Quantcast The Spectator
College Media Network
Spectator Home Spectwitter! Specbook! Site map

A different take on Islam, terrorism

Abstract:
On Nov. 11, I attended a lecture by Robert Spencer, invited to the UW-Eau Claire campus by the Conservative Union. Spencer, who is the director of Jihad Watch and author of seven books and hundreds of articles, is a self-proclaimed expert on Islam. I found his lecture, "Islam and Terrorism," problematic in its title, its declared objectives and the way it was presented....

  • Displaying 1 - 12 of 12

Stephen Gash

posted 11/20/08 @ 5:09 AM CST

Islam does not mean "peace" it means "submission" pure and simple.

Some of the most outspoken against Islam are ex-muslims, notably Whalid Shoebat.

Another ex-Muslim Ali Sina who runs the forum Faith Freedom International has challenged any Muslim to refute his claims against Islam, with a reward of $50,000. All he has been received in return to this generous offer is death threats.

Islamic governments all over the world are oppressing non-Muslims, such as the poor Copts in Egypt. This is done with the support of the Muslim population. Are we to believe they are all extremists?

I suggest the Western media take up Ali Sina's challenge.

Collin

posted 11/21/08 @ 9:37 AM CST

Originally posted by

Stephen Gash

Islam does not mean "peace" it means "submission" pure and simple.

Some of the most outspoken against Islam are ex-muslims, notably Whalid Shoebat.

Another ex-Muslim Ali Sina who runs the forum Faith Freedom International has challenged any Muslim to refute his claims against Islam, with a reward of $50,000. All he has been received in return to this generous offer is death threats.

Islamic governments all over the world are oppressing non-Muslims, such as the poor Copts in Egypt. This is done with the support of the Muslim population. Are we to believe they are all extremists?

I suggest the Western media take up Ali Sina's challenge.


hahahaha, oh man, are you seriously referring to the Egyptian government as "Islamic"? I have news for you, sir, the Egyptian government oppresses Muslims too.

What a silly post. Your lack of knowledge regarding the Middle-East is rivaled only by your confidence in expressing your ignorance.

Glen R.

posted 11/20/08 @ 7:54 AM CST

Dr. Abootalebi's attack on Robert Spencer is highly questionable. Attempting to pull academic rank, for example, hardly qualifies as an impressive debating point. Neither does opening with a fundamentally false statement about the meaning of Islam

Aside from confusing the word 'al-silm' (submission) with 'al-salaam' (peace), Dr. Abootalebi erroneously states that "99.9 percent of Muslims" reject violence. This is contradicted by every published study, including the recent Gallup poll by Islamic apologist John Esposito, which found that 7% of Muslims strongly supported the 9/11 attacks and about 1 in 4 felt they were somewhat justified.

I'm sure that Dr. Abootalebi is a decent person with good intentions, but the significance of a PhD is greatly diminished when condescension and false information is pushed to discredit a critic. Hurt feelings apparently got the best of this professor.

Collin

posted 11/21/08 @ 9:41 AM CST

Islamic apologist. I love your methodology for dismissing Gallup findings by attacking an author who uses them in context. How "academic".

Actions speak louder than words...

posted 11/20/08 @ 10:19 AM CST

All September 11th terrorists and members of Al-Qaida are Muslim, correct? A persons and a religions motives, beliefs, and reputation are shown in it's ACTIONS not its rhetoric. Words mean very little, bombs, guns, and totalitarian regimes clearly show Islam is not a religion of peace. Praise our Lord Jesus that the Catholics and Lutherans are not terrorists like the Sunni's and Shia's (more proof of the violence built into Islam), OR the Palestinian terrorists, or the Iranians. I see very few Islamics who choose peace. Yes, there may be a few, but they are the minority. The scientific method shows that Islam=terror. It's a fact based on any interpretation.

Emily

posted 11/21/08 @ 12:25 PM CST

Originally posted by

Actions speak louder than words...

All September 11th terrorists and members of Al-Qaida are Muslim, correct? A persons and a religions motives, beliefs, and reputation are shown in it's ACTIONS not its rhetoric. Words mean very little, bombs, guns, and totalitarian regimes clearly show Islam is not a religion of peace. Praise our Lord Jesus that the Catholics and Lutherans are not terrorists like the Sunni's and Shia's (more proof of the violence built into Islam), OR the Palestinian terrorists, or the Iranians. I see very few Islamics who choose peace. Yes, there may be a few, but they are the minority. The scientific method shows that Islam=terror. It's a fact based on any interpretation.


All members of the KKK responsible for hanging and shamelessly killing African Americans are Christian right? Its their actions not their rhetoric! So I guess the KKK and other white supremacy groups, whom all pride themselves on being Christian, have taken a more realistic view of the bible then...yeah that makes sense.

Billy

posted 11/20/08 @ 10:22 AM CST

Hi everybody,

First of to all wanna Arab specialists who think they know everything,
if you has a baic arabic course you would know that words in arabic come from rrot words. it is not like english so stop comapring. Islam has many deffinition in one word and are all acceptable: Submission, peace and death.

so naming the religion it self came exactly with these meaning in mind because they are "the truth" that people who are Muslim should believe and do. which are being in PEACE with the our nature and the nature around us through the SUBMISSION to GOD and his commands after which we will experiance our DEATH and go back to who created us.

so Islam is all of them, not only submission, or only peace or only death. submission the a means, a tool to get peace in this world and after our death.

