Althouse: Islamic bumper stickers.

August 19, 2007

Islamic bumper stickers.

A display outside a store on Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn:

(Enlarge.)

90 comments:

Peter Hoh said...: Isn't America great?

I've seen similar bumper stickers on cars here in the Twin Cities.; 8/19/07, 3:16 PM
Ron said...: "The worst of provisions for the hereafter is aggression toward people" redlined my irony-meter!; 8/19/07, 4:05 PM
Simon said...: Is there one that says "convert or die"? The sticker that Ron points to is made even more hideously ironic when you consider where this sticker is being sold.; 8/19/07, 4:19 PM
David said...: I agree that it's telling to see these bumper stickers on display next to the tropes of the isolationist left (although they don't have my new favorite: I'm already against the next war). At some point, however, we've got to take "yes" for an answer. Having drained the militarism out of Germany and Japan, there's no reason we can't do the same for Islam.; 8/19/07, 4:40 PM
Anonymous said...: David says: "Having drained the militarism out of Germany and Japan, there's no reason we can't do the same for Islam."

Islam is a homogeneous country?; 8/19/07, 4:43 PM
Greybeard said...: LOS-
David's comment is clear to me.
What don't you understand?; 8/19/07, 5:03 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: Islam and leftism, sitting in a tree. K-I-S-S-I-N-G.

First comes radicalism. Then comes submission.

The death of the west is our shared mission!; 8/19/07, 5:06 PM
Simon said...: Luckyoldson said...
"Islam is a homogeneous country?"

Countries are homogenous?

(With that said, I do agree with LOS - for once - that David needs to work a little harder to establish the premise that what we did in Germany and Japan we can also do to radical Islam. What really did the job of burying militarism in Germany, in particular, wasn't our presence so much as it was a tidal wave of thought among ordinary germans, a revulsion and repudiation of what had been done in their name. Even if David is correct and that a parallel can be drawn between the single-state German nation and the trans-state Islamic nation, I don't see a similar revulsion in the muslim world towards what Al Queda and its affiliates believe.); 8/19/07, 5:10 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: "What really did the job of burying militarism in Germany, in particular, wasn't our presence so much as it was a tidal wave of thought among ordinary germans, a revulsion and repudiation of what had been done in their name."

Amazingly enough, this tidal wave of revulsion and repudiation of what had been done in their name did not happen until they were completely and utterly defeated.

It may be that radical Islam will not submit even then. However, we should proceed hastily to the point where they are utterly defeated, to see if this is the case.; 8/19/07, 5:15 PM
Palladian said...: I like how these messages hover between banality, reassurance and menace. The blackish-green background and the strident sans-serif capital letters seem to convey a different message than the meaning of the phrases of which they're a part.

Either that or they didn't hire a very good designer. Actually from the look of them, they didn't hire a designer at all.; 8/19/07, 5:20 PM
Anonymous said...: Greybeard,
To compare Islam with two countries that have have homogeneous cultures is laughable at best.

This is why we're on the wrong track; many in American know little about the rest of the world, and for whatever reason appear to think any religion but Christianity is not to be respected...even with one billion Muslims worldwide.

P.S. Simon, you know exactly what I was referring to, so what's with the silly cheap shot?; 8/19/07, 5:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Simon,
And by the way, yes, I do think "countries" can be referred to as being "homogeneous."; 8/19/07, 5:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Simon --

I'm fairly certain that the most important element in removing the militarism gene from the German DNA was the complete and total destruction of their military, as well as the devastation of Berlin, Dresden and other targets of the Allied Bomber Command.

Unlike World War I, where the Germans were able to whinge about the "stab in the back," blaming Jews, Socialists and other undesirables for the defeat (and provide fertile ground for Hitler and the National Socialist Workers' Party), the Allied victory left Germans with no doubt that they'd come a cropper all on their own, betrayed by no one, other than themselves and their abysmal choices.

The lesson of World War 2, total victory and unconditional surrender, is that the only true path to peace leads first through utter and total devastation. For a lasting peace to take root, there must be a clear-cut victor and and unquestionably vanquished loser.; 8/19/07, 5:29 PM
David said...: Lucky: Martin Luther King's great insight was that, if America was forced to confront the dissonance between our ideals and our reality, we would change our reality. I don't see any reason Muslims who believe that Islam is a religion of peace won't reject terror and, in fact, saying that Islam is a religion of peace, even if they don't believe it at first, can only speed that change.

Second, if Islam is irredeemably militaristic, our response may not be (frankly, cannot be) what you would wish.

Having said that, you are of course correct that the situations are different. I don't understand, though, why you think that differences work against taming the terrorists. Fascism and militarism were much more popular among Germans and the Japanese than terror is in Islam. After all, millions of Muslims live happy assimilated lives in the west and billions of Muslims reject terror every day by not being terrorists. Compared to the armies of Germany and Japan, the army of militant Islam is a teeny, tiny thing both absolutely and relative to the total population.

Finally, the proof is in the pudding. I know you dislike any positive reporting from Iraq, but observers from both left and right agree that the traditional Sunni power structure is growing disenchanted with AQ. The Sunnis don't like us, but AQ is fucking nuts.; 8/19/07, 5:33 PM
David said...: Oh, and I just saw where you implied that I'm an ignorant Christian. As it happens, I'm not a Christian of any sort. "Ignorant," in context, is just an ad hominem (I don't agree with you, thus my necessarily ignorant opinion need not be taken seriously) and not worth responding to.; 8/19/07, 5:38 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Lucky: appear to think any religion but Christianity is not to be respected...

By now, I don't see why any religion - including Christianity -dserves respect, considering I have to live in a world completely effed up by religion.

