Germany finds 1500 cases of child marriage among Muslim migrants | Jihad Watch

What exactly did the Germans expect? Few things are more abundantly attested in Islamic law than the permissibility of child marriage. Islamic tradition records that Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha, was six when Muhammad wedded her and nine when he consummated the marriage:

“The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)” (Bukhari 7.62.88).

Another tradition has Aisha herself recount the scene:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Bukhari 5.58.234).

Muhammad was at this time fifty-four years old.

Marrying young girls was not all that unusual for its time, but because in Islam Muhammad is the supreme example of conduct (cf. Qur’an 33:21), he is considered exemplary in this unto today. And so in April 2011, the Bangladesh Mufti Fazlul Haque Amini declared that those trying to pass a law banning child marriage in that country were putting Muhammad in a bad light: “Banning child marriage will cause challenging the marriage of the holy prophet of Islam, [putting] the moral character of the prophet into controversy and challenge.” He added a threat: “Islam permits child marriage and it will not be tolerated if any ruler will ever try to touch this issue in the name of giving more rights to women.” The Mufti said that 200,000 jihadists were ready to sacrifice their lives for any law restricting child marriage.

Likewise the influential website Islamonline.com in December 2010 justified child marriage by invoking not only Muhammad’s example, but the Qur’an as well:

The Noble Qur’an has also mentioned the waiting period [i.e. for a divorced wife to remarry] for the wife who has not yet menstruated, saying: “And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women, if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated” [Qur’an 65:4]. Since this is not negated later, we can take from this verse that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a prepubescent girl. The Qur’an is not like the books of jurisprudence which mention what the implications of things are, even if they are prohibited. It is true that the prophet entered into a marriage contract with A’isha when she was six years old, however he did not have sex with her until she was nine years old, according to al-Bukhari.

Other countries make Muhammad’s example the basis of their laws regarding the legal marriageable age for girls. Article 1041 of the Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran states that girls can be engaged before the age of nine, and married at nine: “Marriage before puberty (nine full lunar years for girls) is prohibited. Marriage contracted before reaching puberty with the permission of the guardian is valid provided that the interests of the ward are duly observed.”

According to Amir Taheri in The Spirit of Allah: Khomeini and the Islamic Revolution (pp. 90-91), Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight. Khomeini called marriage to a prepubescent girl “a divine blessing,” and advised the faithful to give their own daughters away accordingly: “Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house.” When he took power in Iran, he lowered the legal marriageable age of girls to nine, in accord with Muhammad’s example.

“Germany Moves To Ban Child Marriages After Finding 1500 Cases Among Refugees,” by Jacob Bojesson, Daily Caller, April 5, 2017:

 

Source : Jihad Watch 


America at War

For 1400 years Muslims have terrorized civilized people all over the planet in the name of their “religion”. I use the term religion very loosely here. Because Islam is not really a religion at all. It is more of a political system, which is controlled by their religious leaders.

Sharia Law supersedes ANY laws written by man, including the Constitution of the United States, and including the Bill of Rights. There is no such thing as “Freedom of Speech” in a country which is controlled by Sharia Law.

If you express a view which is contrary to Sharia Law, or that is critical of Islam then you are put to death! That’s it. You see………. under Sharia Law you don’t have to be a Muslim to be expected to follow these laws, they apply to everyone! (In the minds of Muslims) 

So they have created a “religion” here that expects submission from ALL. At the end of the day believers consider themselves superior to you and I. They believe we are here merely to “serve” them and to make their life easier. Violence is acceptable under just about any circumstance, especially when dealing with non-muslims. Make a joke about Islam and you are killed.

For 1400 years Muslim marauders have raped, looted, and killed people of other faiths all over the World. They have destroyed countless Churches, Temples, and Religious Artifacts. Literally destroying priceless monuments along with historical buildings, and writings. For NO REASON other than the conquered people were something other than Muslim. It continues TODAY!

56ffcedfc36188fe4d8b4581

Palmyra Syria / ISIS

Here is a link to a video I found on Youtube that shows 12 of the more recent crimes against humanity committed  by ISIS

12 Historical Treasures In The Middle East DESTROYED!

 

If you track the news daily I’d like to issue you a challenge :  To find a single day in which a Christian Church is not destroyed by Muslims. To find a single day in which Muslims do not kill non-muslims for no other reason than being of another religion.

I made that challenge to myself several years ago, and I have yet to find a single day in which both did not occur. That should really sink in to you. EVERY single day Muslims murder in the name of Islam. EVERY single day Muslims destroy holy sites belonging to other religions.

And EVERY single day underage girls and grown women alike are sexually abused, raped, and murdered by men who believe they have the “Right” to do so under “Sharia Law”.

And EVERY single day Muslims worldwide strive to spread Sharia Law to every corner of the globe. And they will never stop, until YOU are forced to live under Sharia Law!

I harbor no ill-will towards ANYONE, but anyone thinking they’ll be strong arming me into following the rules of a religion I don’t believe in has another think coming!

I really don’t care if you choose to worship a rock………… as long as you don’t have intentions of forcing me to worship it with you! Freedom and Islam CANNOT coexist. I hope that you will stay informed on the battle for the planet, that rages on every single day……. Between Muslims and non-muslims.

Arm yourself with the information you need, and that the liberal media hides from you. Subscribe to Creeping Sharia

https://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/

Advertisements

Staged “Hate Crimes” meant to give credibility to claims of “Islamaphobia”

CAIR and other groups have on more than one occasion “Staged” crimes to give the appearance of “anti-Muslim” sentiment across the U.S..

Why would they do that? Well because they love to get themselves on television where they make claims of “Islamaphobia” and of Americans committing horrible hate crimes against Muslims all across the country.

