A group of moderate Muslims is calling for Barack Obama to remove negative references to the term 'Muslim' on his new website called 'Stop the Smears.' The candidate had started the website as part of his Internet rapid response effort to stop the so-called 'smears' and rumors about him that have been circulating around the Internet and the electorate.
The problem is that one of the main 'smears' listed on the site is the rumor/falsehood that 'Obama is a Muslim.' And herein is the root of the moderate Muslims' discontent.
It isn't that it is not true that many in the electorate believe Barack Obama to be a Muslim but that the website refers to that rumor/belief as a 'smear,' the connotation being that to be called a Muslim is tantamount to being libeled or defamed.
Thus, the moderate Muslim group, which calls itself 'Muslims Against Sharia,' is demanding that Obama remove from his website the inference that to be called a Muslim is a 'smear.'
This seems to be a reasonable request.
As the group states, most terrorists are Muslims but most Muslims are not terrorists. Most Muslims do not belong to the extremist Jihadist movement--the 'Islamofascist' segment-- within Islam. Terrorists come from this minority segment in the Muslim religion.
But for Obama to depict being falsely described as a Muslim as a 'smear' seems to indicate that the candidate has trouble differentiating between moderate Muslims and terrorists. If this is not the case, then the candidate has made a glaring error that portrays a shocking lack of forethought for someone who would be President.
For more on this controversy, click here to go to the website of 'Muslims Against Sharia':
http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/06/senator-obama-is-not-dirty-muslim.html
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
The "Muslims against Sharia" blog is a project started by virulent anti-Muslim bigot Pamela Geller of the hate blog "Atlas Shrugs".
Do you have any evidence to back up your accusation?
Further, does it matter who started the blog when its goal is to point out the vast difference between Jihadists and moderate Muslims?
Why do you think Geller is 'anti-Muslim? It seems that she is anti-Jihadist, which is a reasonable stance given their goal to annihilate vast portions of civilization.
Why do you think Atlas Shrugs is a 'hate blog?' Truth-telling is not hate.
Here is her first post on the subject, in September of 2007.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs
/2007/09/musims-against-.html
It appears as if "Muslims against Sharia" had been operating as early as 2002 but posted more posts in September 2007 than in the 2002- August 2007 period combined. This means that Pamela Geller probably didn't start the blog, since her own early efforts in 2004 do not show any evidence of 2+ years blogging experience. My apologies.
It is my suspicion that she got involved at this time (2007) along with some Pajamas Media (run by bigot Charles Johnson) cash to give the blog a second wind. As I said, more was published in September 2007 alone than the the 5 previous years combined).
And yes, she's anti-Muslim. have you looked at the site?
This was the article I was looking for.
http://www.freethinker.co.uk/2007/09/24/non-muslims-against-sharia/
Yes, I read the blog, and I don't experience Geller the same way you do. As far as I can tell she is always specific about the type of Muslim to which she refers--the extremist faction, not the moderates.
In like manner, I also do not experience the Pajamas Media the same way you do. Naturally we internalize the things we read based upon personal, individual factors, but legimitate condemnation of Jihadists should not be troublesome to any moderate Muslim.
It would seem to me that moderate Muslims would want to ferret out the factions within their religion that give it a bad name. That would be MY desire if I were Muslim.
Nothing hurts the cause of any religion any worse than extremists who give the entire group a bad name in the eyes of the public.
By the way, I also took at look at the 'Freethinker' website, and to be frank, I am rather skeptical of the blogger's true intentions.
What stake does an atheist have in defending Muslims? Why such a vigorous attempt to discredit a conservative Jew while obviously coming to the aid of critics of the Muslims Against Sharia blog?
It makes no sense to me unless the blogger has a hidden agenda of some sort...but I certainly can't judge one's heart.
Pamela Geller's website "Atlas Shrugs"is a hate site and the she posts anti-Muslim stuff with titles like "Islam 2008: Religion of Barbarism."
She is rarely specific about "extremism" and to that end has gone so far as to say that the Gaza Strip should be carpet bombed and that Lebanese civilians should not be considered "innocent victims" of the 2006 war.
I agree that extremism hurts religion and more importantly, hurts people. That's why Pamela Geller is so bad. She is an extremist who associates with known terrorist groups like the racist extremists of the Kahane terrorist group. (http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/03/nyc-jewish-mass.html)
your question can be posed differently: why does a purported group of muslims associate their blog (and its purported message of moderation and tolerance) with a genocidal racist who calls for islam to be banned in america?
Gentlemen,
Remember that the topic of concern here is not Pamela Geller nor her blog. It is Barack Obama's smear of the Muslim religion.
Ms. Geller is not here to defend herself. Perhaps you should take your concernes directly to her if you feel so strongly about it.
As for the supposed atheist who defends Muslims, I see my questions remain unanswered. Replying to my questions with another question is not an answer.
In addition, the website 'Muslims Against Sharia' clearly was not started by Pamela Geller, and its writers are a variety of persons, some of whom are moderate Muslims.
Here's my answer: The atheist in question takes an interest in defending because they are human beings. He is working to discredit Pamela Geller while coming to the aid of the critics of Muslims against Sharia because Pamela Geller is a well-known anti-Muslims bigot. She is not here to defend herself, but like my friend Robert has pointed out at other sites, there are posts on her blog calling for Islam to be banned and insulting Islam and/or Muslims.
There is also at least one that connects her to Kahanist terrorists, which she promotes rather than denounces.
