Archive for Catholicism

The Young Turks: Islam, the New Catholicism

Posted in Anti-Loons with tags , , , , , , , on May 5, 2012 by loonwatch

Historical parallels in the treatment of Catholics and Muslims in the USA, brought to you by TYT Nation Channel contributor, Professor Rich:

Hate Blogger Robert Spencer Attacks Interfaith Leaders, Imam Mohamed Magid and Cardinal Theodore McCarrick

Posted in Anti-Loons, Loon Blogs, Loon Sites with tags , , , , , , on December 28, 2011 by loonwatch

Hate Blogger Robert Spencer Attacks Interfaith Leaders, Imam Mohamed Magid and Cardinal Theodore McCarrick

by Jacob M. Hausner

It is no surprise that extremist right-wing anti-Muslim polemicist Robert Spencer is on the prowl, targeting peacemakers and interfaith leaders. In a recent blogpost Spencer targets Roman Catholic Archbishop Emeritus of Washington D.C., Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and ISNA president Imam Mohamed Magid.

He begrudges the fact that Cardinal McCarrick “respects Imam Mohamed Magid”:

Spencer rehashes his favorite method of attack; smear and libel. He claims the Imam has ties to the “Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas,”

The Imam Mohamed Magid is with the ADAMS Center. From a February 2008 report: “Another D.C.-area mosque, the ADAMS Center, was founded and financed by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, and has been one of the top distributors of Wahhabist anti-Semitic and anti-Christian dogma.”

Also, Magid is the President of the Islamic Society of North America. ISNA has admitted ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, and is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case.

What does Spencer cite to prove his claims about the Imam? The ubiquitously termed “February 2008 report.” By not naming the report or its authors Spencer hopes the reader will lazily trust that it is a credible source. The fact is the so-called “report” is nothing except more Islamophobic yarn spun by the anti-Islam industry.

The report was put together by the Mapping Sharia Project led by David Yerushalmi, David Gaubatz and Frank Gaffney under the auspicious of SANE (Society of American National Existence). You may remember David Gaubatz as the co-author of Muslim Mafia which asserted that Muslim spy interns had infiltrated the government; Newsweek labeled this one of the top ten wackiest conspiracy theories of 2009. SANE is well known as a racist organization, and the Mapping Sharia Project has been discredited for its indulgence in conspiracy myths and shoddy methodology.

Amongst the main myths forwarded in the “report” is the false claim that 3 out of 4 mosques in the United States “preach anti-Western Jihadist hate,” including the ADAMS Center. The truth it turns out is that this report has never been made public, the link that Spencer provides is to a World Net Daily article from 2008 claiming to report the findings of an “undercover survey.”

Spencer’s other attempt at tying Imam Magid to the “Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas” is to claim that ISNA has “admitted” ties to both organizations. To do so he doesn’t rely on statements by ISNA or its members (i.e. Facts), but again returns to the anti-Islam echo chamber to gather “information.” Spencer cites pseudo-journalist turned “terror expert” Steven Emerson. Steven Emerson’s terror expertise led him in the past to respond to the Oklahoma City Bombing by claiming it showed “a Middle Eastern trait. It goes without saying that ISNA has never claimed to endorse, support or be in any way associated with either the “Muslim Brotherhood” or “Hamas.”

Spencer seeks to give Cardinal McCarrick the “Lowe’s treatment,” trying to intimidate him into repudiating Imam Magid through falsities covered by a thinly disguised undercurrent of bigotry. It must be said that such defamation of real peacemakers and freedom fighters is projection on the part of Spencer and his allies.

The real threat and subversion in this country is being carried out by Spencer and his allies in the radical right-wing. They are the ones attacking freedom of religion by lobbying for so-called anti-Sharia’ legislation whose real intent is to ban Islam, protesting the construction of Mosques and furthering the idea that all Muslim leaders and organizations are “fifth columns.”

Who is Robert Spencer?

Spencer is a radical right-wing extremist whose words the anti-Muslim terrorist Anders Breivik cited as inspiration well over one hundred times in his manifesto. Breivik also praised Spencer as deserving of the “Noble Peace Prize.” Spencer is co-founder along with Pamela Geller and John Jay of SIOA, an organization that both the SPLC and the ADL have labeled as a hate group. SIOA’s trademark patent was denied by the U.S. government due to its anti-Muslim nature.

Spencer has linked to sites promoting the designated terrorist organization MEK. Spencer is a denier of the ethnic cleansing and genocide of Bosnians during the Serbian war on Bosnia in the early 90’s. Spencer is a supporter and friend of right-wing anti-Muslim European politicians and groups including: Geert Wilders, EDL, SIOE, BPE and others.

Scenes From New York’s Anti-Gay Marriage Rally: ‘Those Who Practice Such Things Are Worthy Of Death’

Posted in Loon Pastors, Loon Politics, Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 16, 2011 by loonwatch
Sen. Ruben Diaz was present at the rally

Robert Spencer’s co-religionist says “gays are worthy of death” at anti-Gay marriage rally, imagine if a Muslim were to say that? (Hat tip: Om)

Scenes From New York’s Anti-Gay Marriage Rally: ‘Those Who Practice Such Things Are Worthy Of Death’

by Igor Volsky

(Think Progress)

Several thousand people rallied in the Bronx, New York yesterday against the impending push to legalize same-sex marriage. Organizers, including state Senator Reverend Ruben Diaz, several Spanish radio stations and churches, argued that marriage should be defined as a union between “one man and one woman” and urged the state government to abandon their effort or put the initiative up to a vote. “Let the people decide. If the people say yes, we’ll shut up,” Diaz said at the steps of the Bronx court house. “Bring it to the people, bring it to the people…look at the people!” he yelled to the crowd of several thousand Hispanic Americans.

Diaz stressed that he was not condemning gay people, telling a small group of protesters gathered across the court house that his granddaughter — who was taking part in the counter demonstration — was a lesbian. “We respect you and we love you. You’ve never heard from me a word of insult to you. You’ve never heard me say — you never seen me call for homophobia or violence,” Diaz said, as organizers and police brought Erica Diaz to the main podium to stand with Diaz. “This is my granddaughter,” he said, stressing that he had “respect” for her “decisions.” “She does what she wants,” Diaz told the crowd.

And while the march and rally focused on the Christian message of “love,” the event remained deeply homophobic, with speakers routinely condemning gay people as “sinners” and describing same-sex relations as something wholly unnatural or perverse. In fact, just minutes before Diaz took to the microphone to stress his respect for gay people, Rev. Ariel Torres Ortega of Radio Visión Cristiana said that the gay people are “worthy of death”:

Committing sexual acts between man and man. And receiving the retribution of the things that they have done from straying away. And because they did not take God in count. God gave them over to reprimand their mind to do things that are not right, being against all justice, fornication, perversity, aberrations, malignity…those who practice such things are worthy to death, not only do they do it, but those who also practice it. God bless this earth. That is the word of God.

