Ali Eteraz replies to a party to the CIC complaint against Maclean’s in the comments section of this post;
“Please let us be heard?”
“Provide me a vehicle for debate?”
Is something wrong with you?
1 -Did you call Mark Steyn’s agent and try and set up a public debate? I bet he’d love a go; the right wing pundits do.
2 – Did you contact opposition publications to Macleans and publish stuff there? I bet they’d love a go to make Macleans look bad.
3 – Did you try and raise funds to start a new liberal magazine so you can respond to people like Mark Steyn?
4 – Did you contact the writer of Little Mosque on the Prairie, who is quite sympathetic to the CIC, and ask her to make a snide reference to the demographics issue that Steyn raises?
5 – Did you call Tarek Fateh, who and his associates seemingly have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER getting published works critical of Steyn?
6 – Did you even think about taking me up on my offer to get you guys published in the Guardian?
7 – Did you try and contact Anar Ali, the short story writer, to use her influence to write a rebuttal?
8 – Did you try to contact Irshad Manji — who last year wrote a piece damning all those who seek to stifle immigration — to help use her influence in challenging Steyn?
9 – Did you try to contact an agent for yourself or your other equally inept legal friends so that you might write an anti-Steyn?
I’m sorry if this sounds too much like a generalization, but I’ve dealt with individuals propounding the same kind of rhetoric you are — willful victimization, complete ignorance of how the world works, wallowing in self pity — and they often love to attach themselves to Western Muslim communities after 9/11 and drag them down. I’m sure you’ve got a few Muslim enablers as well. The individuals I am describing often tended to be highly educated, driven by some kind of parochial original sin which motivates them to teach utter and total despair to the community they attach themselves to, so that they may then save said community, and feel good about themselves.
I bet you and the other law students who have done nothing but toe the line the entire life (and have now turned into “humanitarians!” in what I figure is the last year of law school) had grandiose visions of having your name appear in Macleans as “defenders of the weak.” To be followed by a parade led by beautiful Muslim muhajjibas (oh, but how dare I suggest that YOU might be an orientalist).
Again, like I said, the statement of yours that I just quoted, is one of the saddest things I’ve read; quite helpless in fact. I never respond at this length in the comments, and felt compelled to do so, because you are just so far gone its tragic.
Anyhow this has been my last and final response to you.
Best of luck.
(The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism, p. 115), By Bertrand Russell.htm written in 1920:
Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Mohammedanism rather than with Christianity and Buddhism. Christianity and Buddhism are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love of contemplation. Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of this world.
Source:
docstalk.blogspot.com
P.S. Bertrand Russell was no Christian, having penned a book entitled “Why I am Not a Christian”.
Ted, for questioning islam,you have referred to me or slandered me with the following,Desperate loser and knuckle-dragging redneck racist. I also enbarass,disgust,dishearten and make you sad. I think I have enough for my own little HRC lawsuit. But since I am tolerant and respect the right to have an opinion I will not,unlike the leading muslim moderate in Alberta.
No WallyJ, it was me that inferred you were a desperate loser and knuckle dragging redneck racist. You owe Ted an apology. And perhaps I owe you one, for lumping you in with Irwin Daisy.
Debate is good. In fact, that’s essentially the topic of this thread. We need to be able to overstep boundaries to find out what those boundaries might be for each of us. But, as you pointed out in an earlier post – hate speech is bad in that it incites hatred towards an identifiable group.
Most Muslims are peaceful. The vast majority(!!!) The greatest enemy of the moderate, peaceful Muslim is the radical extremist. The greatest enemy of the moderate Christian are the extremist nutbars. And the greatest enemy of the Conservatives are the far right extremists.
“The Islam that we know is a faith devoted to the worship of one God, as revealed through The Holy Qur’an. It teaches the value and the importance of charity, mercy, and peace.”
President George W. Bush’s Message for Ramadan
November 15, 2001
Merry Christmas to all.
Jimbob,
You rank right up there as the most unintelligent person to comment on this blog. I argue that the foundationally violent ideology of Islam is the root of historical and ongoing Muslim violence and attrocities. That all Muslims (whether they choose to or not) are commanded and rewarded for violence. That they are commanded to emulate their prophet, who has been proven historically, in their own texts, to be what any rational person would call – an extremely evil character. And I support the argument with irrefutable evidence, from their texts.
However, in your empty cranium, there’s confusion and comprehension problems. You argue that there are nice Muslims.
So what? What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? What exactly is the point that you are blathering on about?
I don’t believe you are Conservative in the slightest. Conservatives are generally rational and intelligent people, of which, you are neither.
If you have read the texts and support the ideology of Islam, then it is you who is the bigot, racist, misogynist, supporter of pedophilia, mass-murder, rape, piracy and supreme hate.
But then, I reckon you’re too stupid to have ever looked in the Quran, Hadith and Sira to see what it says. Rather, you’ve got feelings about things.
Hey, go ahead and post sanitized George Bush quotes. If you’re that stupid to believe them, nobody can help.
I think I’d rather listen to these historical men and their descriptions:
Lord Tebbit
“The Muslim religion is so unreformed since it was created that nowhere in the Muslim world has there been any real advance in science, or art or literature, or technology in the last 500 years”
Vernon Richards
“The true Islamic concept of peace goes something like this: “Peace comes through submission to Muhammad and his concept of Allah” (i.e. Islam). As such the Islamic concept of peace, meaning making the whole world Muslim, is actually a mandate for war. It was inevitable and unavoidable that the conflict would eventually reach our borders, and so it has.”
Andre Servier
“Islam was not a torch, as has been claimed, but an extinguisher. Conceived in a barbarous brain for the use of a barbarous people, it was – and it remains – incapable of adapting itself to civilization. Wherever it has dominated, it has broken the impulse towards progress and checked the evolution of society.”