But Islam is certainly the most dispicable of the major religions in our era. I can't think of anything positive that's come from Islamic culture in a hundred years, and I can't think of a place on earth where lots of Muslims are in close proximity with non-Muslims (whether they be Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Jews, or whatever) and aren't doing terrorism, barbarism, butchery, thuggery, and rampaging lunacy.

However, I also believe in judging individuals as individuals and not assuming the worst about them. So, even though that store's on Atlantic Ave., until I find out they're also selling Wahhabi booklets or some sh*t (as some stores around there do), I won't attack that store. Well, except for being hippy-dippy PC...which I can live and let live with. :)

even with one billion Muslims worldwide.

You don't respect people who voted Republican in 2004 even though there were 62 million of them.

(BTW, until there is freedom in the Muslim world, I won't assume that everyone who is counted as a Muslim has freely chosen Islam.); 8/19/07, 5:49 PM
Trooper York said...: I wish they had room for a few more bumper stickers that the islamofascist’s should consider...more rubble less trouble……what goes around comes around...the only good islamofascist....; 8/19/07, 5:49 PM
Trooper York said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/19/07, 5:49 PM
Milbarge said...: My first thought was to wonder if the image of the smiley face violated the prohibition on depictions of people. (One can of course debate whether Islam really bans such images, but some people certainly think so and go to great lengths to enforce it.) Maybe those Danish cartoons should have used a smiley face instead of more realistic drawings.; 8/19/07, 6:08 PM
Eli Blake said...: I've had quite a few Islamic friends over the years and and I've never had one suggest that the tactics used by al-Qaeda represent their view of Islam. I don't happen to agree with their religion or with much of their politics, but that doesn't make them want to shoot me.

Many of them do, as a matter of fact, hold the political view that the United States and the west have by supporting repressive governments and draining resources which with the help of those countries almost never trickle down to the level of the ordinary people in the street been complicitous in the poverty which many people live in those countries, and frankly I believe they have a point (but it's largely a matter of internal politics-- very few in Saudi Arabia actually want to live in a repressive monarchy, and they see us as enabling the monarchy there.)

But the idea that therefore because most Islamic people disagree with you politically means they are therefore violent terrorists is false.

There are some violent terrorists among them, but even our own State Department believes that there are only a few thousand actual terrorists in the world, which is maybe 1/1000 of one percent of the billion or so muslims in the world.

Heck, the Klan and white supremecists officially have a few thousand members too? Does that make them representative of all Americans?; 8/19/07, 6:35 PM
Eli Blake said...: ron:

Do you have any reason to believe that the store owner, or any of the store's customers want to carry out aggression towards people?

If you'd stop looking behind every tree for a muslim maybe you could strart focusing in on finding the few who are in fact terrorists.; 8/19/07, 6:37 PM
Anonymous said...: loafinf oaf,
I'm sure Muslims throughout the world would love to hear your rationale for calling their religion; "the most dispicable of the major religions in our era."

I mean, being such an intellectual sort...; 8/19/07, 6:48 PM
Anonymous said...: David,
Where did I say you were an "ignorant Christian?"; 8/19/07, 6:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Trooper York said..."I wish they had room for a few more bumper stickers that the islamofascist’s should consider...more rubble less trouble……what goes around comes around."

Yeah, America being the peace loving country we are.; 8/19/07, 6:54 PM
David said...: Lucky: That's how I understood your 5:21 comment to Graybeard:

To compare Islam with two countries that have have homogeneous cultures is laughable at best.

This is why we're on the wrong track; many in American know little about the rest of the world, and for whatever reason appear to think any religion but Christianity is not to be respected...even with one billion Muslims worldwide.

If you tell me that my inference is wrong, I'll accept that.; 8/19/07, 7:01 PM
Anonymous said...: David,is: My point is this:

Until we learn to accept other religions, regardless of how extreme we feel they are, we're fucked.

If you think people who live in the Mideast haven't heard of the little Christinan excursions into murder and mayhem (Crusades?)...you're dreaming.

As for my "To compare Islam with two countries that have have homogeneous cultures is laughable at best"...comment, well, it's based in the difficulties we'll have, trying to get so many divergent factions to unite in the Mideast, versus those we dealt with in the homogeneous countries after World War I and II.; 8/19/07, 7:14 PM
Peter Hoh said...: Palladian, when looking at those bumber stickers, I see no evidence of a designer.; 8/19/07, 7:17 PM
Peter Hoh said...: and just to set the record straight, I'm all about intelligent design.; 8/19/07, 7:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Trooper,
Based on population numbers, every time you hear of a bomb killing 100 in Iraq, it computes to 1,200 dying here.

That means that last month, the death toll in Iraq, for civilians, would compute to about 6,000+ Americans dying here...and that number has held steady for the last 4 years...all with
extended families much larger than you would find here.

And we wonder where the new terrorists are coming from?

We're fighting a losing battle.; 8/19/07, 7:21 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Lucky: I'm sure Muslims throughout the world would love to hear your rationale for calling their religion; "the most dispicable of the major religions in our era."

What are the major religions? Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Confucianism, Christianity, Judaism...Taoism.....

Yeah, Islam is the most despicable from that list in the world of our times. Have you not been reading the news of the world for the past 30 years?

I guess I missed when Tibetan Buddhists occupied by China started strapping bombs on their children to blow up other children the way Palestinian Muslims do.