Watch a compilation:

Demonstrators held signs that read “God’s Marriage = 1 man & 1 woman” and “Gay Marriage Is Against the Word of God.”

A group called ‘The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Prosperity’ (TFP) led off the march and provided the musical accompaniment. One member distributed hundreds of flyers to passerbys explaining “why homosexual ‘marriage’ is harmful and must be opposed.” The print-out describes same-sex marriage as “evil,” against “natural law” and argues that allowing gay people to marry would “obscure certain basic moral values, devalue traditional marriage, and weaken public morality.”

“If homosexual ‘marriage’ is universally accepted as the present step in sexual ‘freedom,’ what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior?” the flyer asks.

For more coverage of the rally, click over to Good As YouLGBTQ Nation, and JoeMyGod.

Bomb Attacks on the Rise…in Ireland, What if they were Muslim?

Posted in Loon Violence with tags , , , , , , , on May 12, 2011 by loonwatch

Should we blame Catholicism for this rise in violence? Or Protestantism? If a Muslim nation were to see a rise in such violence you can be sure that Islam would be blamed. (hat tip: Mike)

Bomb attacks double in Northern Ireland

By Ian Graham

BELFAST (Reuters) – Bomb attacks in Northern Ireland have doubled over the last year, police figures showed on Thursday, evidence that dissident pro-Irish nationalists have stepped up activities to try to derail political stability.

A 1998 deal largely ended three decades of violence but small groups of dissidents say nationalists betrayed their cause by entering politics alongside pro-British unionists instead of pressing a fight for full independence from Britain.

A local election last week boosted the status quo when the ruling coalition was returned with a greater majority.

The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) said 99 viable bombs either exploded or were defused by army experts in the year to the end of March, compared with 50 a year ago.

The security threat level stands at severe and police officers — especially Catholics who have been encouraged to join the force — have been targeted.

At the beginning of April, a car bomb killed a 25 year-old Catholic constable. One man has been charged in connection with the bombing and a woman is being questioned by detectives.

Ronan Kerr was the second Catholic officer to be murdered in two years, several more have been severely wounded or had narrow escapes.

Security chiefs fear the dissidents will launch new attacks on either side of the Irish border to coincide with next week’s visit to the Irish Republic by Queen Elizabeth — the first by a British monarch since Irish independence nearly a century ago.

One dissident group, the Real IRA, used an Easter message to oppose the visit, saying she was wanted for war crimes.

The PSNI have loaned a specially adapted bomb and bullet proof Range Rover to the Irish authorities for the Queen to travel in during her four day visit.

Thursday’s police figures show that 188 people were arrested under the Terrorism Act, compared with 169 the year before. Those charged rose to 40 from 36.

As well as bombings there were 72 shooting incidents, 33 casualties resulting from paramilitary style shootings and 81 paramilitary style assaults.

Ordinary crime has hit a 13 year low and Chief Constable Matt Baggott said that was a reflection of the increasing acceptability of the PSNI in largely Catholic areas where the police were traditionally viewed with hostility.

“Despite the challenges we face, po

Scotland: ‘Lethal Nail Bomb’ Sent to Soccer Team, What if they were Muslim?

Posted in Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , , , , on April 29, 2011 by loonwatch

Can you imagine the ramifications if a Muslim had done this? These packages were designed to “maim and kill,” but for the haters out there only Muslims can be terrorists.

Celtic Manager Sent ‘Lethal’ Nail Bomb

(SkyNews)

Police are hunting a nail bomber who has sent several potentially lethal devices to prominent people connected with Celtic Football Club – including manager Neil Lennon.

The devices were addressed to the team boss, a high-profile lawyer and also to a member of the Scottish Parliament.

Fears former Labour minister and Celtic director Brian Wilson had also been targeted after he received a suspicious parcel proved to be a “false alarm”.

Strathclyde Police say the packages, sent through the post, were designed to “maim or kill”.

They contained a combination of nails and high explosives.

It is believed devices have been sent on at least three separate occasions.

It is understood that the package did reach the office and an employee raised the alarm when nails were seen protruding from it.

Mrs Godman is the outgoing Deputy Presiding Officer in the Scottish Parliament.

Recent media coverage told of how she had worn a Celtic top underneath her jacket whilst on duty during a recent sitting of the Scottish Parliament.

The latest incident was on April 15, when a device was sent to Paul McBride QC at the Faculty of Advocates in Edinburgh.

It was intercepted at a Royal Mail sorting office.

The high-profile barrister works for Celtic and has been an outspoken critic of the Scottish Football Association in its recent dealings with the club.

Although no-one was injured by the three devices, they were handed over to police and were the subject of controlled explosions.

Counter-terrorism officers have contacted public figures they believe could fall into the category of potential targets.

High-profile Catholics are also being warned to be vigilant, including the leader of Scotland’s Catholics, Cardinal Keith O’Brien.

SNP leader and First Minister Alex Salmond said he hoped Scotland would “unite to condemn those who abuse football with their pathetic and dangerous prejudices”.

“We will not tolerate this sort of criminality in Scotland,” he said.

“We’ve got to galvanise ourselves to eradicate this evil from attaching itself to the wonderful game of football.”

Officers are visiting the mail rooms of broadcasters in Scotland as a precaution, to advise staff on how to handle suspect packages.

The hunt for the nail bomber is being concentrated in Scotland.

Investigators are following a line of inquiry relating to the bomber being a rogue supporter of the rival Rangers team.

A spokesman for Strathclyde Police told Sky News: “We believe we are dealing with someone who is Scotland-based. There’s every chance someone from a Loyalist background is involved.”

Piss Christ Art Work Destroyed by Protesting Christians, What if they were Muslim?

Posted in Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , on April 21, 2011 by loonwatch

The famously distasteful artwork by Andres Serrano titled “Piss Christ,” caused quite a stir when it was first shown. Now Christians protesting the artwork in Paris have slashed the painting. Imagine if they had been Muslim? Does this mean Christianity can’t live with offense? Does this mean that Christianity is opposed to free speech?

Serrano Piss Christ Slashed

Angelique Chrisafis, Paris

April 20, 2011

ANDRES Serrano’s Piss Christ has been destroyed by Christians who broke into a French gallery and slashed the photograph after weeks of protests.

The New York photographer’s controversial work shows a small crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist’s urine.

It outraged the US religious right in 1987, when it was first shown. It was vandalised in Melbourne in 1997, and neo-Nazis ransacked a Swedish show by the artist in 2007.

The work has previously been shown without incident in France, but for the past two weeks Catholic groups have campaigned against it, culminating in hundreds of people marching through Avignon on Saturday in protest.

On Sunday morning, four people in sunglasses entered the gallery. One took a hammer from his sock and threatened security staff. A guard restrained one man but the others managed to smash an acrylic screen and slash the photograph with what police believe was a screwdriver or ice pick.

Last week the gallery complained of ”extremist harassment” by Christians who wanted the image banned.

The Archbishop of Vaucluse, Jean-Pierre Cattenoz, called the work ”odious” and said he wanted ”this trash” taken off the gallery walls. Saturday’s street protest against the work gained the support of the far-right National Front.