Since very few crimes are actually committed against the Muslim population in America they have to fabricate some, so they can continue to play “victims” while they victimize others.

It is all a part of the Jihad being fought to take control over this country. The liberal media will go on and on about these fake crimes, repeating these claims often so Americans will feel guilty, and not pay attention to what is taking place here. I’ve seen this many times in the past, and expect to see it many more.

Don’t buy into this nonsense, it is all part of their grand facade, to hide what is actually taking place. The Jihad is real. The dangers are real. These claims of “Islamaphobia” running rampant in the streets of the United States are FAKE!

 

 

 

Here is a story I read today on Jihad Watch :


Fake hate crime in Ohio: Muslim charged with painting anti-Arab graffiti

Hamas-linked CAIR and other Muslims have on many occasions not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating “hate crimes,” including attacks on mosques. A New Jersey Muslim was found guilty of murder that he tried to portray as an “Islamophobic” attack, and in 2014 in California, a Muslim was found guilty of killing his wife, after first blaming her murder on “Islamophobia.”

This kind of thing happens quite frequently. The New York Daily News reported that “a woman who told cops she was called a terrorist and slashed on her cheek in lower Manhattan on Thursday later admitted she made up the story, police said early Friday. The woman, who wore a headscarf, told authorities a blade-wielding wacko sliced open her face as she left a Manhattan cosmetology school, police sources said.”

We were told that a Muslim boy was attacked and beat up on his school bus in North Carolina — but a photo showed him without a scratch and no one on the bus corroborated his story. And recently in Britain, the murder of a popular imam was spread far and wide as another “Islamophobic hate crime” – until his killer also was found to be a Muslim. The Mirror reported that the imam “was targeted because he had made efforts to turn youngsters away from radical Islam.”

According to The Detroit News, a Muslim woman, Saida Chatti, was “charged with making a false police report after she allegedly fabricated a plot to blow up Dearborn Fordson High School to retaliate against the November terrorist attacks in Paris….Police say Chatti called Dearborn investigators Nov. 19, six days after Islamic extremists killed 130 people in Paris.”

And similarly in Britain, a Muslim woman was “fined for lying to police about being attacked for wearing a hijab. The 18-year-old student, known only as Miss Choudhury, said she was violently shoved from behind and punched in the face by a man in Birmingham city centre 10 days after the atrocities in the French capital on November 13.”

“Charges filed in connection to racially charged graffiti on Sylvania Twp. home,” by Christopher Burns, WNWO, February 15, 2017:

SYLVANIA TWP., Oh. (WNWO) — Authorities say charges have been filed in connection to a graffiti incident on the garage door of an Arab family in Lucas County.

Sylvania Township police say Osama Nazzal, 28, of Toledo, was charged with criminal damaging in connection to the incident.

On Jan. 10, the Sylvania Twp. home of Souheir Eltatawi had been spray-painted with a swastika and derogatory phrase that read, “Expletive Arabs.”…

Click the link below to view the original story by Robert Spencer posted on Jihad Watch

Source : Jihad Watch


Robert Spencer and

Jihad Watch

are excellent sources of news. You should subscribe today! Stay informed on the events affecting us all.

German asylum seekers refuse to work: ‘We are Merkel’s guests’| Jihad Watch

JIHAD WATCH

August 18, 2016 11:47 pm By

Decisions on Muslim migration made by leftist politicians have become a scourge on the German people and other European citizens, who have witnessed the slow metamorphosis of their peaceful communities while they pay with their tax dollars for the recklessness of their leaders such as Angela Merkel. Tens of thousands of crimes and assaults have been committed by Muslim migrants in Germany, but these are less of a concern to the politicians who walk with their security detail and their bank accounts intact.

Even in the midst of the Muslim migrant crisis in Germany, Mayor Bernd Pohlers of the eastern town of Saxony Waldenburg, where the asylum seekers refused to accept work, stated his concern about this latest piece of news playing “into the hands of those opposing the mass migration,” evincing yet again the all too familiar stench of political posturing and a cruel disregard for those who cast their votes in trust.

Merkel-701556

“German asylum seekers refuse to work insisting ‘We are Merkel’s GUESTS’”, by Siobhan McFadyen and Monika Pallenberg, UK Express, August 18, 2016:

ASYLUM seekers in Germany are refusing to undertake work to counteract boredom – using Chancellor Angela Merkel’s generous hospitality as an excuse.

According to mayor Bernd Pohlers of the eastern town of Saxony Waldenburg, the asylum seekers refused to accept the work that was offered to them after they arrived in the country.

The local council spent £600 arranging for the men to have uniforms but were stunned when they were told they would not complete it because they were “guests of Angela Merkel”.

While asylum seekers are not allowed to work under immigration rules within the EU, they are allowed to do voluntary work.

However officials in the district of Zwickau came up with a plan to help encourage those without employment to get back to work and to help them become more accepted within the local community.

In order to do this they created voluntary jobs which included a nominal payment of £18 for 20 hours work.

But all of the male residents of the local refugee accommodation who initially agreed to get involved in the charitable activities quit after discovering there was a minimum wage £7.30 (€8.50) in Germany.

The men had been picked up and offered transportation from their paid-for housing where they are also given food and then dropped home.

Mayor Pohlers said: “It was subsequently argued by these people that they are guests of Mrs. Merkel and guests do not have to work.

“Furthermore, they were of the opinion that there is a minimum wage (€8.50) in Germany, and that this had to be paid by the City Waldenburg.”

Despite attempts at mediation the asylum seekers refused to return to work.

Mayor Pohlers added: “In a specially convened meeting with an interpreter the authorities explained the rules again.