Winston Churchill
“The religion of Islam above all others was founded upon the sword … Moreover it provides incentives to slaughter, and in three continents has produced fighting breeds of men – filled with a wild and merciless fanaticism”.
John Quincy Adams
“The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force”.
John Wesley
“Ever since the religion of Islam appeared in the world, the espousers of it…have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations, rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth; that numberless cities are raised from the foundation, and only their name remaining; that many countries, which were once as the garden of God, are now a desolate wilderness; and that so many once numerous and powerful nations are vanished from the earth! Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of human kind”.
Hilaire Belloc
“Will not perhaps the temporal power of Islam return and with it the menace of an armed Mohammedan world, which will shake off the domination of Europeans — still nominally Christian — and reappear as the prime enemy of our civilization? The future always comes as a surprise, but political wisdom consists in attempting at least some partial judgment of what that surprise may be. And for my part I cannot but believe that a main unexpected thing of the future is the return of Islam”.
Bishop Fulton J Sheen
“Today (1950), the hatred of the Moslem countries against the West is becoming hatred against Christianity itself. Although the statesmen have not yet taken it into account, there is still grave danger that the temporal power of Islam may return and, with it, the menace that it may shake off a West which has ceased to be Christian, and affirm itself as a great anti-Christian world Power”.
William Eaton, US Consul to Tunis, wrote in 1799:
“Considered as a nation, they are deplorably wretched, because they have no property in the soil to inspire an ambition to cultivate it. They are abject slaves to the despotism of their government, and they are humiliated by tyranny, the worst of all tyrannies, the despotism of priestcraft. They live in more solemn fear of the frowns of a bigot who has been dead and rotten above a thousand years, than of the living despot whose frown would cost them their lives…The ignorance, superstitious tradition and civil and religious tyranny, which depress the human mind here, exclude improvement of every kind…”
Ayatollah Khomeini
“Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world. But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world…. Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers] Islam says Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us Islam says Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender to the enemy Islam says Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Koranic] verses and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”
I find it sad that opinions backed with facts and statistics such as “irwin daisy” are slammed with racial allegations and slander to silence a reasonable voice. It is indeed the intellectual stupidity fueled with delusional emotion that has endangered the promise of our civilizations security and placed our children’s future at risk. The grass roots “common sense” that built our countries and cultures to an unprecedented height of civilization now sadly remains in only a few of the founders descendants.
Defenders of the Muslim world spouting snobbish rubbish about Christianity 300 years ago as some sort of a reason to tolerate the raping of our societies should be the ones questioned, labeled and held accountable.
Look around the world today and open your eyes to the FACTS. If not for yourself do it for your children. Do it for the Muslims you care for so much, and allow them to live in their own countries and sort out their own issues. If it takes 300 years so be it.
Yes, pull all of our troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq and let them kill each other into peace, and use our troops to defend our borders and what’s left of our decaying societies before they are stripped as bare as ancient Rome.
Oh yea, before you go throwing the only weapon in your arsenal (false labels to silence) my comments are NOT racist, Islamaphobic, xenophobic or whatever else you want to falsely claim. They are companionate comments based on genuine experience and understanding having lived, worked and befriended Muslims throughout the world. Rather call it tough love, and survival instincts that all sensible westerners hold dear.
Jimbo said:
No WallyJ, it was me that inferred you were a desperate loser and knuckle dragging redneck racist.
Imply / infer = very often confused, especially among the uneducated.
Usage guidance – examples:
1) Jimbo wonders ‘Is Me No Dhimmi implying that I am uneducated?’.
2) Jimbo composes reply: “Me No Dhimmi, are you implying that I am uneducated?”
OR
3) “Me No Dhimmi, do I infer from your comment that you think I’m uneducated?”.
The person making a statement implies — the person interpreting it infers.
But Jimbo you didn’t infer or imply; you just made a bold, declarative, insulting statement in which you used the word “racist” incorrectly.
And as to education, I can only infer from your statements that you are uneducated on the topic of Islam.
Finally, do you not get the extreme irony of using a quote from Bush whom, I surmise from the language of your insult, you think a moron?
Daniel Simard – one of the students versus McCleans – caught falsifying comments at his site “lawiscool” !!!
from eteraz.wordpress,
David Reese said, on December 22nd, 2007 at 2:09 pm
They’re falsifying reader comments over at Simard’s blog, http://www.lawiscool.com.
Here, http://lawiscool.com/2007/12/22/steyn-fans-spam-law-is-cool/#comments,
I wrote,
“A question: given the remarks made by many in Canada’s Muslim communities toward homosexuals, when can we expect your complaints to the HRC regarding same?”
My comment was edited to read,
“A question: given the remarks made by many in Canada’s Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Sikh and Hindu communities toward homosexuals, when can we expect your complaints to the HRC regarding same?”
Despicable.
Simard, whoever is administering the comments section on your blog is a liar. Is it you?
… … …
I posted this but do not expect an honest answer,
Friend of USA said, on December 22nd, 2007 at 10:11 pm
As Dave as clearly demonstrated ,
Daniel Simard’s blog “Law is cool.com ” is falsifying comments,
So tell me Daniel Simard,
would you be ok with McCleans falsifying the content of your five page rebutall before publishing it?
and if not then why?
“Law is Cool” claims that the 1000 or so comments they got in 24 hours is Steyn-bots spamming them!
The only thing about this group of four law students that makes sense is a reader questioning whether or not this HRC business could be some kind of assignment.
Like I also read…you want these idiots responsible for selling your house or divorcing your spouse?
Jimbo ,you are quite right,I did mix the two of you up. Sorry Ted. Hey,this apologizing stuff is like a virus,soon everyone will be doing it.