I would've loved to be able to have a chat with the Imam of the biggest mosque of my state (Imam Damra of the Islamic Center of Cleveland) except he was too busy calling Jews monkeys and raising money for terrorism before being arrested by America, deported, then arrested again by Israelis for being a ... terrorist. Some of the members of his mosque retracted their support for him after all that went down, but the majority did not.; 8/19/07, 7:23 PM
Anonymous said...: oaf,
You miss my point...as usual.

The fact that you and other regard Islam as a despicable religion creates the kind of animosity which leads to terrorism and hatred.

Like I said...read the history of Christianity and then tell me who is the most violent of all...and considered "despicable" by many.; 8/19/07, 7:40 PM
Simon said...: Luckyoldson said...
"The fact that [LoafingOaf] and other regard Islam as a despicable religion creates the kind of animosity which leads to terrorism and hatred."

It's clearly not the only thing which leads to animosity, terrorism and hatred, since there was scant such rhetoric in evidence in America when they attacked the World Trade Center the first time, when Osama unilaterally decared war on the U.s., when they attacked the Cole, or for that matter when they attacked the World Trade Center the second time.; 8/19/07, 7:47 PM
Anonymous said...: simon,
I suggest you read up on some of the clandestine operations of th e United States.

You act as if Osama and the rest of them are uneducated louts and know nothing of history or current affairs...and I never said religion was the sole reason for terrorism or terrorist acts against America.

Do you remember when Osama was fighting WITH US? (Was Islam okay then?)

Or how about when Saddam was our buddy?
(Was being a dictator okay then?)

Blaming everything on any religion is just plain dumb.; 8/19/07, 8:02 PM
Simon said...: LOS,
You seem to have me confused with someone else. Or at least, you're addressing arguments I didn't make.; 8/19/07, 8:08 PM
Sir Archy said...: To Professor Althouse:

Madam,

You will not take it amiss when I tell you that I have been disappointed and even abash'd these past several Days when it seemed that your Supply of Lunaticks and Madmen had at last exhaust'd itself. As the Ghost of an Emanation of the Brain of a Madman in Bedlam dead these 200 Years, I am inexorably drawn to seek other Madmen, if for no other Reason than to relive the most vivid Scenes I have observ'd.

I now see that one of your most serviceable and mockable Lunaticks has reappear'd. It is perhaps idle to speculate where he might have been, but knowing Lunaticks as I do, it is my considered Opinion that he had found himself in a Situation such as this. Perhaps he turn'd the Crank enough to gain his Release early. It is to be hoped his Family provide for him lest he find himself here once again, or, worse, back in a Prison.

For it cannot be that a Lunatick Pauper remain long on the Town. Madmen commonly are in the possession of a single Passion that forces all Reason from their diseas'd Brains. In this sad Case, the Lunatick imagines he drives the Fortunes of a Faction of a Political Party, and attacks anyone, Stranger or Friend, with flailing Arms and shooting Lips, whom he believes to be not a Member of the Faction. It is perhaps a better Scheme of Amusement to let Observation survey the Actions of this Madman, than to try to reason with him.

Altho' I may wish to see the Action of this Comedy play'd in your Theatre of Topicks, Madam, I will content myself with an evanescent and passing Presence, if, as impressaria, you were by your Art, to cause both the Madman's and my own Remarques to vanish.

It is with the most fleeting sense of ghostly Impermanence, that I remain, Madam,

Your Humble & Obt. Servant,

Sir Archy; 8/19/07, 8:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Ahhhh, Sir Sucky is back and in rare form.

Could this twit be any more full of himself?

Good Lord...; 8/19/07, 8:19 PM
Anonymous said...: simon,
i was probably thinking of the oaf.; 8/19/07, 8:19 PM
Sir Archy said...: Bravo! Mr. Oldson. Such rare wit as we haven't seen since the days of King Charles!; 8/19/07, 8:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Why, with all of this talk about how horrible the Islamic religion is...is there nary a mention that we invaded Iraq for absolutely no reason? (They were contained for ten years, with not one American life lost, at a cost of about 5 billion dollars and served as the perfect buffer between Iran, Syria, Turkey and Pakistan.)

Saddam had nothing to do with Osama, 9/11 or even Islamic terrorism (secular...remember?).

So why would the people of the Mideast not see us as nothing more than the aggressors??; 8/19/07, 8:32 PM
Anonymous said...: Oh, so Sir Sucky is actually...Theodore.

Hiding out...as usual.

Chickenshit.; 8/19/07, 8:33 PM
Anonymous said...: Sir Sucky...why no profile?

Ashamed?; 8/19/07, 8:35 PM
Cedarford said...: David -

After all, millions of Muslims live happy assimilated lives in the west and billions of Muslims reject terror every day by not being terrorists. Compared to the armies of Germany and Japan, the army of militant Islam is .

If you look at the Nazis, Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, Jap militarists - you will find that those in the Cheka, NKVD, SS extermination squads (Jew and communist liquidation details), Death Camp staff, and Japanese special actions units (direct and biowar extermination and experimentation on mainly Chinese) -

All represented a a teeny, tiny thing both absolutely and relative to the total population

Hope that is reassuring.

Eli Blake - There are some violent terrorists among them, but even our own State Department believes that there are only a few thousand actual terrorists in the world, which is maybe 1/1000 of one percent of the billion or so muslims in the world.

Like so many, you refuse to believe that terrorism is just a manifestation of a cancerous ideology. AQ and 60 other "tip of the spear groups" have broad support of radical Islamists, who are now estimated to comprise 25-30% of the Ummah. In any malignant Democide, you find only a "teeny, tiny" number of Bolsheviks, Nazis, Turkish soldiers, Saddam's Ba'thist killing details of Shiites and Kurds doing the actual butchery - but butchery impossible without wide support.