“Unfortunately, no agreement could be reached on the continuation of the measure.”

Now all seven of the jobs have been scrapped.

The mayor spoke out in a bid to highlight the issue of the asylum crisis in Germany.

He said he is aware his statements could play into the hands of those opposing the mass migration.

However after having raised money from the local community to help aid the asylum seeker’s transition into the community, he felt compelled to speak out…..

Source : Jihad Watch


America at War

Featured Image -- 1045

    I Would like to point out that the current administration would like nothing more than to flood our streets with these same “Guests“. And when/if they are allowed to do so, American tax payers will bear the burden. Our “guests” will insist on housing of course, and surely a free college education will be expected for adults and children alike. (most likely in atomic energy or piloting aircraft.)

Featured Image -- 1117

    And what good is an education if our guests don’t have healthcare? And unlike any poor American who must catch the bus or walk, our guests will expect and demand transportation. Next they will be whining about Denny’s serving bacon on the breakfast menu, and demanding the local butcher remove all pork from his shop.

bacon-muslims-1024x536

   Your local school will certainly have to remove any pork from the lunch and breakfast menu, if they haven’t already. American prisoners are already being denied pork in many prisons because of this now, the one source of “meat” a prisoner gets, removed because of…… someone else’s religion???

The complaints about Christian Symbols and Crosses will never cease, but will barely be audible over the “Call to Prayer” blasting from loudspeakers all over town, multiple times daily. (Like can be heard in Michigan today) As the Churches across America fall victim to fire and explosions.

burnt-church

 

   Every non-Muslim who wishes to protect his or her freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution will suddenly become some sort of “Hate-Monger” or “Islamaphobe” because they wish to protect their right to free speech. Because there is no such thing as “free speech” in Islam. If you disagree with Islam then you are killed under Sharia Law.

jd-672x372

    Muslims believe that non-Muslims exist only to serve them. A non-Muslim is viewed as “Unclean, Dirty, Less than Human.” They believe themselves to be superior to you and I, and view us as nothing more than “something to be used for their own benefit.” This is why women Worldwide are raped, tortured, and murdered EVERY SINGLE DAY all across the planet by Muslims. You have NO RIGHTS as a non-Muslim in a Muslim controlled country. You are nothing more than an object. They feel they are superior to you in every way

     When their numbers are great enough, and the murders and the daily beheadings have you afraid, they may allow your family to live as  “Dhimmis” and graciously allow you to contribute to their cause by paying  the “Jizya”, which is a tax levied against non-Muslims in  Muslim countries. If you have never heard of this you should do some research, since it may well be in your future if this Administration has it’s way.

isis-ethiopian-beheading-2-christian-april-2015

     So you’ll be paying for them to come here. Then you’ll pay for their housing, electricity, water, phone, internet, and education. And then you can pay them their “Jizya” tax on Infidels. Then you’ll be expected to clean their house as well…. Just like in Europe today. They won’t work, because they are “guests”. And besides….. You’ll be their little “Dhimmi”, and as such you’ll be required to pay the “Jizya” or be beheaded.

011

    Sounds like good times don’t it?

sharia

Well the fun has not even started yet!!!

    The rapes will begin on day one, and will NEVER end! Women will become nothing more than “meat” like in every other Muslim country across the world. If your wife or daughter gets attacked, raped, and beaten…… Most likely SHE will be put in jail for the crime, or maybe stoned to death. And you’ll be left to suck on it. Because under Sharia Law that’s how it works! Muslim men apparently cannot help themselves, and it is the woman’s fault he rapes her like an animal, because she “tempted” him in some way.  If you don’t believe me, research it for yourself!

11002

Sharia Law is coming soon to a town near YOU!

sweden-rape11

 

So next time you hear a politician (with 15 armed secret service agents) talking about restricting YOUR second amendment right to own a firearm, just remember where we are heading. And then give some serious thought as to why they’d want you disarmed. Then give some serious thought to why we have not locked that scumbag politician up as a traitor, and thrown him in a cell with a 300 pound lonely fella named “Bubba”.

holder_obama_prison_butt_buddy_fudge_packers


  I’d rather die on my feet, than to live on my knees!!!

The right to self-defense is one given to you by Almighty God himself, and no man or government has the authority to strip you of that right!

14352313610615

Protect your Second Amendment Rights!!! Join the NRA TODAY!!!

Join the NRA now for $30 or 5 years for $100

 

Give it some thought, I’m gonna go make a bacon sandwich and clean my gun, maybe read a couple verses in my Bible. Unlike our enemies, I feel safer knowing my neighbors are armed! So ARM YOURSELVES!!!

 

Conservative Thinker

 

 

I give you “Idiot of the Day”!

haroon-moghul

America at War would like to Thank the “Idiot of the Day”!!! Because without people like him, we’d not realize how dumb some people are!!!

It’s not a “phobia” when people really are trying to kill you!!!


Time Magazine blames America’s crumbling infrastructure on “Islamophobia”

March 3, 2016 2:24 pm By

It’s always fun to see Haroon Moghul, or “Dwayne,” as he styles himself for fear of “Islamophobia” at Starbucks, taking up the cudgels again, as his increasingly risible “Islamophobia” victimhood posturing has made him the clown prince of the “Islamophobia” propaganda industry: Dwayne is far funnier than, say, Dean Obeidallah, who actually calls himself a comedian but appears never to have said anything funny in his life. To be sure, Moghul is as vicious as other “Islamophobia” propagandists, despite his comic persona: he cheerfully traffics in defamation and dishonesty and routinely takes advantage of his audience’s ignorance about Islam to invert reality, portraying Muslims as victims of a cruel “Islamophobia” machine, instead of non-Muslims threatened by the global jihad.

