important distinction between the Islamic law courts and the Jewish courts.
13 years ago
Sad. I think a lot of us wondered when Jasser’s mask would start to slip. Whatever his claims of being for “reform” may mean, his emotional enslavement to Islam is so overwhelming that he will never be able to view it objectively. He may keep up this “moderate” and “reform” pretense indefinitely, but once the call comes for him to stand with Islam or stand with America, is there any real doubt which way he’ll jump?
And yes, “outsiders” do have the right to analyze and criticize a religious ideology that is threatening their well-being. The Jews are not doing that to others, nor have they ever, in my experience. But followers of Islam are threatening our very existence and we have every right to dissect the beliefs that fuel their hate and aggression. Their emotional enslavement to Islam is their problem, not ours. Our problem is keeping them from enslaving us, in the name of Islam.
Islam cannot be “kinder and gentler” or it will not be Islam. The only people they will be “kind and gentle” to are their own “brothers”. Even their “sisters” get beaten if they don’t toe the line.
13 years ago
Alana Goodman at the Commentary magazine blog Contentions tries the same smear against Pam: “The argument that Jasser’s Islam “does not exist” is similar to the one used by terrorists like Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki….”
A once powerful voice against communist hegemony (Commentary) has been deconstructed into an apologist vehicle for a non-existent reformist Islam. Shame!
13 years ago
I have always been suspicious of Jasser for the simple reason he has not received a death fatwa from the main stream mullahs for his heretical statements like there is no wife-beating sura in the Quran. He maybe playing good cop.
13 years ago
I wd compare Dr. Jasser to the VERY few righteous souls scattered among the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah:
31 And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty’s sake.
32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten’s sake.
33 And the LORD went his way, as soon as he had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned unto his place.
God was willing to spare the cities of sin if there were just 10 righteous men there. I wd suggest the same attitude by us for the “House” of Islam–even a tiny righteous portion there should be encouraged and supported, especially when they risk death by their dissent.
A few hundred years ago, the Protestant Reformation was begun by 1 man, who rebelled against ~1500 years of tradition. Perhaps a few hundred years from now Dr Jasser and the great Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury (http://jewishodysseus.blogspot.com/2008/08/muslim-heroes-v-bengali-sakharov.html) will be remembered the same way?
13 years ago
Oh, and a follow-up question: is there any specific policy or position that Dr. Jasser holds that his critics disagree with? I have yet to hear one. I did watch him chew up and spit out the vile Cong. Keith Ellison on YouTube a few months back, though.
Isn’t this whole debate an utterly sterile or wasteful exercise on what we believe to be inside another man’s heart?
13 years ago
““And if We had so willed, We could have given every soul its guidance, but the word from Me concerning evildoers took effect: that I will fill hell with the jinn and mankind together.” (Qur’an 32:13) So actually Allah is saying that he decided not to guide some people, but instead to send them to hell – apparently for no reason at all.”
I remember reading another verse that says Allah didn’t kill them because it is the Muslims’ duty to kill them.
“Qur’an 4:34 tells men to beat their disobedient wives after first warning them and then sending them to sleep in separate beds.”
This is a time out of a sort in that it does not condone immediate violence, but rather than the Western concept of time out for reconciliation, in Islam it is a time out for the wife to be manipulated by isolation, and THEN to be followed by a beating.
“interpretations of Islam such as Dr. Jasser’s are personal, idiosyncratic, and non-traditional – a fact that is all too often glossed over by his enthusiastic and well-heeled non-Muslim backers, who would prefer to pretend that he represents the dominant mainstream.”
Theoretically, to the extent that there may exist a mainstream majority who cultural Muslims, Muslims in Name Only (MINO), and apatheists who are equally ignorant of Islamic doctrine; and whose Islam is equally “personal, idiosyncratic, and non-traditional, Jasser could represent a dominant majority.
Unfortunately, my research into this has belied this hypothesis. First, there is Islam’s dualism of the face they show to outsiders versus how they are among themselves. In Undercover Mosque: The Return, the teacher discusses not befriending unbelievers. When a student objects, she talks about how they can be nice to unbelievers, and try to bring them to Islam, but not reveal their secrets.
In Islam: What the West Needs to Know, Walid Shoebat talks about his time working for a US company during the Gulf War. When he was around Americans, if there was an American loss, he had to say sympathetic and consoling words, but when alone or among Arabs at home, it was “Allahu Akbar”. He particularly remembers the flyers for jihad fundraisers. In Arabic, it said exactly what it was, but the English said it was a Middle Eastern cultural event. He says it even extended to behavior in the social environment. If they are talking among themselves, again, they are open about how things are. But if a Westerner walked up to join the conversation, it changed to topics palatable to the Western mind.