The 1/000th of 1% is actually more like 25-30% in certain Muslim populations, sometimes far more, sometimes less - like in Britain where "only" 10% of young Muslims believe it is moral to kill Britons who oppose Islam's global conquest...

If it was such a small number as Eli professes in furthering the "Islam means Peace - Vast Majority are Moderate!!!" - you would not see such a teeny, tiny fraction able to kill 1.8 million Armenians and Chaldeans in 2 months. The 2 million Hindis butchered in 1971 in Bangladesh cleansing ops. The 2.5 million Christian and animist black Africans of Sudan before the Arabs turned on their "Muslim Brothers" in Darfur. And the impressive ability of directed Muslim mobs to kill 550,000 Chinese on 23 different islands of Indonesia in 3 weeks time.

No, Jihad has gone on 1400 years. Most without Central Authorities, let alone some Hollywood fantasy of a CEO Of Terror ordering it.

Brilliant in it's simplicity. Brave young men venture forth. If they are unsuccessful, more time elapses and the Jihad doesn't spread, then try again..If they ARE successful, and reports come back of Glory, Booty, lands conquered for Allah, plenty of women and slaves for the taking, other Islamic men join in. Jihad spreads.

If they are resisted, have their asses scorched - they "moderate" the pure, murderous version of Islam - because heads on the Swords of the Reconquista, the Mongols, the Crusades suck. Muslims don't think Jihadis get Paradise if they and their families are killed like sheep - only offensive war and certain defensive battles guarantee a dead Muslim soldier who dies fighting Paradise.

So the most intolerant Muslims are those that took land from infidels without battle and who have held it largely uncontested: Saudis, Yemenis, Egyptians, Pashtuns, N Africa tribes...

While the most tolerant were those that learned intolerance leads to mass slaughter or cleansing of Muslims who cannot coexist next to powerful neighbors.

That makes the case that Islam best "reforms itself" for a while when someone goes medieval (or Mogolian) on their asses. And all they actions that the US has done - no decisive defeat, sacrifice Americans to spare enemy civilians - have had little effect. Only when the Muslims saw the "Strong Horse" chewing up Iraqi divisions, wiping out large masses of Taliban and AQ fighters - were they impressed.; 8/19/07, 8:37 PM
Sir Archy said...: Bravo again, Mr. Oldson! You outdo yourself.

Madmen commonly imagine Figments and give them Names. I was thus nam'd. My Madman's Christian Name was James. Mr. Oldson seems to imagine someone with the name of Theodore.

I would be happy to reveal and perhaps bore the Publick with my Biography, which I have long prepar'd, but as someone dead these 200 years I regret I cannot properly work the Levers of these modern Machines to display any more than my Remarks here.; 8/19/07, 8:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Sir Sucky,
Can you blow yourself, too?; 8/19/07, 9:02 PM
Sir Archy said...: I will reveal to you, in strictest confidence, that in my Day, we had a Machine, whose Levers I learnt but improperly to work, whose Purpose was Control, both of Mind & Body. You may see here the poor Unfortunates put thus under the Power of this Infernal Device.

It seems that your Internet has surpass'd the paltry Efforts of the 18th Century by way of Mind Control. It has also outdone us in Numbers of Lunaticks.

I propose to offer the Publick a complete Dissertation on these Matters, when Publication can be arranged on some Theatre of Topicks or another on your Internet.; 8/19/07, 9:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Sir Sucky,
Are you familiar with the term: grandiose?

Well, if so...we'll all keep our fingers crossed that you don't explode.

*Are you perhaps...dating Theodore?; 8/19/07, 9:19 PM
Sir Archy said...: It is a Principle to not directly speak to Madmen, lest their diseas'd Brains be stimulated to pour forth more Phantasms. You may see the Results here for Yourselves.

In my Day, Persons of all Stations in Life would pay dearly to be transported to Bedlam, and to spend a Day in the Observation of Lunaticks. Here, you have it all most cheaply.

I will leave it to the charming impressaria of this Theatre, if she wishes to draw Crowds of Gawkers thus, and withdraw myself to the Shadows, as befits a Ghost with no Earthly Interest, save the haunting of Lunaticks.; 8/19/07, 9:37 PM
cryptical said...: Why, with all of this talk about how horrible the Islamic religion is...is there nary a mention that we invaded Iraq for absolutely no reason?

No reason that you'd accept.

(They were contained for ten years, with not one American life lost, at a cost of about 5 billion dollars and served as the perfect buffer between Iran, Syria, Turkey and Pakistan.)

Iraq borders Pakistan?

Saddam had nothing to do with Osama, 9/11 or even Islamic terrorism (secular...remember?).

You might be right about 9/11, but there's certainly enough evidence of contacts between AQ and Iraq, and Saddams cash rewards to the families of Palistinian suicide bombers to put your other two assertions to doubt.

So why would the people of the Mideast not see us as nothing more than the aggressors??

From recent reports from Iraq, the locals there hate the jihadis even more than us which seems to bode well.; 8/19/07, 9:53 PM
Michael The Magnificent said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/19/07, 10:43 PM
Michael The Magnificent said...: Luckyoldson: Saddam had nothing to do with Osama, 9/11 or even Islamic terrorism (secular...remember?).

Saddam financed, harbored, and trained international terrorists, your willful ignorance notwithstanding.; 8/20/07, 2:47 AM
clint said...: My favorite is the"Visualize World Peace, Qu'ran 49:13".

Go check out Sura 49...

It's about peace *among* muslims -- the bumper sticker is asking you to visualize a world in which everyone has converted to Islam, not one in which everyone is getting along fine despite our differences.