And now we learn from the sage and stalwart Dwayne that “Islamophobia” is to blame for these factoids: “Your smartphone is more advanced than nearly every air-traffic control system. Our sewage pipes, bridges and highways are falling apart. The residents of Flint, Michigan, just found their water is the opposite of potable….You can blame Islamophobia for that.” What? Have dastardly “Islamophobes” infiltrated the air-traffic control system and the government of Flint, Michigan? Have these “Islamophobic” villains persuaded those who take care of our nation’s sewage pipes, bridges and highways that if they kept them in good repair, Muslims might use them?

No. Dwayne has a splendid comic touch, but he is not quite that good. What he means is that if we hadn’t spent all that money in Iraq and Afghanistan, we would have the money to shore up our infrastructure. And that is actually true. Osama bin Laden has stated that he carried out the 9/11 attacks in order to weaken America economically, and he succeeded in splendid fashion. Both the Iraq and Afghanistan incursions were disasters in every way. They were intended to create stable secular republics that would be beacons of freedom in the Islamic world; only someone who believed that Islam is religion of peace that is completely compatible with democracy could ever have thought that outcome would be achieved.

The problem, however, was how we responded to 9/11, not the fact that we responded at all. But Moghul is suggesting that the best response to the global jihad threat would be to ignore it: al-Qaeda, he says, was “a fringe terrorist movement with the support of the backwater Taliban” that Bush transformed into “an existential threat to Western civilization.” Never mind that the Taliban actually ruled Afghanistan at the time, and that al-Qaeda had a global network and had declared war against the United States. “Jeb Bush was one of the rare Republican candidates who wasn’t an anti-Muslim bigot, but he still described ISIS as an ‘existential threat.’ Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, maybe, and in any case, Jeb’s out. But I hardly think Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi can destroy the world’s most powerful nation.” Certainly not by means of a conventional war. But his plan is to overwhelm law enforcement and intelligence agencies with so many jihad attacks and plots that they collapse, and bring the whole system down with them. And in September 2014, the Islamic State issued a lengthy call to Muslims to murder non-Muslim civilians in the U.S. It says: “If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him. Do not lack. Do not be contemptible. Let your slogan be, ‘May I not be saved if the cross worshipper and taghūt (ruler ruling by manmade laws) patron survives.’ If you are unable to do so, then burn his home, car, or business. Or destroy his crops. If you are unable to do so, then spit in his face.” Yes, how “Islamophobic” of Jeb to see this group as an existential threat!

What’s more, as wrongheaded as Bush was about both Iraq and Afghanistan, he was responding to a jihad attack that took 3,000 lives. Haroon Moghul is characterizing that response as “Islamophobia.” Apparently he would have preferred we had surrendered outright.

More below.

haroon-moghul

“Islamophobia Is Ruining America—But Not How You Think,” by Haroon Moghul, Time, February 26, 2016:

…Each time I land at JFK, I am amazed. Shortly after you exit, the manicured lawns vanish, the smooth surfaces become potholed and cratered—New York begins. Heaven forbid you fly to LaGuardia, where there’s only a creaking bus service. It is almost impossible to go via mass transit between most of Brooklyn and Queens, which are over four million people. Many of the city’s rail tunnels still haven’t recovered from Hurricane Sandy, and nobody knows what’ll happen if there’s another big storm. The Second Avenue subway was conceived before we could conceive of a black President, and it’s still not done. This is America’s alpha city and, with London, one of the two most important. In the world. But New York isn’t an American outlier.

Your smartphone is more advanced than nearly every air-traffic control system. Our sewage pipes, bridges and highways are falling apart. The residents of Flint, Michigan, just found their water is the opposite of potable. We are still the world’s most powerful country, one of the most secure, and one of the most stable. But our country has been crumbling apart for years now, and we’ve done next to nothing about it.

You can blame Islamophobia for that.

Islamophobia is like racism not because Islam is a race, but because, for the Islamophobe, “Islam” plays the same role “race” did for racists. It’s all about broad, sweeping, malicious judgments. Has any other demographic had to suffer the indignity of being declared insufficiently loyal to be President, or hear proposals to be banned from the country? When Trump and Cruz argue over who will impose more war crimes, do you think they mean to waterboard Dylann Storm Roof, or kill his family members?

No one said that Muslims were “insufficiently loyal to be President.” Ben Carson noted that elements of Sharia contradict Constitutional freedoms, which is manifestly true, since Sharia denies the freedom of speech and equality of rights for women and non-Muslims. Carson pointed out that a Sharia-adherent Muslim would have troubled defending certain elements of the Constitution. That was true, and needs to be discussed. Instead, as Leftist commentators always do, Dwayne misrepresents the position of those he hates and fears and sets up a straw man.

There are a lot of explanations for where this hateful language comes from; a report for the Center for American Progress, Fear, Inc., outlined the deliberate and calculated inflammation of anti-Muslim sentiment on the right.

Yes, “anti-Muslim sentiment” comes from “Islamophobes.” Nobody would get a negative view of Islam from, say, Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki and Khaled Shaikh Mohammed and Muhammad Atta and Nidal Malik Hasan and Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Mohammed Abdulazeez and Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik and so very many others like them. Tell us another, Dwayne!

But Islamophobia was also the vehicle by which the Bush administration was able to sell its policies. Most Americans know very little about Islam. Most, as President Obama recently pointed out, don’t know a Muslim, or don’t know they know a Muslim. (Knowing a Muslim is the best inoculant against anti-Muslim bigotry.) Which is why the Bush administration could sell the Iraq war to a fearful and unknowing public.