I think one of the things that really cinched it up for me was the Horowitz v. Albarhi exchange at UCSD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fSvyv0urTE
Just looking at her, you would think if there is anyone who would represent a demographic for moderate Islam, it would be her. Her dress is semi-modern – lose the hajib and scarf, and she would look normal – she is young, a university student, and raised in America. But the sickness lies beneath the veneer as manifest in what she says, and, really, her entire attitude and supremacist demeanor.
You might think she is just an exception, but David says that at UCSB there were 50 just like her, and not one would denounce Hamas. The only way I can find to be generous and give benefit of the doubt here would be to say that the moderates are not Muslim activists and stay away from these kinds of things.
If such people exist, Dr. Walid Phares in his December interview at GadiAdelman.com says that the moderate Muslims are afraid and intimidated. This speaks volumes about the community culture and is more in harmony with what Pamela says about the nature of the community when she talks about the difficulty her rescue charges have in leaving Islam.
“Yes, because I do not hate all Muslims. Because I, too, wanted to believe.”
Well, that puts us in the same boat. I was surprised when I saw him on “The Third Jihad”, and I am truly disappointed to see it come to this.
“I never suggested conversion of one-fifth of the world’s population. But any ideology that calls for violence and oppression of those outside the fold must be defeated.”
Hirohito offered MacArthur to convert Japan to a Christian country after WWII. MacArthur graciously declined, but did implement the Shinto Directive as a means of dealing with violent religion.
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/08/robert-spencer-proposed-realistic.html
It allowed Shinto to remain as a personal religion of private devotion, but prohibited it in public, such as education and politics. This still remains a problem for Islam because of the mandated violence and conquest, unless the law also declared Muhammad a fallen prophet and only permitted the Meccan Koran.
Ali Sina says no Muslim can read his book, Understanding Muhammad and remain a Muslim. He believes that the truth is the only way to break Islam.
http://alisina.org/about/
13 years ago
Judaism is not a political religion. 65% of Islamic doctrine is devoted to political relations with kafirs. Get the free download, Statistical Islam at CSPIpublishing.com
13 years ago
I am so converting to islam so I can:
1) beat my wife
2) have sex with her whenever I want even if she doesn’t want to
3) have sex with children (in the example of the Prophet (PBUH) and Aisha)
4) have sex with my 3 other wives
5) have sex with my sex slaves (as many as I want)
6) have sex with animals (ala the rulings of the Ayatollah Khomeini)
Mmmmm…. with so many sex options, why do I need to die for paradise when I can have it here on earth?
13 years ago
Pam, I always go straight to the question, what about the honor murders?
Where is Daisy? Where is Jasser? Rauf? For that matter, Obama? Silent!
You got this guy nailed, there is no excuse, no answer ANYONE can offer
me as to why they are silent. Except, that by their silence, they show
guilt by omission. “He who has the ability to act on an injustice,
but who stands idly by, is just as guilty as he who holds the knife.”
Until the day this Jasser fellow hops on your band wagon and works to
give shelter and safety to those who are leaving Islam, he’s full of pig
poop! Talk is cheap Jasser! Although, in reality, Muslims desperate to
leave Islam would probably not want a defender of Islam helping them into
“safety”…if you know what I mean.
13 years ago
Who should I believe, Dr. Jasser or the Qur’an?
The Qur’an is believed by Muslims to be the Word of Allah. Muslims may not change or interpret it. So Jasser is an apostate. Unless he is practicing taquiyya.
Here’s what the Qur’an says –
Allah does not guide disbelievers. 2:264
“Give us victory over the disbelieving folk.” 2:286
Those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, theirs will be a heavy doom. 3:4
Those who disbelieve will be fuel for the Fire. 3:10
Those who disbelieve shall be overcome and gathered unto Hell. 3:12
Non-muslims will be punished by Allah for their nonbelief. 3:19
“If they surrender, then truly they are rightly guided, and if they turn away, then it is thy duty only to convey the message.”
(The message for those who won’t surrender is “you’re going to hell.”) 3:20
Those who disbelieve, promise them a painful doom. 3:21
“They [Christians and Jews] say: The Fire will not touch us save for a certain number of days. That which they used to invent hath deceived them regarding their religion.” (The Fire will burn them forever.) 3:24
Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. 3:28
Allah loveth not the disbelievers. 3:32
Allah will punish disbelievers in this world and the next. They will have no helpers. 3:56
Don’t believe anyone who is not a Muslim. 3:73
Theirs will be a painful doom. 3:77
All non-Muslims will be rejected by Allah after they die. 3:85
Apostates will be cursed by Allah, angels, and men. They will have a painful doom. 3:86-88
Disbelievers will have a painful doom. And they will have no helpers. 3:91
Disbelievers will have their faces blackened on the last day. They will face an awful doom. 3:105-6
Muslims are the best people. Most Non-muslims are “evil-livers.” 3:110
Those who disbelieve will be burnt in the Fire. 3:116
Don’t be friends with non-Muslims. They all hate you and want to ruin you. 3:118
The Fire is prepared for disbelievers. 3:131
Give us victory over the disbelieving folk. 3:147
Do not obey disbelievers. 3:149
We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Their habitation is the Fire 3:151
“Is one who followeth the pleasure of Allah as one who hath earned condemnation from Allah, whose habitation is the Fire?”
