Posted on 12/31/2005 12:13:58 PM PST by Pikamax
Oh, okay. He's teaching the real Islam, the peaceful Islam, which will help the US avoid another 9/11. Why does that sound cockamamie?
Of course, if we actually read the article and not just the first paragraph, we discover that the speaker is the scumbag that the "right wing websites" made him out to be.
Taken out of context my ass.
Key sentence: ""It is not my position now nor has it ever been my position that a Muslim should ever attack an innocent person," Depends on your definition of innocent.
exactly!
Take a look at his comment:
"It is not my position now nor has it ever been my position that a Muslim should ever attack an innocent person,"
Since all "infidels" are guilty, I guess teaching to kill them is ok.
Wonder if they are learning bomb-making and punishment gang rape at this camp?
Just the headline alone, calls up a strange picture.
Imagine, if you will, the line of Muslim jihadists facing overwhelming odds, and in a fit of self-preservation, they are actually vacating strategic positions as they become untenable. But in a last act of defiance, they leave loud threats and shout profanities as they gather their possessions in preparation of seeking shelter in a more amicable setting.
It is an ironclad rule that when they do something evil, Leftists and their allies always, always, always claim to receive death threats. Ironclad Rule 2, these claims are never documented or verified. Ironclad rule #3, the Presstitutes always hasten to write a front-page editorial to "report" the "threats" as "news."
Christians and Jews, of course, never are innocent.
Just what has he done to help us win this war, as opposed to sitting back and hoping maybe the other side wins?
When I read the sentence that I mentioned above, and the "fact" that he doesn't remember writing some stuff attributed to him, I knew he was BOGUS! Oh, wait! I'm Bogus!
He says he does not remember writing those words. He says he is being taken out of context.
These are not denials.
"It is not my position now nor has it ever been my position that a Muslim should ever attack an innocent person,"
Well that clears everything up doesn't it? He obviously believes a Muslim should attack a guilty person. The only question remaining is who determines the guilt.
The organizer of the "event" is a liar. "Moderate islam" my a&&. Look at the quotes from his featured speaker:
• On several occasions, Mazen Mokhtar has used the Internet to post extremist
newsgroup messages that have included calls to religiously-inspired violence:
o “Covenant Of The Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas]… I have read the
covenant, I support the covenant.” (February 1993)
o “Hamas has no victims, it only has legitimate targets.” (E-mail signature used by
Mazen Mokhtar)
o The nations of the Arab world are divided “[b]ecause they are run by corrupte
[sic], unIslamic, oppressive, power-hungry, murderous secularists. They were
installed by colonial powers for the purpose of keeping the Muslims divided.
The only force which is actively combatting them is Islam.” (October 1996)
o Suicide bombing should be encouraged “[b]ecause it's an effective method of
attacking the ennemy [sic] and continuing jihad, which is at the very least a
[religious requirement] on the Muslims… Those who commit suicide seek death,
but martyrs are not counted as dead, as Allah said above. They seek a greater
life for themselves with Allah, and a greater future for Muslims. May Allah
support them, bless them and forgive us for not being with them.” (April 1996)
Well, that sorta defines "innocent."
Ping
If he thinks these "threats" are appalling, wait until he sees what happens to him and his Islamic buddies in this country after the next 9/11 style attack.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.