So the Bush administration transformed a fringe terrorist movement with the support of the backwater Taliban into an existential threat to Western civilization, which, if true, demanded we respond accordingly. And that’s one of the major reasons why Americans could be persuaded to go to war with a country that didn’t attack us. So while I could tell you why anti-Muslim sentiment is bad for Muslims, maybe it’ll be more impactful if we consider why it’s bad for Americans generally.

The Iraq war, which was an easier sell given our tendency to conflate Arabs, Muslims and everything about the Middle East, cost the lives of thousands of American soldiers, and injured thousands more. By circumventing the U.N., we lost much of our moral capital, and created a precedent for aggression by regional powers worldwide. Hundreds of thousands Iraqis died, and many in the Muslim world still only see America through this lens. By focusing on Iraq, which rapidly spun out of control, we abandoned Afghanistan, where the Taliban are now resurgent there. If all this was not horrible enough, the Iraq war also led to the rise of ISIS, which has dragged us back in. Even if we wanted to walk away, we can’t; ISIS is far too dangerous for us to ignore.

Some three years ago, the Iraq war was estimated to have cost us $2 trillion dollars. Researchers have suggested that amount could rapidly increase over coming years, never mind the rise of ISIS and the deployment of American forces anew. As a comparison, free public college for all Americans would cost $70 billion a year. Not only is that much cheaper, but the latter is an investment that would pay dividends for years to come. The Iraq war didn’t make America safer and, if we’re really lucky, the war will be wound down and ISIS defeated and the region returns back to the status quo. And all the while, many other countries, like China, invested in their own economies. Even oil-rich Saudi Arabia has been making huge investments in energy, public transportation and green initiatives. You’d think, after a decade of this, that we would have caught on. Instead Islamophobia is still used to score cheap points, and avoid real problems….

Source : Jihad Watch

America at War Salutes Jihad Watch and Robert Spencer for the work they do every day, because like being a cop, telling the truth is a dangerous job!!! Time Magazine is perfectly safe though.

 

Fox to cure “Islamophobia” with Muslim sitcom | Jihad Watch

Robert Spencer in PJ Media: Fox to cure “Islamophobia” with Muslim sitcom

Over at PJ Media I discuss the imminent arrival of the long-awaited Muslim situation comedy:

nasim-pedrad

Here it is at last: the long-desired Muslim family situation comedy that is going to cure “Islamophobia” by showing racist, ignorant, xenophobic Americans that, hey, Muslims are just like us. Deadline Hollywood reported last week:

Fox has given a late pilot order to Chad: An American Boy, a single-camera Middle Eastern family comedy co-created by and starring Saturday Night Live alumna Nasim Pedrad and directed by Jason Winer.…

[A] 14-year-old boy (Pedrad) in the throes of adolescence is tasked with being the man of the house, which leaves him with all the responsibilities of being an adult without any of the perks.

Pedrad is actually a 34-year-old woman. She made the intention of the show abundantly clear:

I’m thrilled to be able to portray a Middle Eastern family not working for or against Jack Bauer on network TV.

This show has been a long time coming. Katie Couric called for it during the Ground Zero Mosque controversy, saying that America needed a Muslim Cosby Show. Now that Bill Cosby is so resoundingly discredited, Reza Aslan, with his typical clumsiness, called for a Muslim All in the Family, apparently not realizing that the central character of that show was held up as a bigoted object of ridicule.

But clearly both calls meant the same thing: if Americans could just see Muslims outside of the context of jihad terrorism, they would love them, and “Islamophobia” would evanesce.

Then Barack Obama said last week at the Islamic Society of Baltimore:

Our TV shows should have Muslim characters that are unrelated to national security.

The fallacy of this reasoning? When The Cosby Show aired, there were no international black terror groups mounting terror attacks in the U.S. and around the world, boasting of their imminent conquest of the country. The suspicion that Americans have of Islam comes from jihad terror and Islamic supremacism, not from racism and bigotry.

Americans know this distinction despite the best efforts of Couric, Aslan, and others to obscure it, to make people feel guilt for opposing jihad terror. Some slick TV show depicting funny, warm, attractive, cuddly Muslims would not end jihad terror, or blunt concern about it — it would only serve to further the idea that resisting jihad violence was somehow “bigoted.”

Nonetheless, now we have it. Will it work? Will it make Americans drop their concerns about jihad terror? Unlikely. The whole idea that Muslims are threatened, harassed, and discriminated against in the U.S. is a creation of the Islamic advocacy industry, which knows well how well it pays to be a victim in the U.S. today.

Those groups — Hamas-linked CAIR, ISNA, MPAC, and the rest — will still need to play the victimhood game even while this sitcom is running, and after its run has ended. So we will continue to see fake hate crimes and claims of discrimination, and the failure of this show to stem the tide of “Islamophobia” will be touted as a reason why Muslims deserve special privileges and the further weakening of counter-terror measures.

Meanwhile, how a 34-year-old woman is going to be convincing playing a 14-year-old boy is an open question, but whether or not Nasim Pedrad can pull it off, it is noteworthy that this Muslim sitcom will feature a 14-year-old boy who has to serve as the man of the house. That suggests that it will not feature the individual who is the center and dominant figure of most real Muslim families: an adult male.

That makes it likely that the show will not depict in any remotely realistic manner the way women are treated in observant Muslim homes….

Source Jihad Watch


My Thoughts on it……

I would like to point out, as Robert did in the story, their seemingly will be no male “Head of the Household” character from their description. So naturally their will be nothing realistic about the show. It will not have to deal with the complete and total submission of women and their not being allowed to get an education………….genital mutilations and honor killings. I wonder if they will attend the local mosque where jihad will be front and center. Do you think CAIR will represent them in any lawsuits against America and it’s laws???