Unbelievers will burn forever in the Fire. 3:162
Theirs will be an awful doom. 3:176
Disbelievers do not harm Allah, but will have a painful doom. 3:177
Disbelievers will go to Hell. 3:196
Those who disobey Allah and his messenger will be burnt with fire and suffer a painful doom. 4:14
For the disbelievers and those who make a last-minute conversion, Allah has prepared a painful doom. 4:18
For disbelievers, We prepare a shameful doom. 4:37
“Allah has cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not.” 4:46
Christians and Jews must believe what Allah has revealed to Muhammad or Allah will disfigure their faces or turn them into apes, as he did the Sabbath-breakers. (See 2:65-66) 4:47
Those who ascribe a partner to Allah (like Christians do with Jesus and the Holy Spirit) will not be forgiven. They have “invented a tremendous sin.” 4:48, 4:116
Those who invent lies about Allah are guilty of flagrant sin. 4:50
Jews and Christians believe in idols and false deities, yet they claim to be more rightly guided than Muslims. 4:51
“Those (Christians and Jews) are they whom Allah hath cursed.” 4:52
Hell is sufficient for their burning. 4:55
13 years ago
“Muslim women cannot marry non-Muslim women “??? I’m guessing you meant “non-Muslim man” but you’ve got to watch what you’re typing, Pamela.
13 years ago
I thought we viewed Dr.Zuhdi Jasser not to long ago on jihadwatch as one of “the good guys”.
So what happened? Does that still stand outside of Pamela’s article in American Thinker?
13 years ago
Alright John, but would we take a progressives suggestion on what makes a teapartier? On what makes a “good” conservative or a “bad” conservative?
13 years ago
Your questions are totally irrelevant to the issue at hand. Islam has a well-known problem with it’s members being uneducated and unaware of its teachings, so of course experts on Islam like Robert Spencer and Steve Coughlin, or even proper scholars are in a far better position to evaluate the differing concepts. Islam is different from other religions because the doctrines are set in stone by Muhammad with a death penalty for changing them. So it is eminently possible to know what the doctrines are and to compare them with variants proposed by others. These are basic techniques to anyone trained in comparative religion or comparative literature.
13 years ago
When push comes to shove ALL practicing muslims always fall in line with islam. Do not trust a one of them.
13 years ago
Idiot! Oh not you, just thinking out loud. How can you compare a Teapartier to the Muslim’s? One behaves himself while protesting on detrimental and important issues and cleans up after himself when finished protesting…while the other is chanting Death to the “Big Satan” while burning flags and screaming death to the “Infidel” and push the Jews into the sea. You are an(refer to first word on my post) or a liar to make this comparison. It helps if their is some credence to what you say. A good opinion is based on truth or gross assumption. Yours opinion is based on non-sense at best. But hey you have a right to speak your mind/_ _ _ _.
13 years ago
Jasser at first seemed ‘a breath of fresh air’. But low, judge a man by his fruit…That breath of fresh air turned into hot garlic breath.
DON’T GIVE TO RADICAlISLAM.COM that money can and will be used against you in the Shariah Court of Law.
13 years ago
Jasser at first seemed ‘a breath of fresh air’. But low, judge a man by his fruit…That breath of fresh air turned into hot garlic breath.
DON’T GIVE TO RADICAlISLAM.COM that money can and will be used against you in the Shariah Court of Law.
13 years ago
Zuhdi Jasser is very much like Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev tried to take a faulty economic system(communism) and make it work more efficiently.
Jasser is trying to take a vicious cult (Islam) and make it look more like a normal religion.
He is probably sincere in his own way, but is unlikely to reform a system that has not changed in 1400 years. There is too much violence in the Muslim rule book to effect any meaningful reform.
12 years ago
Sr Jasser is a sweet man, I agree, but I too think his description that ‘most Muslims’ are pretty much like him is highly exaggerated. It is however great that he is trying to bring greater awareness to the threat of Islam to our society instead of constantly pushing it under the carpet.
8 years ago
At a loss as to how Dr Jasser reconciles his religion and his country’s constitution. Has he? http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/upload/wysiwyg/article%20pdfs/Shariah_VS_Constitution.pdf