At least that's how it reads to me in English translation -- perhaps one has to read it in the original Arabic to understand how it's really about a modern leftist vision of World Peace.

It makes you wonder why they couldn't find a better Sura to quote on World Peace, given that Islam is the Religion of Peace, and all...; 8/20/07, 7:41 AM
ricpic said...: Bow down, bow down to the child rapist's death cult.; 8/20/07, 8:03 AM
From Inwood said...: Where’s the Bumper Sticker which says:

Small Minds Discuss People

Average Minds Discuss Events

Great Minds Discuss Ideas.

Infidel Minds Which Discuss People, Events, Or Ideas Must Be Severed From Their Torso, Even More So.; 8/20/07, 10:28 AM
Justin said...: Luckyoldson said...

Why, with all of this talk about how horrible the Islamic religion is...is there nary a mention that we invaded Iraq for absolutely no reason?

Because it is completely off topic.; 8/20/07, 11:20 AM
Slim Tyranny said...: Althouse --- does it bother you that so many of your regular commenters are bigots?; 8/20/07, 1:01 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Slim: I object to many of the comments here. I thought the bumper stickers were interesting because they were so innocuous and so much like lefty claptrap, beginning with the smiley face.; 8/20/07, 3:07 PM
garage mahal said...: So Ann
A kiosk w/ Islamic bumper stickers on it equals lefty claptrap. Ok!

I have to think you and your commentator's heads must really hurt from all the gymnastics.; 8/20/07, 4:02 PM
Ann Althouse said...: I'm talking about "Visualize World Peace" and "If you want peace, work for justice," etc. I've always associated those with the left, not Islam, but here they are on the green standard format with the more clearly Islamic stuff. And the more clearly Islamic stuff is rather peacenik-y too, like "The most excellent jihad is that for conquest of self." I thought all that was interesting. And the smiley face really caught my eye. I look for juxtapositions and incongruities, and this clearly met my standard for a photography post. I'm sorry some people took it as a reason to bash the religion. My post was not meant that way. I wanted people to read the individual sayings and find them intriguing.; 8/20/07, 4:10 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Lucky: oaf,
You miss my point...as usual.

The fact that you and other regard Islam as a despicable religion creates the kind of animosity which leads to terrorism and hatred.

I don't know what point I missed. You're trying to say I'm required to hold Islam in high regard. I don't know where this notion came from that belief systems that become popular enough become belief systems we're all required to respect.

I never respected communism, and found it a despicable belief system. That doesn't mean I will hate every person who labels him/herself a commie. I have to know what someone's about as an individual before I make judgments about him or her (in contrast with what you do, Lucky).

If you wanna persuade me to hold Islam in high regard, give it your best shot. So far you've told me that if I don't hold Islam in higher regard Muslims will indiscriminately mass-murder more innocent people around the world. lol Maybe you can do better in your next attempt. Just stop trying to thought-police me.

And now you're saying I'm required to pretend to hold Islam in high regard even if I don't, to be diplomatic. LOL! I'll leave that to the politicians in Washington.

It's time Muslims learn they must tolerate and live amongst people who do not hold Islam in high regard, or else it is they who are creating animosity. I'd love to be able to care as little about Islam as I do about Buddhism, and I'd love to drive by the biggest mosque in my city and not remember the local news airing hardcore hate speech coming out of the mouths of the lunatics running the place. It's not my fault Islam is f*cked up.

Like I said...read the history of Christianity and then tell me who is the most violent of all...and considered "despicable" by many.

Which is why I said IN OUR ERA. Get some reading comprehension.

And please don't lecture me about what beliefs I have to respect in order not to create animosity when your entire existance on the Internet is belligerently trolling people you've never met just because they subscribe to different beliefs than you do.

I don't make personal attacks or direct hatred towards individuals I know nothing about simply because they label themselves under an ideology I don't like. That's why I didn't attack that store for selling Muslim stickers that were just hippy-dippy slogans, but I would if they were selling Wahabbi booklets. I actually find those stickers encouraging at a time where there's very little to be encouraged about from Islam.; 8/20/07, 4:34 PM
Slim Tyranny said...: Ann Althouse said...

Slim: I object to many of the comments here. I thought the bumper stickers were interesting because they were so innocuous and so much like lefty claptrap, beginning with the smiley face.

--------------------

So, Ann, if you do object to many of these comments, maybe you should speak up. Maybe instead of sitting passively while commenters call Islam the "child rapist death cult" and advocate the killing of civilians based on religion, you should take a stand and say they are wrong.

These comments are disgusting. I'm not saying your silence means agreement, I'm saying maybe it's the right thing to do to state your disagreement. Directly, in the comment thread.; 8/20/07, 5:21 PM
The Exalted said...: some gross stuff in here

very gross; 8/20/07, 5:22 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Slim: Maybe instead of sitting passively while commenters call Islam the "child rapist death cult" and advocate the killing of civilians based on religion, you should take a stand and say they are wrong.

If someone in this thread called for the killing of civilians just because they subscribe to Islam, that's not just wrong but evil. (You didn't bother to quote the comment and I don't feel like hunting for it).

I did find the comment you object to about the "child rapist death cult." Correcting your (probably intentional) misquotation, the comment read: "Bow down, bow down to the child rapist's death cult" (italics added).

You can object if you like, especially to the tone of it )if you like), but you have a problem if you're calling it wrong. According to history books, Muhammad - the founder of the cult of Islam - was, in fact, a child rapist, if we all agree that having sex with a prepubescent child is rape.