I’ve got it!!! They can have an episode where the 14 year old “boy” builds a device looking just like a timer operated bomb, and a teacher at the school can get alarmed and call authorities to examine the device, and afterwards the boy can get invited to the White House for being such a genius, and CAIR can represent him in the $15,000,000 lawsuit!!!

mg_obamawatch_comp02

Nawwwwww………….. it’s been done!!!

CT

“Islam can’t be modernized,” says world’s “greatest Arabic poet”

“When asked if he receives death threats from radical Islamists Adonis said: ‘Of course, but I do not care. For certain convictions people should risk their lives.’” Bravo.

adonisasbar

“‘Islam Can’t Be Modernised’ Says World’s ‘Greatest Arabic Poet,’” by Chris Tomlinson, Breitbart, February 19, 2016:

The writer regarded as the greatest Arabic language poet alive today has said Islam cannot be modernised.

Adunis Asbar, known by his pen name Adonis, is a Syrian-born writer often considered one of the greatest living poets of the Arabic language. He has come under criticism for comments he made recently about Islam before receiving the Erich Maria Remarque Peace Prize, named after the famous pacifist and author of the classic World War One novel ‘All Quiet on the Western Front’.

In an interview with Die Welt he talked about one of the most pressing issues in Germany since the migrant crisis began, the idea of being able to integrate migrants from predominately Muslim countries into European societies.

Being raised a Muslim himself and having one of the greatest understandings of the language of the Quran, Adonis said: “You can not reform a religion. If they are reformed, [the original meaning] is separated from it. Therefore, modern Muslims and a modern Islam is already impossible. If there is no separation between religion and state, there will be no democracy especially without equality for women. Then we will keep a theocratic system. So it will end.”

Laying down a heavy critique of the Islamic world, he added: “Arabs have no more creative force. Islam does not contribute to intellectual life, it suggests no discussion. It is no longer thought. It produces no thinking, no art, no science, no vision that could change the world. This repetition is the sign of its end. The Arabs will continue to exist, but they will not make the world better.”

The remarks are in reference to the broader questions of how he sees the Middle East, and specifically his native Syria which has been in a state of civil war for years. Adonis describes the totality of Islam in the life of people in the Islamic world saying Muslim society is “based on a totalitarian system. The religion dictates everything: How to run, how to go to the toilet, who one has to love…”…

“I have long been an opponent of Assad. The Assad regime has transformed the country into a prison. But his opponents, the so-called revolutionaries, commit mass murder, cut people’s heads off, sell women in cages as goods and trample human dignity underfoot.”

Adonis was referring to the Islamic State and the Al-Nusra front (an Al Qaeda affiliate) who have become the largest opposition force to Assad over the course of the civil war.

Breitbart London has already reported that attempts to house and integrate Muslim migrants will cost Germans and other European countries billions of euros, and according to Adonis’ opinion it could be a useless endeavour.

When asked if he receives death threats from radical Islamists Adonis said: “Of course, but I do not care. For certain convictions people should risk their lives.”

Source Jihad Watch

Obama, Islam, and History

This article gives many examples of what I spoke about in my last article! Obama twists history to suit his agenda. Inserts fictitious events into American History and tries to tie them to our founders in a strange web of lies and deceit of his very own. I call it   History version 2.0 Beta


 

Posted from Jihad Watch

thomas-jefferson

“‘Thomas Jefferson’s opponents tried to stir things up by suggesting he was a Muslim. So I was not the first,’ Obama said, sparking laughter. ‘No, it’s true. Look it up. I’m in good company.’” — From USA Today on Barack Obama’s visit to the Islamic Society of Baltimore, February 3, 2016

Barack Obama paid a visit — his first — to an American mosque today. He did so in the same feelgood spirit with which he held his first “Annual Iftar Dinner” in 2010. That dinner prompted a Jihad Watch post which, considerably modified and enlarged, is reprinted below.

“The first Muslim ambassador to the United States, from Tunisia, was hosted by President Jefferson, who arranged a sunset dinner for his guest because it was Ramadan — making it the first known iftar at the White House, more than 200 years ago.” — Barack Obama, speaking on August 14, 2010, at the “Annual Iftar Dinner” at the White House

Really? Is that what happened? Was there a “first known Iftar at the White House” given by none other than President Thomas Jefferson for the “first Muslim ambassador to the United States”? That’s what Barack Obama and his dutiful speechwriters told the Muslims in attendance at what was billed as the “Annual Iftar Dinner,” knowing full well that the remarks would be published for all Americans to see. Apparently Obama, and those who helped write this speech for him, and others still who vetted it, found nothing wrong with attempting, as part of the administration’s policy of both trying to win Muslim hearts and Muslim mind and to convince Americans that Islam has always been part of America’s history, to misrepresent that history. For the dinner Jefferson gave was not intended to be an Iftar dinner, and his guest that evening was not “the first Muslim ambassador…. from Tunisia,” but in using such words, Obama was engaged in a little nunc pro tunc backdating, so that the Iftar dinner that he gave in 2010 could be presented as part of a supposed tradition of such presidential Iftar dinners, going all the way back to the time of Jefferson.

But before explaining what that “first Iftar dinner” really was, let’s go back to an earlier but even more egregious example of Obama’s rewriting: the speech he delivered in Cairo on June 4, 2009. In that speech, he described Islam and America sharing basic principles:

“I’ve come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition.  Instead, they overlap, and share common principles — principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”

And then for his Muslim guests he segued into a flattering lesson in History. First he described Western Civ. which, he said, owed so much of its development to Islam:

“As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam — at places like Al-Azhar — that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities — (applause) — it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.” (Applause.)

