LobeLog on Facebook LobeLog on Facebook

Message no image

Published on September 20th, 2009 | by Eli Clifton

3

Dogs, Donkeys and Women, Oh My!

By Eli Clifton

A newly created group dedicated to fighting the “Islamization of America” will be walking the streets of Washington DC on September 25th engaging passers-by in a “dialogue” about Islam in America.

The group, Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), stands out for its extensive ties to far-right bloggers in the US and Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy. It also has links to the European Far Right and Nazi apologists.

The choice of September 25 as the launch date is designed to coincide with “Jumah Prayer on Capitol Hill: A Day of Islamic Unity,” a gathering of Muslims on the National Mall. Its organizers say:

“The objective of this gathering is to invite the Muslim Communities and friends of Islam to express and illustrate the wonderful diversity of Islam. We intend to manifest Islam’s majestic spiritual principals [sic] as revealed by Allah to our beloved prophet Muhammad (PEACE BE UPON HIM) of Arabia. Likewise; we intend to inspire a new generation of Muslim to work for the greater good of all people. We shall serve all people, regardless of race, religion or national origin.”

SIOA,however, takes a dim view of what it calls “the doctrine of Islam, jihad, and Sharia (Islamic law),” especially in the United States.

‘’Islamic law and jihad are brutal, misogynist, and fundamentally contrary to our Constitution and to our concepts of human rights and freedom. Tolerance for ideologies that are opposed to our principles of individual freedoms and our Constitution is indefensible,’’ reads SIOA’s website.

The new group’s September 25 launch will include a number of high-profile guests, including Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and Christine Brim.

Both Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller were present at the 2007 CounterJihad Europa Conference in Brussels which was co-sponsored by the Belgian far-right Vlaams Belang (VB) party whose platform, among other things, calls for pardoning Belgians convicted of collaborating with the Nazis. Spencer, Geller and Brim have also been strong supporters of far-right Dutch MP Geert Wilders and helped facilitate his fund-raising trips to the US. (Ali Gharib, Daniel Luban and I have written about Wilders and his American hosts here, here and here) Wilders has gone so far as to suggest that the Koran should be banned, along with Mein Kampf, as examples of hate speech.

Spencer, Geller and other attendees at the Brussels conference have denied that they’re allied with Nazi apologists, insisting that their European contacts in VB and Wilders’ Party for Freedom are totally unrelated to the fascists of the 1930s. By loudly claiming their affection and support for Israel, the new European Far Right has tried to distance itself from that era and, in so doing, has succeeded in gaining the support of some neoconservatives.

SpinWatch recently published an excellent article that details the development of the European far-right’s relationship with U.S. neoconservatives.

In 2007 Christine Brim, whose group Center for Vigilant Freedom helped organize the Brussels conference (along with VB) and who is listed as a speaker at the SIOA kickoff next week, elaborated on the neoconservative relationship with the European far-right in 2007.

‘’If such parties specifically state pro-Israel positions, and take real actions opposing anti-Semitism and disavowing previous positions – and reach out to Jewish constituents and encourage Jewish participation in party positions – these are real actions to observe, and to approve.’’

Brim also serves as a senior vice president at Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy.

Encouraging far-right political parties in Western Europe to reject anti-Semitism–formerly a tenet of their often fascistic views towards immigrants and non-Christians–is a positive step. But the willingness of U.S. neoconservatives such as Brim, Gaffney or far-right US bloggers, such as Geller and Spencer, to embrace politicians who have substituted Muslims as targets for their xenophobia and hate they once (and probably still, at some level) directed at Jews seems like a devil’s bargain. (Of course, this is not entirely new: prominent neo-conservatives, including Midge Decter and the late Irving Kristol, staunchly defended the murderous military junta in Argentina from the late 1970s until the 1982 Falklands/Malvinas War against charges by Jacobo Timmerman and human-rights activists that it had a special affinity for Hitler and Nazi paraphernalia.)

Arutz Sheva called attention to SIOA’s “brainstorming” blog posts that suggested that donkeys, dogs and women should be brought to the group’s launch in order to interfere with the Jumah Prayer event on the Mall.

SIOA president D.L. Adams responded to accusations that such provocations were “extreme”.

“Because the Arutz Sheva article picked up on some of SIOA’s creative brainstorming posts to use humor and a bit of theatrics involving the things that are thought to disrupt prayer for Muslims – dogs, donkeys and women – some are already calling this loving group of people “extreme”.

I take the opposite viewpoint and contend that drawing attention to the Muslim belief that ”dogs, donkeys, women” (and don’t forget breaking wind) are the things that interfere with their prayers being received, rather than spiritual matters like insincerity of heart, highlights the essential materialism of this so-called religion.