The owner of the work, Yvon Lambert, had complained he was being ”persecuted” by religious extremists who had sent him tens of thousands of emails. He likened the atmosphere to the Middle Ages.

French Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand condemned the vandalism as an attack on the fundamental freedoms of creation and expression.

The gallery’s director, Eric Mezil, said he would keep the exhibition open to the public with the destroyed work on show ”so people can see what barbarians can do”.

Spanish priest arrested with 21,000 images of child porn; what if he were Muslim?

Posted in Feature, Loon Pastors with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 24, 2010 by loonwatch

Spain was largely free of the high-profile child sex abuse scandal that rocked the Catholic Church in many European countries and the United States… until now. Even more men of the cloth are found to be involved in sexual child abuse. A Spanish Catholic priest was arrested with 21,000 images of child porn on computersin his church.

To be fair, it should be obvious that hoarding pornography of any sorts, especially children, is against the formal teachings of the Catholic Church. “If the accusation is true, this is something that hurts us deeply, that we sincerely regret and that we reject unreservedly,” the diocese said. Just because some criminals belong to a faith does not mean that faith endorses criminal behavior. Reasonably open-minded people can understand that.

But what if he were Muslim?

Expect no fairness from the anti-Muslim conflict-o-sphere. Child porn is a tenet of Islam, we’d be told. We’d see another repeat of the whole child bride fiasco, echoing again and again the tired “Muhammad is a pedophile” smear.

But was Muhammad’s marriage to the young but post-pubescent Aisha unusual for 7th century Arabia? Nope. As Colin Turner of the University of Durham Middle East Studies department points out:

A marriage between an older man and a young girl was customary among the Bedouins, as it still is in many societies across the world today. It was not unheard of in Muhammad’s time for boys and girls to be promised to each other in marriage almost as soon as they were born, particularly if the union was of direct political significance to the families concerned. However, such marriages were almost certainly not consummated until both parties had entered adulthood, which Arabs in the 7th century tended to reach at an earlier age than Westerners today. It is highly unlikely that Muhammad would not have taken Aisha into his bed until she was at least in her early  teens, which was wholly in keeping with the customs of the day, and in context not in the least improper.

[Turner, C. (2006). The messenger. Islam: the basics(pp. 34-35). London: Routledge.]

But wasn’t Muhammad some sexual pervert that couldn’t control his libido? False. As Aisha herself testified:

Narrated Aisha: “The Prophet used to kiss and embrace his wives while he was fasting, and he had more power to control his desires than any of you.”

[Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3 Book 31 Number 149]

But wasn’t Muhammad a violent misogynist who beat women and children all day? Wrong again. As Aisha again testifies:

Narrated Aisha: “The Messenger of Allah never struck a servant or a woman.”

[Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 41 Number 4786]

عَنْ عَائِشَةَ، عَلَيْهَا السَّلاَمُ قَالَتْ مَا ضَرَبَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم خَادِمًا وَلاَ امْرَأَةً قَطُّ

Now, do these same anti-Muslim bloggers know (or care) that Christian sources record that Joseph married the Virgin Mary when he was 90 and she was 12? Probably not.

A year after his wife’s death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age. Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, went up to Jerusalem among the candidates…

[Catholic Encyclopedia, St. Joseph]

Will these same anti-Muslim keyboard warriors accuse Joseph of being a pedophile and Christianity of being a religion of pedophilia? Not likely. So what is at play here? As George Readings observed, “This attempt to aggressively apply a modern British definition of pedophilia to seventh century Arabia strikes me as a sign of severe anthropological illiteracy…”

Anthropological illiteracy indeed! But who has time for troublesome scientific principles and scholarly analysis if you rely on “closed information systems based on pretend information” and your anti-Muslim canards fit so neatly into your supremacist ideological view of the world?

Note: This article is part of our “What if they were Muslim?” series. In this series, we examine the double standards used by anti-Muslim activists when discussing religious extremism in Islam as compared to other religions. We reject using extremists of any religion to justify prejudice, stereotypes, and hostility towards all members of that religion. Period.

 

Ahmed Rehab: Passion and Peril at a Pro-Christian Rally

Posted in Anti-Loons with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on November 11, 2010 by loonwatch

Muslims in Chicago joined their Christian brethren in condemning and opposing the slaughter of Christians in Iraq. (hat tip: Robert Spencer)

Beyond the Comfort Zone: Passion and Peril at a Pro-Christian Rally

(ahmedrehab.com/blog)

by Ahmed Rehab

Yesterday, CAIR-Chicago staff and interns participated in a rally alongside the Assyrian community of Chicago to condemn violence against Iraqi Christians. The rally was organized in response to the massacre of dozens of Assyrian Christians in Baghdad on October 31st.

It was a tricky decision for us. We knew that there could be anti-Muslim sentiment at the rally that would put is in a precarious position, but we decided that our disdain for the heinous acts of Al Qaeda far exceeded our concern for personal inconvenience.

We decided that the right thing for us to do was to act on our values and our sincere feelings of camaraderie with our fellow human beings in times of anguish. We wanted to raise our voices as Muslims in support of the Assyrian community and against terrorists who purport to act in the name of our faith.

Al Qaeda does not have reverence for any innocent life, including those of Muslims. It is a fact that they have bombed many more Mosques in Iraq than churches.
While we were weary of the possibility that some people at the rally could lash out at us, Muslims-at-large who condemn terrorism, we were not interested in seeing ourselves as victims. The only victims we were prepared to recognize were the 52 innocent souls that were claimed by the recent church bombing, and the many others – Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and otherwise – claimed by terrorism.

And so we set out with signs including “An Attack on Your Church is an Attack on my Mosque,” “American Muslims, Iraqi Christians, One Blood,” “My Brother is an Assyrian,” “We Stand with Iraqi Christians,” and “Muslims for Peace.”

We held our signs up high and marched in solidarity with the predominantly Assyrian Christian crowd.

The reaction we got was mixed.

In an interesting scene that summed up my experience, I was asked by one man if I was a Muslim. I said “Yes, I am.” He then asked, “Am I impure?”

I joked, “I don’t know did you shower this morning?”

He dismissed the joke and asked me if I thought “his blood was impure.” I told him, “why would you expect that, you’ve never met me, I am here supporting you, what about me leads you to ask me such a question?” He told me, “You said you are a Muslim.” I told him, “so what?” He said that Muslims believe this sort of thing. I told him that he had been grossly misinformed, “you’re blood like all innocent blood is holy to me.”

Another man interjected and started yelling that I was “unwanted” there, motioning with his arms for me to leave. As he continued to yell at me, my attention was drawn to something that touched me. A young woman a few yards away leaned down on a stroller she was pushing and started to sob uncontrollably.

At first, I thought it had nothing to do with us but my intuition told me otherwise. I asked here, “what’s wrong, why are you crying?”