And  Islam played — according to Obama — a significant role in American history, too:

I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President, John Adams, wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, they have served in our government, they have stood for civil rights, they have started businesses, they have taught at our universities, they’ve excelled in our sports arenas, they’ve won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers — Thomas Jefferson — kept in his personal library. (Applause.)

We could go through those paragraphs accompanied by such keen students of history as Gibbon, John Quincy Adams,, Jacob Burckhardt, and Winston Churchill, all of whom had occasion to study and comment upon Islam, their remarks rebutting proleptically Obama’s vaporings with their much more informed and sober take on the faith — but that is for another occasion. We can note, however, that when Obama in his Cairo speech talks about “the light of learning” being held aloft at places like Al-Azhar, he misstates: some Greek texts were translated into Arabic and thereby “kept alive” instead of being lost to history, but the translators were mostly Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews, not Muslims, and the work of translation went on not at Al-Azhar but at the courts of Cordoba  and Baghdad. The word “algebra” is certainly Arab, but algebra itself was a product of Sanskrit mathematicians. The printing press was not a Musim invention and its use was accepted in the Muslim East only long after it had been in use in Western Christendom. Indeed, in Islam itself the very notion of innovation, or “bida,” is frowned upon, and not only, as some Muslim apologists have claimed, in theological matters. And so on.

“I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco.I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco.”

The picture Obama paints by implication, of Muslims being deeply  involved in the grand sweep of American history practically from the time of the Framers (at least he didn’t make the mistake of the State Department flunkie who claimed Muslims accompanied Columbus on his voyages) is simply false. The first mosque in North America was a one-room affair in 1929; the second mosque was not built until 1934. The first Muslim to be elected to Congress was Keith Ellison, less than a decade ago. The Muslim appearance in America is very late. As for Morocco being the first country to recognize the United States in a treaty, Morocco also soon violated that very treaty and became the first country to go to war with the young Republic. That is something Obama’s advisers may not have told him.

When Obama quotes that single phrase from John Adams, made at the signing of the Treaty of Tripoli, a treaty designed to free American ships and seaman from the ever-present threat from the marauding Muslim corsairs in the Mediterranean that attacked Christian shipping at will (and when America became independent, it could no longer count on the Royal Navy to protect its ships) he wants us to think that our second president was approving of Islam.  But that is to misinterpret his statement, clearly meant to be taken to have this meaning: we in the United States, have a priori nothing against Islam. Rhetoric designed to diplomatically please. But based on his subsequent experiences with the North African Muslims, including his experiences with them after various treaties were made and then broken, Adams came to a different and negative view of Islam, a view that  was shared by all those Americans who, whether diplomats or seized seamen, had any direct dealings  with Muslims.  America’s first encounter with Muslims was that with the Barbary Pirates, from Morocco to Algiers to Tunis to Tripoli, and their behavior rendered Adams’s initial “the United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims” null and void. And it was not John Adams himself, but his son John Quincy Adams (our most learned President), who studied Islam in depth, and it was he to whom Obama ought to have turned to find out more about Islam. For he would have found, among other piercing and accurate remarks by J. Q. Adams, the following:

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.

Isn’t it amazing that not a single American official — and not just Obama — has ever alluded to the study of Islam that one of our most illustrious presidents produced?

Again, Obama, with a jumble of Jefferson, Ellison, and Holy Koran:

 “And when the first Muslim American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers — Thomas Jefferson — kept in his personal library.”

When Obama notes that Thomas Jefferson had a copy of the Qur’an in his “personal” library, he is subtly implying that Jefferson approved of its contents. Keith Ellison did much the same when he ostentatiously used that very copy of the Qur’an for his own swearing-in as the first Muslim Congressman. But Jefferson, a curious and cultivated man, with a large library, had a copy of the Qur’an for the same reason you or I might possess a copy, that is simply to find out what was in it. And we might note in passing that it was not the “Holy Koran” that Jefferson possessed and Ellison borrowed, but an English translation by George Sales of the “Koran.” According to Muslims, the epithet “Holy” can only be attached to a Koran written and read in the original Arabic. White House, for the next time, take note.

There is not a single American statesman or traveler or diplomat in the days of the early Republic who had a good word for Islam once he had studied it, or had had dealings with Muslims or had travelled to their countries. Look high, look low, consult whatever records you want in the National Archives or the Library of Congress, and you will not find any such testimony. And the very idea that an American President would someday praise Islam to the skies in Obama’s fulsome manner would have astounded them all.

And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance” 

Also sprach Obama. But Islam is based on an uncompromising division of humanity into Muslims and Non-Muslims, Believers and Unbelievers, and Unbelievers, at best, can be allowed to live in a Muslim polity — be “tolerated” — only if they accept a position of permanent and humiliating inferiority.  It would be fascinating if Obama could name even one example of Islam demonstrating through words and deeds “the possibilities of religious tolerance.”

But let’s return to Obama’s assertion about Jefferson’s “Iftar Dinner,” or rather, to that dinner that Barack Obama would have us all believe was the first “Iftar Dinner” at the White House, way back in 1805.

Here is the background to that meal in 1805 which not Jefferson, but Obama, calls an “Iftar Dinner”:

“In the Mediterranean, American ships, now deprived of the protection formerly offered by the Royal Navy, suffered constant depredations by Muslim corsairs, who were not so much pirates acting alone but were officially encouraged to prey on Christian shipping, and at times even recorded the areas of the Mediterranean where they planned to go in search of Christian prey. Under Jefferson, America took a more aggressive line:’

“Soon after the Revolutionary War and the consequent loss of the British navy’s protection, American merchant vessels had become prey for Barbary corsairs. Jefferson was outraged by the demands of ransom for civilians captured from American vessels and the Barbary states’ expectation of annual tribute.