It is very annoying to see all around people who have nothing to do with arabic start explaning thing beyonf them. to let you even arabs who know arabic as their mother's tongue cant explain stuff like this. you need specialist in arabic with alot of experiance in Quran since it's the highest form of beauty and complixity in the arabic language. nobody so far has ever been able to write some even close to QURAN. ask any arabic scholor and they tell u.

Peace.

akhter

posted 11/20/08 @ 11:29 AM CST

Originally posted by

Billy

Hi everybody,

First of to all wanna Arab specialists who think they know everything,
if you has a baic arabic course you would know that words in arabic come from rrot words. it is not like english so stop comapring. Islam has many deffinition in one word and are all acceptable: Submission, peace and death.

so naming the religion it self came exactly with these meaning in mind because they are "the truth" that people who are Muslim should believe and do. which are being in PEACE with the our nature and the nature around us through the SUBMISSION to GOD and his commands after which we will experiance our DEATH and go back to who created us.

so Islam is all of them, not only submission, or only peace or only death. submission the a means, a tool to get peace in this world and after our death.

It is very annoying to see all around people who have nothing to do with arabic start explaning thing beyonf them. to let you even arabs who know arabic as their mother's tongue cant explain stuff like this. you need specialist in arabic with alot of experiance in Quran since it's the highest form of beauty and complixity in the arabic language. nobody so far has ever been able to write some even close to QURAN. ask any arabic scholor and they tell u.

Peace.


Very nicely explained, Billy thank you for reminding, i hope Mr Spencer would also take note![the so called expert on Islam]

Omar

posted 11/20/08 @ 11:23 AM CST

Hello I would like to invite you to visit our website : http://www.ikhwanweb.com/

IKhwanweb is the Muslim Brotherhood"s only official English web site. The Main office is located in London, although Ikhwanweb has correspondents in most countries. Our staff is exclusively made of volunteers and stretched over the five continents.
The Muslim Brotherhood opinions and views can be found under the sections of MB statements and MB opinions, in addition to the Editorial Message.
Items posted under "other views" are usually different from these of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Ikhwanweb does not censor any articles or comments but has the right only to remove any inappropriate words that defy public taste
Ikhwanweb is not a news website, although we report news that matter to the Muslim Brotherhood"s cause. Our main misson is to present the Muslim Brotherhood vision right from the source and rebut misonceptions about the movement in western societies. We value debate on the issues and we welcome constructive criticism.

to help inform you about your subject matter,questions

If you have any addition questions you can email us at :
Ikhwanweb2010@gmail.com

jhimmi

posted 11/20/08 @ 2:51 PM CST

It's time for Muslims to stop defending Sharia Law. It's time for Muslims to stop defending Islamists and their literal interpretation of the Qu'ran. Don't expect anyone to see a distinction between an ordinary Muslim and an extremist Islamist, if you can't define the difference yourself. Where does the 'moderate' Muslim differ from the extremist, the islamist? Is the use of indiscriminate violence?

I see very little difference between peaceful and violent Islamists. Anyone who wants to implement Sharia in any way, shape, or form in a Western democracy is my enemy.

Collin

posted 11/21/08 @ 9:34 AM CST

Originally posted by

jhimmi

It's time for Muslims to stop defending Sharia Law. It's time for Muslims to stop defending Islamists and their literal interpretation of the Qu'ran. Don't expect anyone to see a distinction between an ordinary Muslim and an extremist Islamist, if you can't define the difference yourself. Where does the 'moderate' Muslim differ from the extremist, the islamist? Is the use of indiscriminate violence?

I see very little difference between peaceful and violent Islamists. Anyone who wants to implement Sharia in any way, shape, or form in a Western democracy is my enemy.


Your post is so rife with misinterpretation and outright ignorance I'm cautious about even replying to it. I suggest you take a course in Islam, Middle-Easter Politics, or Middle-Eastern Studies.

To begin with, Sharia is merely the practice of the Islamic faith, it does not necessarily denote "law" which is referred to as "fiqh" in Arabic.

Next, an "Islamist" is a Muslim who advocates for a greater integration of Islam into society, basically Fundamentalist Muslims. An "Islamist" does not advocate violence, a terrorist does. I suggest you research for yourself the results of the Gallup poll which is the most comprehensive opinion survey of the Muslim world. The results may be read in "Who Speaks for Islam" by Esposito.

I find it humorous that your black-and-white absolutist thinking so closely mimics that of the "Islamists" you are trying to condemn.

Andrew Yu-Jen Wang

posted 3/02/09 @ 8:05 PM CST

Speaking of terrorism:

George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism (indicated in my blog).

George W. Bush did in fact commit innumerable hate crimes.

And I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed other hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention.

Many people know what Bush did.

And many people will know what Bush did--even to the end of the world.

Bush was absolute evil.

Bush is now like a fugitive from justice.

Bush is a psychological prisoner.

Bush has a lot to worry about.

Bush can technically be prosecuted for hate crimes at any time.

In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy.

Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993

"GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY" BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
______________________
I am not sure where I had read it before, but anyway, it is a linguistically excellent statement, and it goes kind of like this: "If only it were possible to ban invention that bottled up memory so it never got stale and faded." Oh wait--off of the top of my head--I think the quotation came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.
  • Displaying 1 - 12 of 12

Post Your Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Advertisement

Poll

Should the UW-Eau Claire campus go smoke-free?
Submit Vote

View Results

Advertisement