She said unable to hold back her tears, “I am so sorry you and your friends have to deal with idiots like that, this man does not represent us, I am so embarrassed. This is so wrong.”

Here I was standing before a stark display of contrasts, extreme animosity on one end and extreme compassion on the other.

In a single powerful moment, I was reminded yet again at the absurdity of those who generalize about any one group of people. Here were two people of the same religion, color, and ethnic background standing side by side rallying for the same cause — and yet they could not be any more different.

I hugged her and tried to comfort her, “Trust me, I know, we have our share of idiots too, everyone has them, most people here have been kind.”

And it was true. Many in the crowd were genuinely happy – almost relieved – to see Muslims standing with them at this rally. Some smiled, some nodded, others simply said “thank you!” It reinforced my feeling that our participation was extremely important.

While there were other incidents – one lady held a cross up to my face and told me I was a “bad Muslim” for condemning terrorism which is “in my Quran”, two people told us that we are going to hell for not accepting Jesus as our Saviour, some guy yelled profanities and was held back by a girl half his size, another called for reciprocal violence – in every single instance, someone else would take a strong stance, telling the others to back off and apologizing.

As we made our way back to the office, we were chased by two girls. “Can I ask you a question?” one of them said. “Can I just give each of you guys a hug?”

We met back in the office for an evaluation.

I learned that my colleagues’ experience mostly mirrored mine.

Despite the bigotry of some, we all felt strong solidarity with most people. We felt as if the Assyrian community, with its good and bad, was our own.

It is of no surprise to any of us that there are some negative feelings among some Arab and Assyrian Christian communities regarding Islam and Muslims. Part of it is understandable to us, given the ugly acts by saboteurs claiming to act in the name of Islam. Part of it is due to the opportunistic work of preachers like father Zakaria Boutros who make a living out of telling Arabic-speaking Christians that Islam is an evil religion. Part of it still is due to the lack of dialogue and engagement between our faith communities, and that was the part we resolved to try to change.

Assyrians have a long and proud history that goes back to one of the earliest civilizations in the world. They live as a religious minority in their indigenous homeland. For centuries, they have coexisted peacefully with their Muslim neighbors. But at other times, especially now, the instability and violence is leaving them feeling frightened for their loved ones and overall vulnerable. Some of them blame Al Qaeda, others demonize all Muslims, and others still blame the United States and its wars.

One thing we must never allow is for the bad amongst us – terrorists, extremists, ideologues of exclusion and hate – to succeed in turning the rest of us against each other. We must condemn them, ostracize them, and disempower them. The way to do that is to strengthen our relations, and stand with one another. That is the only way to spell defeat for the agents of hate.

We must emerge from our comfort zones and stand together as one against all forms of violence, ignorance, and intolerance.

When Christians are attacked, they should NOT have to rally alone. We must rally along with them. When Jews are attacked, they should NOT have to rally alone. When Muslims are attacked, we should NOT have to rally alone.

 

Robert Spencer v. Peter Kreeft: “The Only Good Muslim is a Bad Muslim”

Posted in Feature, Loon Blogs with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 9, 2010 by loonwatch
Robert Spencer is lost

Robert Spencer had a “debate” at Thomas More College recently with a former professor of his, Catholic Theologian and apologist Peter Kreeft. It was quite evident that the two were friends and they were quite chummy with one another, in fact it was pointed out by Kreeft that this wasn’t a debate as much as it was a “dialogue” or “discussion.”

The Debate:

The resolution being debated was that “the only good Muslim is a bad Muslim.” Of course yours truly Robert Spencer, affirmed the resolution, defending it with the usual canard of ‘any Muslim who truly practices his faith is potentially dangerous and a threat to society.’ The “debate” was interesting as it exposed even more vividly the inherent biases and prejudices held by Spencer, the deep lack of understanding and knowledge of Islamic theology, belief and history as well as his limited command of the Arabic language.

Kreeft who didn’t provide much of a challenge to Spencer and who showed brightly his Ultra-Conservative Catholic belief essentially agreed with 95% of what Spencer was saying. While it is clear that Kreeft regards Muslim devotion to, and confidence in their faith in high esteem he nevertheless believes Islam is a “primitive,” “defective,” and “false” religion that has caused “more bloodshed” than Christianity.

Instead of challenging Spencer’s consistent distortions of Islam and Islamic teaching (he deferred to Spencer as an “expert on Islam”) he pivoted the argument to say that the greater threat to Catholicism is the Enlightenment and the Sexual Revolution.

Surprisingly, Spencer agrees with Professor Kreeft regarding the Enlightenment being a threat to Catholicism though he didn’t explicitly say that Islam was less of a threat. I can see how Ultra-Conservative Catholics may rail against the Enlightenment, it was the era which saw a secularist revolt in the name of Reason against the Catholic Church and which led to formulas for the Separation of Church and State, it also witnessed the decline of the power of the Catholic Church in the temporal realm.

However, it is quite hypocritical for Spencer to agree with such a premise, especially considering Spencer claims to be a defender of the West. Agreeing that the Enlightenment is bad is like saying that the Separation of Church and State is bad, or that Constitutional government is bad, all the things that Spencer claims to champion! (but which we have frequently shown is just a front for his own anti-Freedom supremacist beliefs).

A few other points were likewise revealed in this debate:

Spencer’s terrible command of Arabic and very poor articulation of Arabic. This has been revealed on other occasions such as when Danios slammed Spencer and one of his JihadWatch groupies‘ faulty understanding of the word dhimmi, which Spencer was trying to pass off as meaning “guilty people.”

Spencer said during the course of the dialogue on the topic of Islamic views of marriage that,

In Islamic marriage the woman is essentially chattel, and actually the word for marriage in Islam is an obscenity in Arabic, I am not making this up, the theological word for marriage in Islam is not a word that people say in polite company.

(Gasps from the crowd)

It’s because its a very degraded idea.

In this instance Spencer says that the theological word for marriage in Islam is actually an obscenity! A ridiculous notion that underscores the willful and deliberate ignorance of the so-called “scholar of Islam.”

The word that Spencer is likely referring to is “Nikah” which simply means “marriage.” In claiming that “Nikah” is an obscene word that cannot be uttered in polite company, “scholar” Robert Spencer is committing a laughable gaffe that underscores yet again the shallow nature of his knowledge of Arabic and Islamic terminology. He is confusing a classical Arabic word Nikah, with the colloquial word (“Neik”), a different word, just because they sound similar. This would be like Spencer suggesting that Richard is an obscene word, because a colloquial subtract “Dick” is used as a derogatory word for penis. Well, here Spencer is arguing that Richard is an obscene word. That’s your scholar.

Also, when Spencer attempted to say Arabic words such as madhabnasikhmansukh, etc. it sounded like an Arabic 101 student struggling with pronunciation, it was quite embarrassing.

Kreeft, in one of the rare instances where he pushed back against his buddy Spencer said,

Kreeft: Doesn’t the Qur’an say that you can only have four wives if you respect them and treat them equally?