So I'll pose his question again: If the moderate Muslims and others at Muslims against Sharia want to ferret out the factions within their religion that give it a bad name, why are they associating with a pro-terror religious bigot like Pamela Geller? And since Pamela Geller has made it clear that she sees no distinction between good "moderate Islam" and violent "radical Islam" (as those terms are commonly used today) why is her ulterior motive in working with the moderate Muslims at Muslims against Sharia?
I will repeat what I have already said, Pamela Geller is not here to defend herself, so why the red herring to deflect attention away from THE ISSUE here, which is Barack Obama's attempt to run as fast as he can from any association with Muslims, including smearing them?
Regarding the atheist, if he is so concerned about humanity, then why does he not passionately defend Christians and Jews?
I do not believe Pamela Geller is a terrorist but passionately pro-Israel. With Palenstinians and others in the region attempting to wipe the nation off the map, Israel is forced to take drastic steps to defend itself.
Hamas and Hizbollah are terrorist organizations that perpetrate violence and mayhem. Where is your atheist buddy on THAT issue?
Barack Obama has consistently supported these groups, which has led to many defections of Jews from the ranks of his supporters.
The Obama 'Stop the Smears' website is simply full of half-truths anyway. They conveniently leave out significant portions of the truth in their attempt to shield the candidate from any criticism.
But on this issue, they dropped a major bombshell of a faux pas. Stating that to be called a Muslim is a 'smear' is a slap in the face to moderate Muslims.
Everything posted here is wrong. Utterly inaccurate.
IBut hey am not surprised - its the leftist Islamic allaince propagating their memes.
Muslims Against Sharia asked me to join them and to chair a committee who's objective is to make honor killing a capital crime. I was unaware of their group but thought what they wanted to do was admirable and important. Islam must be reformed from within.
I love everyone that fights on the side of truth, justice and the American way.
I fight the jihad and consider myself most fortunate to count amongst my friends Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Andrew Bostom, Youssef Ibrahim, Walid Phares, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, Sam Solomon.
I am against the coming holocaust against the Jews.
I am against FGM, honor killings and the sub class citizenship of women in Islamic countries. I fight the jihad - that is my fight.
To address your charges of racism and islamophobia is a canard. I can't prive a negative.
It is obvious you do not read my blog or understand why I do what I do.
I fight for the indiviual and the basic tenets of western civilization. You can avoid evil but you cannot avoid the consequnces of avoiding evil.I and the folks that work with me intend to save America.
Your either with us or against.
Thanks, Pamela, for your response.
I thought it was only fair that you be given the chance to respond to the accusations leveled against you here.
Kind regards,
Martyn
And I find it interesting that you are so sure to bash the Freethinker site without having read it.
http://www.freethinker.co.uk/
I read it. That's how I arrived at the conclusion that there is, perhaps, a hidden agenda.
That is not bashing but a legitimate critique. I certainly do not purport to be infallible on these matters, and I could be wrong.
But that is how I experienced the site.
D. Martyn Lloyd-Morgan,
I reposted my response to Pamela Geller about her anti-Muslim, pro-terrorist blog. This time, I hope you will not pretend that you didn't see it.
Robert,
I wasn't 'pretending I didn't see it.' My delay was due to pondering over what to do about your comment. I decided not to post your latest entry.
You have made this exchange here entirely about Pamela Geller and her blog, Atlas Shrugs. This is clearly NOT the subject of my original post.
But I let you have your say, and you even got a fair hearing from Pamela Geller herself, who took the time to come here and respond to you directly, which she certainly did not have to do, given her busy schedule. She manages one of the top blogs in the country and could well have ignored you and me both.
But she didn't. She came here and responded to your accusations. She told you what she meant by her words directly, clearly, and succinctly. That should be enough.
However, I cannot allow this forum to be used as a platform from which you can hurl accusations and innuendo at a fellow blogger. This is not even the appropriate place for it. You obviously have issues with the blogger in question, and it is not fair to me for you to come here and turn this into a 'bash Pamela Geller' forum.
I am certain you would not want someone hurling accusations against you on somebody else's blog.
So, if you have a problem with Pamela, this is the wrong place to discuss it.
I would be happy for you to discuss issues related to the original post about Barack Obama, however.
If you don't like people hurling accusations and innuendo, can you show us what warrants your claim that Obama has "consistently supported" HAMAS and Hizbullah?
I would be happy to. If fact, I am doing an entire post on it that you will find either tomorrow or over the weekend.
But let me make one think crystal clear--this is my blog and I get to write what I want. It is an opinion blog.
If you don't like what's here or at Pamela Geller's blog, then start your own blog, and have at it.
pamela geller of atlas shrugs is supported by many, many great, loyal americans of all colors and creeds. people who really "get it". people who understand that there is a global jihad threat that must be met and defeated. something which is akin to to the nazis in ww2.
anyone who does not yet understand this must not only read atlasshrugs.typepad.com but read the books she discusses: the legacy of islamic antisemtism by bostom as well as his book on jihad and several other significant works.
if the liberal/left insists on only reading it's own media they will never wake up to what is really going on.
how about this: ask soldiers who have been in iraq how they feel. a vast majority of them understand excactly what they are fighting for. unless you are a kerry leftist who snidely looks down upon our soldiers, you would find their answers illuminating.
G-d bless pamela geller/atlas shrugs and all the other blogs and media who strive to tell the truth to protect and save america, israel and the west from the very real threat of global jihad.
people!!! do you really think that 9-11 was a one time thing? it was most certainly an act of war.
wake up!!!
Post a Comment