So, now we're not allowed to comment on historical facts about a historical figure's life even if the comments are based on historically accurate facts. I guess Althouse would also have to object to Ayaan Hirsi Ali (a woman she greatly admires) referring to Muhammad as a "perverted tyrant" based on the same historical record. I guess we all just have to shut up and, as the commenter said, bow down?

I'm very sorry but Muhammad was a historical figure we're all allowed to form our own opinions about. Some love him, some hate him.

If I want people to stop considering Muhammad a "prophet of God" (which is my right) I should be able to go through Muhammad's life and talk about things I believe a "prophet of God" would not do. For example, why would a prophet have sex with a child who hadn't reached puberty? A prepubscent child is, by nature, not ready for sex. I must say I find it odd that the so-called prophet would defy nature.

Apparently we're not allowed to make such comments without being "bigots." I'll take the "bigotry" further. I believe the Branch Davidian cult was also a child rapist's cult, and I don't respect a belief system that holds David Koresh up as a prophet of God. Shoot me.; 8/20/07, 6:41 PM
Ann Althouse said...: I consider religion to be the realm of ideas and people should be able to argue over whether ideas are good. This isn't the same as racism, where you are purveying stereotypes about people based on their inborn biological traits. I personally try to be sensitive about people's religion, but I understand the point -- Richard Dawkins makes it very well in "The God Delusion" -- that religion should be subjected to argument and not given special respect. So if some people want to debate about religion they way they'd talk about politics, I think that is acceptable, and I don't feel obligated to monitor everything for nastiness.; 8/20/07, 7:36 PM
The Exalted said...: you're right loafing, this thread is devoid of bigotry.

thanks for clearing that up.

btw, when does WWIII on islam begin??!!; 8/20/07, 7:38 PM
Anonymous said...: oaf,
Show us where you're tolerant of the Islamic religion. You act as if Christians are the chosen few, while those who follow others are somehow damned by their beliefs.

And again...I ask you: are you familiar with the Crusades????

You're a disgusting bigot and you know it.; 8/20/07, 8:37 PM
LoafingOaf said...: I don't know, Exalted. I haven't read the whole thread. Since you're so eager to look out for the sensitive Islam religion that is always so respectful towards everyone else, feel free to highlight the bigoted statements you object to with direct quotes.

I did read some of Lucky's stuff because he was replying to me. Since we're on the topic of offensive postings, I'll quote one that offended me:

Lucky: Saddam had nothing to do with...Islamic terrorism

It's possible Lucky is ignorant, but I don't believe someone who reads newspapers as often as he does could have missed that Saddam was involved with Islamic terrorism. Even the United Nations resolutions on Iraq mentioned his involvement in terrorism, and some of Saddam's activities in that area were not done in secret. He made widely reported speeches pledging money to suicide bombers' families, for example.

So, I find it offensive that Lucky whitewahes some of the dead dictator's crimes against humanity. There were innocent people, including children, blown up in horrendously painful and evil fashion, paid for by Saddam Hussein. Whatever Lucky thinks of the invasion of Iraq, he should not spit on the victim's of Saddam by rewritting Saddam's record. Truly vile and he should be ashamed of himself.

Also, what do we say about the Islamic countries where there are still child brides sold to old men, justified by Muhammad's life? Can we not say, "Hey, some of those things Muhammad was up to 2,000 years ago have no place in the modern era?" Would that make me a bigot? Or just someone tired of girls and women being abused and enslaved? Well, whatever, I know you'll be the last person to say a bad word about Islam. And now you know where to by some bumper stickers, too. :); 8/20/07, 8:58 PM
Anonymous said...: LoafingOaf said...Lucky: Saddam had nothing to do with...Islamic terrorism.

Please show us where and when Saddam was involved in Islamic terrorism.

Saddam was secular (a Baathist)...and whether or not he wanted Jews killed, financed suicide bombers or not...it was certainly NOT based in any form of Islamic religious beliefs.

Admit it...you're uninformed and bigoted.; 8/20/07, 9:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Oaf,
Please show us where I have whitewashed anything Saddam ever did, or spit on the victim's of Saddam by rewritting (spellcheck?) Saddam's record or show us where I have defended him in any way, shape or form.

You're lying through what few teeth you have left.; 8/20/07, 9:15 PM
Slim Tyranny said...: Ann Althouse said...
"I consider religion to be the realm of ideas and people should be able to argue over whether ideas are good. .... So if some people want to debate about religion they way they'd talk about politics, I think that is acceptable, and I don't feel obligated to monitor everything for nastiness."
----------

I am not talking about monitoring for "nastiness," I am talking about making a substantive statement against this bigotry and hate. These comments are not intellectual points regarding religion in general; these comments are disgusting and ignorant.

When you read "Peace is over-rated after what happened to us in New York...I knew 31 people who died on 911...if I had my druthers...I would kill them all and let Allah sort them out...of course that's not politically correct....", do you really think that person is "debating" religion? Or are they really just advocating mindless mass murder/genocide/war
crimes?

"Kill them all and let Allah sort them out"? You want to pretend this is a real debate about the nature of religion? Step up and having something substantive to say.; 8/20/07, 9:30 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Lucky: You act as if Christians are the chosen few, while those who follow others are somehow damned by their beliefs.

You're a f*cking retard. You replied to a message from me earlier in the thread where I made clear I'm not a Christian and don't even like Christianity. But, no, I don't think Christianity is as bad as Islam, because Christinaity has made itself much more compatible with modern civilization. Islam is lashing out violently against modern civilization and it's gonna be some time before all that works out, unfortunately.

I also don't think Judaism is as bad as Christianity, because Jews don't tend to go around condemning everyone to hell and pushing their religion so hard.