Spencer: It doesn’t say respect all of them, I have it here, it says you can have four wives if you treat them all equally, in other words if you treat them all the same, if you’re beastly to all of them then you can have them. It doesn’t say anything about respect.

Here Spencer reveals more of his biases and readings of his own prejudice into Islamic text. He believes the Qur’an calls for men to treat their wives “beastly.” Can he provide us a quote, a single verse that says anything remotely near that claim? In fact his claims are belied by the fact that the Qur’an and Islamic teaching specifically call for love, harmony, and respect between a husband and wife.

Take this verse (30:21),

“And amongst His signs is that He created for you from yourselves mates that you may find tranquility in them; and He placed between you love and compassion. Indeed in that are signs for a people who contemplate.”

or this one (2:228),

“And they (women) have rights similar to those (men) over them in kindness…”

or this (2:187),

“They (women) are your garments and you are their garments.”

or take the saying of Prophet Muhammad,

“The best amongst you, are the best for their wives”

So much for all that chattel nonsense.

More disturbing was when the question shifted from one in which Islamic belief is questioned to questioning the mere presence of Muslims in the West.

In reply to a commenter/questioner from the audience who basically asked “what will we do with Muslims in the West, since they are in our midst now,” Spencer replied,

Anyone who professes the Islamic faith, if he delves into the teachings of his own religion, he can end up being someone who is very dangerous to us. Now that doesn’t mean that people should be round up into camps and such but we need to enforce our own laws about sedition and formulate some sane immigration policies and recognize that this is an ideological conflict and not a problem of racism.

Oh thank heavens! At least Spencer isn’t calling for camps! Though his buddy Michelle Malkin does. Muslims need to *just* be aware that for merely professing to follow Islam they can be convicted of sedition! That is really the import of what Spencer is saying, he is calling for Muslims to be locked up and denied entry to the USA. Very Geert Wilders-esque.

The moderator asked the horrid question earlier to Kreeft and Spencer,

Couldn’t we learn from Muslims what we need to learn from reading their books but nevertheless energetically fighting their attempts to assert themselves in American society, restricting their entrance into our countries and just generally fighting political Islam, protecting our own religious freedom and our own political freedom by aggressively imposing our own values on our own societies. In other words, not permitting them polygamy, not permitting them honor killing, or wife beating or any of the other aspect of Sharia that they are asserting. In other words couldn’t we get all this from your book, your book tells us what we need to gain from Islam, and so, ok, fine, they can go home now?

(Laughter)

The framing of the question is terrible, which Muslim or Muslim group is asserting Sharia? Who is calling for polygamy and honor killings? Then look at the condescending way in which the moderator asks “why don’t we tell them to go home now?”

So I ask you who is for freedom? Democracy? Who is viewing the “other” as foreign and not belonging?

Kreeft who is supposed to be the “counter” replied,

the long and complete and nuanced version of my answer to your question is ‘yes.’

Spencer answered the question without any caveats simply saying,

yes.

Spencer also asserted that there are “20-30,000 polygamous groups of Muslims in the USA” but he didn’t provide any independent evidence. This is in fact all conjecture to further the “stealth-Muslims-in-our-midst-who-are-trying-to-advance-creeping-Sharia’ conspiracy theory.”

To cap it all off a Thomas More student who is joining the Israeli Army said,

You’re probably familiar with the supremacy clause in the Qur’an, “In order to honor Allah you must kill all the infidels, first the Saturdays and then the Sundays.”

Spencer replied accurately (he had no choice) for once, thereby sparing himself further ridicule from us that “such a verse doesn’t exist in the Qur’an,” but unable to help himself he went on to say,

There is a hadith, it isn’t in the Qur’an that says the Muslim must kill the Jews, and the Jews hide behind trees and the trees cry out and say, O’ Muslim there is a Jew behind me come and kill him, that is an authenticated hadith, and so it is considered to be a laudable practice for a Muslim to kill a Jew because it is something that hastens the coming of the end times in which all things will be consummated, but its not specifically in the Quran like that.

Unbelievable. A colossal falsity, an absurd statement that ventures on the ridiculous and is certainly slanderous. In this instance Spencer is attempting to advance the notion that a tenant of Islam is that the End Times can be hastened and brought quicker by killing Jews.

In fact, Spencer should focus more on his Christian brethren in the Evangelical movement who believe they can hasten the second coming of Christ by planting the seeds of the second Armageddon.

Such a theological precept doesn’t exist in Orthodox Islam. In fact it runs counter to Islamic theology to say that one can hasten the End Times, and if anyone were to claim they could they would be immediately considered a heretic. However, I will deal with this claim in more depth in a future article. Suffice it to say that it is a despicable statement that underscores Spencer’s profound ignorance of Islamic theology and belief.

 

SpencerWatch.com: New Website Takes on anti-Muslim bigot Robert Spencer

Posted in Feature with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 10, 2010 by loonwatch

For years, Robert Spencer has seemed quite comfortable spewing his anti-Muslim polemic uncontested, and then LoonWatch came along and shattered that comfort to bits.

Now we introduce SpencerWatch.com, a site that lays waste, once and for all, to the hate, deception, and fear-mongering that propels Spencer.

The site breaks down Spencer’s bio, agenda, and arguments, with more information than can be found anywhere on the web. It also has bios of Spencer’s “sugar daddy”, David Horowitz as well as Spencer’s “mystery man” Hugh Fitzgerald. The site’s format is a parody of JihadWatch, and in its creative imitation it also has a section on “What they say about Robert Spencer,” which is a comprehensive section on what politicians, scholars, academics, and humanitarians have said about Robert Spencer. There are also quotes directly from Robert Spencer himself, and they quite succinctly capture the loony, zealous and bigotted character that pervades everything Spencer does or says in relation to Islam.

Most importantly, the site will archive all the rebuttals (by the likes of Danios and others) of Spencer’s fraudulent books, articles, and arguments, as well as running commentary on his daily blog posts that expose the fallacy of his logic.

The world will finally have the perfect antidote to his venomous hate-blog. Make sure you read more at “W

 

St. Rose of Lima Church was opposed by Murfreesoboro Residents

Posted in Loon Pastors, Loon Politics with tags , , , , , , , on July 28, 2010 by loonwatch

Very interesting article from the website HispanicNashville on the parallels between the Murfreesboro Mosque and the first Catholic Church built in Murfreesboro.

St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church, like mosque today, was opposed by Murfreesboro residents

The first Catholic person in the Americas to become a saint, Saint Rose of Lima, was born in the capital city of Peru. A church in nearby Murfreesboro bears her name. And like a local mosque that faces vocal opposition for a recently announced building project, the history of Saint Rose of Lima Catholic Church of Murfreesboro also reveals local opposition to one of its planned houses of worship, according to the Daily News-Journal:

A New York couple, Mr. and Mrs. Francis Hoffman, stopped in Murfreesboro on a train trip in 1925. During the layover, they searched in vain for a Catholic church and mass. “Some months later Bishop A. J. Smith in Nashville received a gift to build a chapel” in Murfreesboro. Mrs. Hoffman requested that the new place of worship be named for her patron saint, Saint Rose of Lima.