Neither our Founding Fathers, nor Lao Tse, Confucius, Gautama Siddartha, Saint Paul, Jesus, Isaiah, Moses, nor Abraham would recognize Islam as a bona fide religion, but would instantly understand it as the massive intellectual fraud that it is. Our cowardly leaders, in both Church and State, who claim it doesn’t matter what people believe, are fools. It matters that Muslims believe non-Muslims are inferior human beings. It matters that Muslims believe women are inferior to men. It matters that Muslims believe obedience and worship are the same thing and that conformity is the same as morality. It matters that Islam requires territorial sovereignty. It matters that Muslims believe that leaving Islam is equivalent to high treason. It matters what Muslims believe just as it matters what communists believe and what neo-Nazis believe.’’

SIOA’s kickoff will be followed by a “saunter” to “engage in conversations with our fellow citizens who might happen to be there on the same day on matters of moment.’’

Print Friendly


About the Author

avatar

Eli Clifton reports on money in politics and US foreign policy. Eli previously reported for the American Independent News Network, ThinkProgress, and Inter Press Service.



3 Responses to Dogs, Donkeys and Women, Oh My!

Show Comments →



  1. avatar scott says:

    Shana Tova Umetakah.

    “Our cowardly leaders, in both Church and State, who claim it doesn’t matter what people believe, are fools. It matters that Muslims believe non-Muslims are inferior human beings. It matters that Muslims believe women are inferior to men. It matters that Muslims believe obedience and worship are the same thing and that conformity is the same as morality. It matters that Islam requires territorial sovereignty. It matters that Muslims believe that leaving Islam is equivalent to high treason.”

    I find this quote indicative of a common device used by Neo-cons and ardent Zionists. Muslims don’t believe they are superior, (though they believe Islam is a better way to live) but isn’t this very charge more appropriately directed toward Jews who’s books say they are “god’s chosen people?” Islam holds that men and women are equal in the eyes of God, but doesn’t Judaism hold women as chattel? I know that what adherents believe and practice is different than what the original texts say, but again we see the pot calling the kettle black. As to obedience and worship being the same, this is a weird charge especially from a tribe that holds so many commandments, laws and restrictions–from a faith tradition that calls it’s texts “the law?” The line about territorial sovereignty is the most hypocritical line of all. Who reveres the “land of Canaan” for themselves? Who’s sacred texts celebrate genocide and atrocity to take that “Promised land?” Finally, I don’t know what you call the censure that any Jew who challenges the official Israeli/Zionists narrative receive but it looks to be fierce. Specifically I understand that the Islamic prohibition is for “treason” not simply leaving the faith. If one were to lie, and defame the faith they might begin to meet the standards for the judgment of apostasy.

    Finally, I wanted to recount the uniquely American experience of the Eid Prayer here in Dallas. No where in the world is there such a colorful, international and diverse group gathered together in the name of any single faith. Not even the Haj can claim such a colorful pageant. Women and men from Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and India, from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanese, Jordanians, Palestinians, Egyptians, Bosnian, Croats, Turks, North Africans, Americans, Mexicans and more. Each dressed to the nines, some covered in Burkas to those who wear their scarves, if at all like ribbons draped across the back of their perfectly coiffed hair.

    No other faith tradition anywhere else likely offers such diversity. Even at Eid prayers in the Muslim world aren’t this diverse nor this centralized. There adherents go worship in their home mosques, often predominately men but here the desire for community and homesickness likely bring all these people from diverse sects even together.

    The Quran says I made you from different tribes so that you may know each other. In other places speaking of the variety of color even on a bunch of grapes as the ummah (Muslim community) I would like to post the photos I took somewhere, and in my free time hope to do so.

  2. avatar Jon Harrison says:

    If someone were to employ D.L. Adams’ language about Islam toward the Jewish faith, one would immediately be labeled a bigot. I don’t like the extreme views held by radical Muslims any more than I like the prejudices of militant Christians. But one mustn’t condemn entire groups based on the beliefs or actions of a few. After all, wasn’t that a tactic used by the Nazis?

  3. avatar Feizal Mansoor says:

    I wonder if the anyone in the group organising the confrontation at the congregational prayer (jumma) are aware that every Muslim awaits the Second Coming?
    As such it would be impossible for a believing Muslim to be anti-Christian, in fact the Qur’an is explicit in condemning those who would dispute that He is the Messiah.
    Regardless of anyone who tries to turn what is in fact an active noun into an institution, the word Islam describes an act not a heterodoxy, and Christians and Muslims alike would benefit more by Comprehension than rhetoric: the Christ is to Christians what the Qur’an is to Muslims.
    I am Muslim. I am Hindu. I am Christian. I am Buddhist. I am Zorastrian.
    The Prophet died without naming a successor, and while various tariqats or interpretations of doctrine may serve some, no one can interpret what is essentially a symbolic teaching for anyone else. Comprehension of the Almighty is a personal experience that can never be taught. This is why it really doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks, only what one thinks oneself.
    Does anyone truly believe anyone else has not farted?

Back to Top ↑
  • Categories


  • Subscribe to LobeLog

    Enter your email address to subscribe to our site and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Popular Posts