And again...I ask you: are you familiar with the Crusades????

All of my comments were about OUR TIMES, not hundreds of years ago. There's a crackpot named Pastor Ernie Sanders on the radio in my city (he has to pay for his own airtime and most of his callers are in prison lol) and he often sounds like the most extremist and fundamentalist Muslims. He once said if Cleveland gets hit by a terror attack we'll deserve it because of our abortions. But he's so fringe it's not even funny. His "church" is a milita-man-style bunker out in the sticks. Why aren't his equivalents in Islam also on the laughed-at fringe?

I'm not an expert on the Crusades. I think they started in reaction to Islamic Jihad. What's interesting is that people in the West tend to speak of the Crusades with criticism and shame. Maybe that's part of the reason why Christianity reforms itself much more than Islam has so far. Like I said, religion is effed up and effs up the world, and it's not my fault Islam happens to be the most effed up of the major religions right now. I hope they clean themselves up. Maybe more people should stop saying there's nothing wrong with Islam when there's obviously a lot wrong.; 8/20/07, 9:39 PM
Slim Tyranny said...: LoafingOaf said...
"I don't know, Exalted. I haven't read the whole thread. Since you're so eager to look out for the sensitive Islam religion that is always so respectful towards everyone else, feel free to highlight the bigoted statements you object to with direct quotes."
-------------

Here's one, since you apparently want to play ignorant: "I would kill them all and let Allah sort them out". Directly quoted.

Hmmm. Kill them all based on their religion, because they are all responsible for 9/11. Yea, not at all bigoted.

And listen to yourself --- "Since you're so eager to look out for the sensitive Islam religion that is always so respectful towards everyone else" --- your statements drip with hate and scorn of Islam. That's fine and your cross to bear, but at least have the stones to admit that you are a bigot. Embrace it! And then crow about "not being politically correct."; 8/20/07, 9:42 PM
Slim Tyranny said...: LoafingOaf said...
"... All of my comments were about OUR TIMES, not hundreds of years ago."

-----------

Except, of course, when you're defending the labeling of Islam as the "child rapist's death cult", based on the historical events of Muhammad's life.; 8/20/07, 9:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Slim Tyranny,
Good luck with these people, and I include Ann.
You can throw out as many direct quotes from people like Oaf as you want and it means absolutely nada. They either deny or ignore what they themselves actually say.

This is a basically a right wing suckfest, with bigoted comments the norm. As far as most here are concerned, 9/11 was an open invitation to hate and eventually kill anyone who is not pro-American. (As in: "You're with us or against us.")

Now...try to imagine this: Ann Althouse is a tenured law professor.

Hard to believe.; 8/20/07, 9:50 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Saddam was secular (a Baathist)...and whether or not he wanted Jews killed, financed suicide bombers or not...it was certainly NOT based in any form of Islamic religious beliefs.

Oh, Lucky, I don't really feel like exerting much more energy on you. You're the kind of person who notes typos in people's messages but still can't manage to actually read what they said.

Saddam's relationship with Islamic jihad was complicated. He was a dictator who saw the power of jihad and wanted to use it for his own aims, increasingly after the first Gulf War, but he was also aware he wasn't the favorite leader of many of the jihadists. People don't have to love each other to work together against common enemies.

If you wanna stick to your simplistic statements like "He was secular" then feel free. I really don't care that much about what you know or don't know. You just shouldn't make factually inaccurate statements such as "He wasn't involded in Islamic terrorism." He was involved and there are victims of his involvement. Shame on the people who whitewash this.; 8/20/07, 9:52 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Here's one, since you apparently want to play ignorant: "I would kill them all and let Allah sort them out". Directly quoted.

I condemn that statement. Thanks for finally highlighting one instead of trying to make everyone out as wanting to kill all the Muslims.; 8/20/07, 10:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Oaf,
Anybody who actually believes Saddam was involved in an Islamic jihad needs to educate themselves.

I suggest you spend more time reading and less time ranting and raving about things of which you obviously know little.

There are over one billion Muslims in the world and better get used to it.; 8/20/07, 10:13 PM
Unknown said...: Ja, aber es gibt nur einen Herrn Glück. Wir haben uns daran nie gewöhnt.; 8/21/07, 12:05 AM
Ann Althouse said...: Slim: I didn't see the "kill them all" comment until you pointed it out. I disapprove of that. Of course. The commenter himself disapproves to some extent and recognizes that he's said something wrong. Is there anything else like that here?; 8/21/07, 5:32 AM
Ann Althouse said...: Actually, I'm deleting the "kill them all" comment.; 8/21/07, 5:34 AM
Anonymous said...: dieter,
I did.; 8/21/07, 10:16 AM
From Inwood said...: Prof A

You say you

"thought the bumper stickers were interesting because they were so innocuous and so much like lefty claptrap, beginning with the smiley face."

I get it: The banality of evil.; 8/21/07, 5:16 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Twice I said I don't associate myself with the kind of statement Slim quoted from someone who has nothing to do with me, yet Lucky says to Slim: You can throw out as many direct quotes from people like Oaf as you want

That intentional smear is not a surprise. I expect little else from the gangs of commenters like Lucky and Slim who fan out from the smear-artist partisan blogs like Greenwald, SadlyNo, and Instaputz.

Slim: And listen to yourself...your statements drip with hate and scorn of Islam. That's fine and your cross to bear, but at least have the stones to admit that you are a bigot.

Disliking Islam is not bigotry, thicko.

Hating a member of Islam just because he/she is a member of Islam would be bigotry. I treat everyone I come across as a unique individual (the American way) and would never hate or dislike someone simply because he/she is a Muslim.