A lot on the northeast corner of University and Lytle was purchased for the new church from Helen C. Earthman on April 25, 1929, for $2,500.

This plan to construct the county’s first Catholic Church was the target of a local KKKprotest march.

The Daily News-Journal article quotes 93-year-old Murfreesboro historian C.B. Arnette, 93, who witnessed the march protesting the new building for the Saint Rose of Lima congregation.  Arnette said you could recognize marchers by their shoes: one marcher was a local physician, and another was a Church of Christ preacher.

What was the reason for the opposition to Catholics?  The Tennessean points out the history of the 20th century KKK as an organization created in opposition to (mostly Catholic) immigration, preaching “racism, anti-Catholicism, nativism (favoring of native inhabitants over immigrants) and anti-Semitism.”  A commenter points out that Catholics were described as national security threats:

In the 1920s, Hiram Evans, the Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan rose to prominence with a populist, nativistic, and anti-intellectual message to the American public. Klan members identified the Irish and Italian members of Anarchists, IWW, and WFM organizations as national threats that sought to overthrow the government through force. The Klan’s job was to protect Americans from these corrosive elements. They labeled Individuals such as Carlo Tresca, Mother Jones, and Nicola Sacco as “bomb-throwing lunatics.” The Catholics also came under close scrutiny because the pope was a “monarchist” and the Catholics subverted the nation. The Catholic “monarchists” would never assimilate because their religious structure conflicted with the republican ideas of Protestants who had decentralized church hierarchies.

Construction of Saint Rose of Lima’s new building continued anyway, and the building was dedicated just six months after the property was purchased.  The congregation of Saint Rose of Lima Catholic Church of Murfreesboro thrives to this day.

Modern parallels to Saint Rose of Lima history

In modern-day Murfreesboro, the announcement of the construction of a new mosque building, where Muslim faith would be practiced, has also faced opposition.  As reported locally and nationally – including by ABC News – much of the opposition to the mosque has come from local Christians and been in general opposition to Islam:

“We have a duty to investigate anyone under the banner of Islam,” Allen Jackson, thepastor of World Outreach Church, said at the meeting.

Others were quoted by the Tennessean with similar remarks:

“Everybody knows they are trying to kill us.” -Karen Harrell

“Islam is a system of government. Islam is a system of justice. … “I’m afraid we’ll have a training facility in Rutherford County.” -George Erdel

“It’s an ideology. It’s not a religion.” -Bob Hayes

But some Christians and others, including Mike Williams of Smyrna (quoted in another Tennesseanarticle), have gathered and spoken out in favor of the mosque’s construction project:

[Mike] Williams, who attends All Saints Episcopal Church in Smyrna, said he believes “very strongly that all of us are the children of a God.

“We are entitled to an equal inheritance. In America, our inheritance is freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the color of skin. In short, the Constitution of the United States belongs to all of us.”

Williams is one of a number of politicians who have sided with the Constitution on this controversy.  Another is Ben Leming:

I made a stand to protect the rights of every American, not just those that form the majority.  … Unfortunately, there are many people that disagree strongly with or don’t understand this basic American principle and how it should protect the rights of others. … Right now they are lining up to deny other Americans their Constitutional rights and discredit our mission to put the people of Middle Tennessee first in Washington.

Words of wisdom for Christians and Muslims alike, as quoted by the Tennessean, came from MTSU professor Rabbi Rami Shapiro:

“I think people should listen very carefully to their clergy and what they teach. If they teach violence and hatred (of other religions), I think it is incumbent upon the parishioner to get up and walk out.”

 

Robert Spencer: I am Never Wrong even when I am Wrong

Posted in Feature, Loon Blogs with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 6, 2010 by loonwatch

Spencer resembles someone here.

We don’t want to make big hay over errors even from the likes of Robert Spencer, the pseudo-Scholar who swears he is “never wrong.” We just like to take a hammer to those assumptions being parlayed as facts and reduce them to rubble. Loonwatch, over and over again has done just that to Spencer’s work and we will continue to do it until Spencer acknowledges his folly.

We wrote a piece on one more instance of Robert Spencer getting basic information wrong and then trying to pass it off as fact. He claimed Pope Pius XII was a victim of misinformation and that he was in fact “memorialized in Yad Veshem.” Tipped by one of our readers we pointed out the easy to find out fact that Pius XII was not memorialized in Yad Vashem, in fact he has constantly been rejected.

Spencer, originally wrote:

The record of Pope Pius XII is controversial, but there has been a good deal of misinformation publicized about it. In reality, he helped save many hundreds of thousands of Jews and was memorialized at Yad Veshem.

(Click here for a snapshot of the original comment by Spencer)

One of Spencer’s readers, Raqnu, who the JihadWatchers figured was a Muslim Taqqiyah artist because his name is an anagram for Quran (only problem is it also seems to be a name for the Spirit of Justice in the Zend Avesta) asked Spencer what he thought about our claim. Spencer replied,

As far as I know Pius XII is not honored at Yad Veshem.

(Click here for a snapshot of the reply to Raqnu from Spencer)

A clear contradiction to his early comment. Yet, Spencer doesn’t have the guts to acknowledge his mistake and he especially is not going to acknowledge a mistake when it is pointed out to him by Loonwatch. C’mon Spencer where is our hat tip?

Interestingly, Spencer went back to his original comment, and without telling anyone changed what he had written, so instead of saying,

The record of Pope Pius XII is controversial, but there has been a good deal of misinformation publicized about it. In reality, he helped save many hundreds of thousands of Jews and was memorialized at Yad Veshem.

It now says,

The record of Pope Pius XII is controversial, but there has been a good deal of misinformation publicized about it. In reality, he helped save many hundreds of thousands of Jews. The campaign to blacken his name began much later.

(Click here for a snapshot of Spencer’s quiet attempt at covering up his error)

Not a word about how he was propelled by Loonwatch’s article to change his comment. Not even a disclaimer signifying “Update” as most professional bloggers would react in this scenario. Instead, Robert Spencer keeps trudging along hoping no one will notice his error. To do so would concede that he is wrong, and that would bruise his fragile ego. More worrisome for him, it would open up the door in his and his minions’ brains (if it already hasn’t) that maybe Loonwatch is right about his other arguments.

For a paid polemicist that is a scary proposition.

 

Robert Spencer Exposed: Gets Facts on Pope Pius XII Wrong

Posted in Feature, Loon Blogs with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 29, 2010 by loonwatch
This is still my favorite picture of Robert Spencer.

A while back Danios wrote one of his most popular pieces debunking Robert Spencer’s work. It dealt with a chapter from Spencer’s, Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and was titled The Church’s Doctrine of Perpetual Servitude. Spencer wrote a reply that basically skirted around the subject and in effect dug himself into a bigger hole then he was in previously. Danios replied to Spencer who has remained mum on the debate since then, essentially conceding to Danios and Loonwatch.

One of our readers, Paterfamilias, wrote to inform us that Spencer’s reply contained more factual errors. Spencer claimed that Pope Pius XII, though “controversial” was “memorialized at Yad Vashem.”

The record of Pope Pius XII is controversial, but there has been a good deal of misinformation publicized about it. In reality, he helped save many hundreds of thousands of Jews and was memorialized at Yad Veshem.

Oh really, a lot of misinformation? So much for Robert Spencer’s research abilities. He could have easily done a Google search to check the veracity of such a claim, but for a paid polemicist with an ax to grind it’s probably considered a waste of time.

The following article, Pope Pius XII and Yad Vashem, from Wikipedia makes it clear that not only is Pope Pius XII not memorialized at Yad Vashem, his candidacy has been repeatedly rejected for decades.

Yad Vashem, the state of Israel‘s official Holocaust memorial, has generally been critical of Pope Pius XII, the pope during The Holocaust. For decades, Pius XII has been nominated unsuccessfully for recognition as Righteous Among the Nations, an honor Yad Vashem confers on non-Jews who saved Jewish lives during the Holocaust altruistically and at risk to their own lives.

Yad Vashem affixes the following captions to two pictures of Pius XII in both English and Hebrew,

In 1933, when he was Secretary of the Vatican State, he was active in obtaining a Concordat with the German regime to preserve the Church’s rights in Germany, even if this meant recognizing the Nazi racist regime. When he was elected Pope in 1939, he shelved a letter against racism and anti-Semitism that his predecessor had prepared. Even when reports about the murder of Jews reached the Vatican, the Pope did not protest either verbally or in writing. In December 1942, he abstained from signing the Allied declaration condemning the extermination of the Jews. When Jews were deported from Rome to Auschwitz, the Pope did not intervene. The Pope maintained his neutral position throughout the war, with the exception of appeals to the rulers of Hungary and Slovakia towards its end. His silence and the absence of guidelines obliged Churchmen throughout Europe to decide on their own how to react.

Pretty damning stuff.

Yad Vashem’s official website has this to say about Pope Pius XII,

The controversy about Pius XII and the Holocaust is still open. At the end of his visit to Israel in 1964, Pope Paul VI came to Pius’s defense in Jerusalem. On March 12, 1979, Pope John Paul II met with Jewish leaders in Rome and said: “I am happy to evoke in your presence today the dedicated and effective work of my predecessor Pius XII on behalf of the Jewish people.” In a meeting with American Jewish leaders in September 1987 in Miami, John Paul II again recalled the positive attitude of Pius XII. However, his passivity in the face of the Holocaust remains a controversial subject.

How could Robert Spencer get a fact so brutally wrong? Maybe one day Yad Vashem will find Pope Pius XII legitimate for memorializing, but as of now the controversy surrounding his actions and inaction during the Holocaust continue to make the attempts of various Pope’s and advocates unsuccessful.

Robert Spencer should think twice before undertaking a task of disinformation, it just doesn’t fly anymore.

 

Another Sunday, Another Protest Against the Mosque

Posted in Loon-at-large with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on June 21, 2010 by loonwatch

The hysteria of the anti-Mosque crowd continues in Staten Island.

Another Sunday, another protest against proposed Staten Island mosque

by Virgina N. Sherry

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. –  Midland Beach residents opposed to the sale of the empty convent of St. Margaret Mary parish to a Muslim group rallied yesterday afternoon for the second straight Sunday in front of the 2½ -story building, and this time other Staten Islanders joined them, carrying their own protest signs.

“I’m here to support this community because of how frightened everyone is of this group coming in to the neighborhood — the terrorism factor is a big part of it,” said Suzanne Adamo of Castleton Corners, who was born and raised in Midland Beach. She was referring to the Muslim American Society, a national organization whose Brooklyn/Staten Island chapter signed a contract last month with Rev. Keith Fennessy, the parish pastor, to purchase the convent.

“To me, they’re too closed,” added her husband Sal Adamo. “We don’t know them. It’s up to them to show us what and who they are. It’s very frightening.”

One sign on bright yellow cardboard read in black capital letters: “Muslim Brotherhood You Are Not Welcome Here.”

A major issue that has energized opponents of the convent-to-mosque conversion is the alleged links of MAS founders to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, and the belief of many neighborhood residents that the Muslim Brotherhood is itself a terrorist organization.

The U.S. State Department maintains a publicly available list of foreign terrorist organizations. The most current list, dated January 2010, includes the names of 45 groups from around the globe. The Muslim Brotherhood is not on the list.

‘NO FOREIGN TIES’

“Everyone in this country has safety concerns, and I think that’s fair and valid, especially in the wake of September 11,” MAS local spokeswoman Lana Safah said in a phone interview on last night.

“We want to reiterate that we have no ties or affiliations to any foreign entities whatsoever,” she added. “And we have maintained the same position from the beginning — we are willing to speak to whoever wishes to speak to us.”

“I’m very against the way this sale went through — it was deceitful and sinful,” said Carolyn Pinto of New Dorp, who attended St. Margaret Mary elementary school. “This is a Christian community. The people here are the church. Archbishop [Timothy] Dolan has hurt the Catholics of Midland Beach, and it cuts like a knife.”

Anthony Sagona, also New Dorp, saw no nuance. “We don’t want the mosque. This is a nice neighborhood and we hope to keep it that way,” he said, adding that he was born in Midland Beach and lived there for 50 years. “I hope the deal falls through.”

Native Islander Christine Marra of Grant City said she was “opposed to the sale of the convent to a non-Christian organization,” and held a hand-written sign that read “Tell the Archdiocese No Mosque. Boycott the Basket.”

“I feel betrayed by the New York Archdiocese,” she commented. “I’ve been donating money my entire adult life with the intention of spreading the Gospel and the Christian message.”

TENSION OVER A BANNER

Some division in the anti-mosque crowd became apparent when a long banner was unfurled, emblazoned with color photographs and the words “We Will Never Forget!” It referenced the killing of Coptic Christians in Egypt, where they remain a beleaguered minority without full civil rights, including freedom of worship and the right to freely build churches.

The U.S. State Department, in its 2009 “Report on International Religious Freedom,” said that Egypt’s constitution “provides for freedom of belief and the practice of religious rites,” but added that “the Government restricts these rights in practice. Islam is the official state religion, and Shari’a is the principal source of legislation.”

One of the people holding up the banner was Magdi Saweres, a Cairo-born Copt who has lived in Midland Beach for the last eight years.

“You see..they [Islamic extremists] killed these kids in Egypt,” he explained to someone reading the large banner.

“That’s not our issue! They should not be here!” said Rosemary Vasquenz, an officer of the Midland Beach Civic Association, who then walked away in disgust.

“We’re not in Egypt — we’re in the U.S.” another resident chimed in.

“They’re on our side, believe me,” intervened Thomas Bosco of Grasmere, who was helping to hold up the large banner.