(This would perhaps be put to the test if I had lost 31 aquaintances on 9/11, as the commenter who made misguided, hyperbolic remarks had. But even under those circumstances I believe I would not let myself violate my moral code and slip into bigotry.)

Here's the definition of Bigot from Mirriam-Webster: : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

I don't throw around words like "bigot" loosely, but since you two did against me: I'd say a better case can be made that you, Slim, and your pal Lucky, are bigots. You're both intolerantly devoted to your opinions and prejudices, and you both hate people just because they disagree with you.

That you both troll and engage in smears against people simply because they disagree with your ideology, and that you are enthusiastic participants of web sites that engage in the same, is also revealing of your bigotries.

Those web sites are run by people at least as bigoted as you two are. For example, what is InstaPutz? It's a web site with the sole purpose of attacking everything and anything Glenn Reynolds says or does while attempting to smear and demonize him in any possible way with no interest in fairness, all because he's not on the Hard Left.

I never understood why people like a web site like InstaPutz. You already know he's gonna disagree with everything InstaPundit says tomorrow, no matter what InstaPundit says. But whatever, that's your kind of blog, not mine. It's a blog for bigots like you, Slim.

Today InstaPutz claims Glenn Reyolds is mad we're not killing more arabs. Tomorrow it'll be another pathetic smear. All because Glenn Reynolds doesn't think the same as people like Blue Texan and you, Slim.

I saw your comments about Althouse over there. You were intentionally unfair to Althouse (you saw her reason for posting the pic up above and pretended otherwise) but you think that's okay because she doesn't label herself with your ideology.

You are a bigot and you - along with so many in Islam - need to learn to tolerate people who don't see things the same way you do. (BTW: As much as you admire Islam, my advice is not to convert.); 8/21/07, 5:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Th legacy continues:

Biggest One-Week Drop In History Of The Consumer Comfort Index

Note the term; HISTORY.; 8/21/07, 8:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Oaf,
Everybody knows what you are.

Give it up.; 8/21/07, 8:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Oaf says: "Hating a member of Islam just because he/she is a member of Islam would be bigotry. I treat everyone I come across as a unique individual (the American way) and would never hate or dislike someone simply because he/she is a Muslim."

Except for this:

OAF: "Also, what do we say about the Islamic countries where there are still child brides sold to old men, justified by Muhammad's life? Can we not say, "Hey, some of those things Muhammad was up to 2,000 years ago have no place in the modern era?" Would that make me a bigot? Or just someone tired of girls and women being abused and enslaved? Well, whatever, I know you'll be the last person to say a bad word about Islam. And now you know where to by some bumper stickers, too. :)"

OAF: "It's not my fault Islam is f*cked up. "

OAF: "Yeah, Islam is the most despicable from that list in the world of our times. Have you not been reading the news of the world for the past 30 years?"

Give-it-up.; 8/21/07, 8:23 PM
LoafingOaf said...: Lucky:

Yes, I think Islam is currently f*cked up and has been getting increasingly f*cked up throughout my lifetime. And, no, it ain't my fault. And, no, that doesn't make me a bigot, just someone who doesn't see Islam as a lovely religion and positive influence.

Yes, I do think Islam is the most f*cked up of the major religions right now. That's not to say that 100 years from now Christianity won't become the most f*cked up, as there's plenty of f*cked up sh*t in the Bible that can be used by fundamentalists to send the Christian World back into a potentially barbaric direction. As I said before, I wish the nutters of Islam were pushed to the fringe, but right now they are not.

It may be harder for moderate Muslims to gain any ground when folks like you are afraid to help them criticize the worst elements within Islam and instead go around making sure no one is allowed to utter a negative word about Islam.

And, yes, there are places in the Muslim world where child brides are sold to old men. Here's a NY Times slide show of child brides sold in Afghanistan, for example. Heartbreaking. The Ayatollah in Iran reduced the age girls can be married off down to prepubescents because, hey, that's what Muhammad did.

Criticizing the abuses of children and women living in Islamic societies is not bigotry. It's actually serious concern about Muslim children and women. It's not my fault Islam is used to justify these horrible child abuses and gender apartheids. It's the fault of the fundamentalists who want Islamic culture to be stuck 2,000 years ago - Muhammad's time. I guess you're unconcerned about millions of women living in slavery.

Anyway, you can't quote anything from me that is bigotry, all you can find is that I don't like Islam and think it's been a terrible influence in the world for the past 30 years. I stand by that, and if you disagree I wonder why you can't tolerate disagreeing. Oh yeah, because you're a bigot and you stand by your bigoted and intolerant approach towards everyone who even slightly disagrees with you. Keep on trollin', boy!; 8/21/07, 10:23 PM
stepskipper said...: Of course LOS, the stupidest troll on the internet, fails to see the irony in his accusations of bigotry. What commenter here more frequently resorts to anti gay taunts?; 8/22/07, 7:59 AM
Unknown said...: Ignorance never ceases to amaze me... yeah islam doesn't mean terrorist... Those people are just the islamic are extremists the jihad people, who are kind of crazy.. Kind of like our bible thumping crazy george bush lovers... but ours aren't as cuckoo...; 4/25/08, 9:02 AM
Unknown said...: Ignorance never ceases to amaze me... yeah islam doesn't mean terrorist... Those people are just the islamic are extremists the jihad people, who are kind of crazy.. Kind of like our bible thumping crazy george bush lovers... but ours aren't as cuckoo...; 4/25/08, 9:02 AM
Unknown said...: Yeah because we know islam, means terrorist right? give me a break, ignorant shits.; 4/25/08, 9:03 AM