Unlike the first rally last Sunday, yesterday’s included a uniformed police presence, and officers restricted protestors to the sidewalk after many spilled out onto Greeley Avenue, raising signs and cheering when drivers of passing vehicles slowed down and honked horns in support.

The rally, with about 175 people at its height, was periodically interrupted by a lone counter-demonstrator standing across the street from the convent. His shouts were ignored by the vociferous yet peaceful crowd.

It concluded at 1:30 p.m., with the crowd chanting “USA! USA!” as they dispersed.

MAS REACTION

The Advance received this written statement from MAS in reaction to yesterday’s rally:

“We as Americans understand and fully appreciate the need to feel safe, and the right and necessity to look into the background of any party or group.

“However, it is equally as important for individuals to do their homework, not just rely on the research and propaganda of other parties.

“We have and continue to make ourselves available for any sit downs or questions, be it with the Church board, Community Leaders or individuals in the community. We are committed to communication and dialog, and are willing at any time to address any valid community concerns.”

Archbishop Dolan said it best on his blog: “Yes, it is acceptable to ask questions about security, safety, the background and history of the groups hoping to build and buy… What is not acceptable is to prejudge any group, or to let fear and bias trump the towering American virtues of hospitality, welcome, and religious freedom.”

 

Robert Spencer, is the Pope a Dhimmi?

Posted in Loon Blogs, Loon Sites with tags , , , , , , , , , on February 22, 2010 by loonwatch

air-security-baird-306-7899

Over a week ago the Fiqh Council of North America, which is a council of Islamic scholars who give religious opinions said that Body Scanners (Nude-Scanners) violate the requirements of  modestyand respect for human dignity and were,

against the teachings of Islam, natural law and all religions and cultures that stand for decency and modesty.

This is a respectable position since the objectives of the body scanner can be achieved through a pat-down by an officer of the same sex. When the Council came out with the verdict it was big news with the usual culprits on Fox News saying, ‘here go Muslims again trying to get special treatment.’Robert Spencer in fact commented that Muslims were seeking special treatment, and implied that the council was just up to some taqiyyah. His commenters and followers weren’t as ‘civil,’ one commenter stated that we should break out a shotgun on Muslims, another said Muslims should go back to riding ‘camels’ if they don’t like scanners, and other bile filled racism.

How ’bout this?

We stand them all in a line out in front of God and everybody and one-by-one break open like a shotgun each and every Muslim and Muslima who wants to get on any sort of mass transportation device and look until we find that for which we are searching.

And anyone who bitches about it goes through thrice.

Then there is this genius,

Too obvious – let ‘em saddle up the ol’ camels then.

Yet another reason for a new airline: “No-Mo Air” – they’ll serve pork rinds rather than chips, etc.

Then there is this comment from Vee who seems to think that only Muslims oppose body scanners,

Where are all the Catholic nuns protesting body scanners?

They are out there, right?

Well you’re in luck Vee because it seems not only are nuns protesting body scanners but the Pope himself opposes them. I’m sure Catholic Robert Spencer will just call him a Dhimmi, right?

The head of the Roman Catholic Church spoke out against the use of body scanners at airports, saying human dignity must be preserved even as countries attempt to protect their citizens against acts of terrorism.

Pope Benedict XVI , making his comments during an audience with airport workers and officials at the Vatican on Sunday, did not specifically use the words body scanner in his address, according to reports in U.K. newspapers the Daily Telegraph and the Guardian.

But he said that even when facing the threat of terrorism, airport security officials should not forget to respect “the primacy of the human person.”

“[With] every action, it is above all essential to protect and value the human person in their integrity,” he told the representatives from the aviation industry.

The United States began using the scanners capable of detecting items hidden under clothing at airports as part of new security protocols put in place in the wake of the failed bombing attempt on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day.

Canada and European countries have followed suit and begun installing their own scanners, particularly for flights destined for the United States.

The Pope is not the first religious leader to speak out against the scanners.
Muslims urged to choose pat-down over scanner

The Fiqh Council of North America, an Islamic group with membership in Canada and the United States, said earlier in February it believed the body scanners were “against the teachings of Islam, natural law and all religions and cultures that stand for decency and modesty.”

The group urged Muslim travellers to choose to be patted down by airport security rather than go through the scanners.

Canada is in the process of installing 44 scanners to be used on U.S.-bound passengers selected for secondary screening at Canadian airports.

The Canadian Air Transport Security Authority has said the scanners would protect the privacy of the passenger, and that the officer viewing the image would do so in a separate room and never see the actual traveller.

The focus on security measures stems from the failed attempt by a Nigerian man to set off a bomb on a Detroit-bound flight on Christmas Day.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, is accused of trying to ignite the bomb on the Northwest Airlines flight. Officials said he has told U.S. investigators he received training and instructions from al-Qaeda operatives in Yemen.

 

Czech Cardinal says “Muslims” Gradually Conquering Europe

Posted in Feature, Loon Pastors with tags , , , , , , , , , on January 7, 2010 by loonwatch

miloslav-vlk_1554339c

Conspiracy alert! Czech Cardinal Miloslav Vlk says “Muslims” are gradually conquering Europe. The comment from the Cardinal is fairly tame but and is directed more towards domestic consumption but still feeds into the narrative of conspiracy. (via Islamophobia-watch)

Czech Cardinal says Christian Europe is to blame for Islamisation

Czech Cardinal Miloslav Vlk, the Archbishop of Prague, said Muslims were well placed to fill the spiritual void “created as Europeans systematically empty the Christian content of their lives”.

“Europe will pay dear for having left its spiritual foundations and that this is the last period that will not continue for decades when it may still have a chance to do something about it,” he said.

 

“The Muslims definitely have many reasons to be heading here. They also have a religious one – to bring the spiritual values of faith in God to the pagan environment of Europe, to its atheistic style of life.

“Unless the Christians wake up, life may be Islamised and Christianity will not have the strength to imprint its character on the life of people, not to say society.”

The 77-year-old cardinal made his remarks in an interview to mark his retirement after spending 19 years as the leader of the Czech Church.

He said he did not blame Muslims for the crisis as Europeans had brought it upon themselves by exchanging their Christian culture for an aggressive secularism that embraced atheism.

“Europe has denied its Christian roots from which it has risen and which could give it the strength to fend off the danger that it will be conquered by Muslims, which is actually happening gradually,” he said.

“At the end of the Middle Ages and in the early modern age, Islam failed to conquer Europe with arms. The Christians beat them then.

“Today, when the fighting is done with spiritual weapons which Europe lacks while Muslims are perfectly armed, the fall of Europe is looming.”

He called on Christians to respond to the threat of Islamisation by living their own religious faith more observantly.

Last year Cardinal Jose Policarpo, the Patriarch of Lisbon, warned Catholic women against marrying Muslims.

Italian Cardinal Giacomo Biffi also urged the Italian government to give priority to Catholic migrants over Muslims in order to protect his country’s religious identity.

The Vatican has also opposed Turkey joining the European Union partly because the Muslim country does not share the continent’s Christian heritage