“The crisis with Tunis erupted when the USS Constitution captured Tunisian vessels attempting to run the American blockade of Tripoli. The bey of Tunis threatened war and sent Mellimelli [Sidi Soliman Mellimelli] to the United States to negotiate full restitution for the captured vessels and to barter for tribute.”

Mellimelli was not, pace Obama, “the first Muslim ambassador to the United States”—there was no official exchange of ambassadors – but a temporary envoy with a single limited task: to get an agreement that would set free the Tunisian vessels and come to an agreement about future payment – if any — of tribute by, or to Tripoli. At the end of six months that envoy was to return home.

The Muslim envoy made some unexpected personal demands in Washington:

Jefferson balked at paying tribute but accepted the expectation that the host government would cover all expenses for such an emissary. He arranged for Mellimelli and his 11 attendants to be housed at a Washington hotel, and rationalized that the sale of the four horses and other fine gifts sent by the bey of Tunis would cover costs. Mellimelli’s request for “concubines” as a part of his accommodations was left to Secretary of State James Madison. Jefferson assured one senator that obtaining peace with the Barbary powers was important enough to “pass unnoticed the irregular conduct of their ministers.”

Some readers will no doubt be reminded by this request for “concubines” of how the State Department has supplied female companions to much more recent Arab visitors, including the late King Hussein of Jordan.

Mellimelli proved to be the exotic cynosure of all eyes, with his American hosts not really understanding some of his reactions, as his “surprise” at the “social freedom women enjoyed in America” and his belief that only Moses, Jesus Christ, and Mohammed were acceptable “prophets” to follow, for they lacked the understanding of Islam that would have explained such reactions:

Despite whispers regarding his conduct, Mellimelli received invitations to numerous dinners and balls, and according to one Washington hostess was “the lion of the season.” At the president’s New Year’s Day levee the Tunisian envoy provided “its most brilliant and splendid spectacle,” and added to his melodramatic image at a later dinner party hosted by the secretary of state. Upon learning that the Madisons were unhappy at being childless, Mellimelli flung his “magical” cloak around Dolley Madison and murmured an incantation that promised she would bear a male child. His conjuring, however, did not work.

Differences in culture and customs stirred interest on both sides. Mellimelli’s generous use of scented rose oil was noted by many of those who met him, and guards had to be posted outside his lodgings to turn away the curious. For his part, the Tunisian was surprised at the social freedom women enjoyed in America and was especially intrigued by several delegations of Native Americans from the western territories then visiting Washington. Mellimelli inquired which prophet the Indians followed: Moses, Jesus Christ or Mohammed. When he was told none of them, that they worshiped “the Great Spirit” alone, he was reported to have pronounced them “vile hereticks.”

So that’s it. Sidi Soliman Mellimelli installed himself for six months at a Washington hotel, for which the American government apparently picked up the tab including, very likely, that for the requested “concubines.” He cut a dashing figure:

The curious were not to be disappointed by the appearance of the first Muslim envoy to the United States – a large figure with a full dark beard dressed in robes of richly embroidered fabrics and a turban of fine white muslin.”

“Over the next six months, this exotic representative from a distant and unfamiliar culture would add spice to the Washington social season but also test the diplomatic abilities of President Jefferson.”

During the time Mellimelli was here, Ramadan occurred. And as it happens, during that Ramadan observed by Mellimelli, President Jefferson invited Sidi Soliman Mellimelli for dinner at the White House. The dinner was not meant to be an “Iftar dinner” but just a dinner, albeit at the White House; it was originally set for three thirty in the afternoon (our founding fathers dined early in the pre-Edison days of their existence). Mellimelli said he could not come at that appointed hour of three thirty p.m. but only after sundown.

Jefferson, a courteous man, simply moved the dinner forward by a few hours. He didn’t change the menu, he didn’t change anything else, he did not see himself as offering an “Iftar Dinner” and there are no records to hint that he did. Barack Obama, 200 years later, is trying to rewrite American history, with some nunc-pro-tunc backdating, in order to flatter or please his Muslim guests. But he is misrepresenting American history to Americans, including schoolchildren who are now being subject to all kinds of Islamic propaganda, in newly-mandated textbooks, that so favorably depict Islam, and present it as so integral a part of American life.

Now there is a kind of coda to this dismal tale, and it is provided by the New York Times, which likes to put on airs and think of itself as “the newspaper of record,” whatever that means. The Times carried a front-page story on August 14, 2010, written by one Sheryl Gay Stolberg, and no doubt gone over by many vigilant editors. This story contains a predictably glowing account of Barack Obama’s remarks a few days before at the “Annual Iftar Dinner.” Here is the paragraph that caught my eye:

“In hosting the iftar, Mr. Obama was following a White House tradition that, while sporadic, dates to Thomas Jefferson, who held a sunset dinner for the first Muslim ambassador to the United States. President George W. Bush hosted iftars annually.”

Question for Sheryl Gay Stolberg, and for her editors at The New York Times: You report that there is a “White House tradition that, while sporadic, dates to Thomas Jefferson.” I claim that you are wrong. I claim that there is no White House Tradition of Iftar Dinners. I claim that Thomas Jefferson, in moving forward by a few hours a dinner that changed in no other respect, for Sidi Soliman Mellimelli, did not think he thi not providing what he thought of as an “Iftar Dinner” but simply a dinner, at a time his guest requested. And to describe as a “White House tradition” wou first of the “Annual Iftar Dinners” that, the New York Times tells us, has since Jefferson’s non-existent “Iftar Dinner,” have been observed “sporadically.”

When, then, was the next in this long, but “sporadic” series of iftar dinners? I can find no record of any, for roughly the next two hundred years, until we come to the fall of the year 2001, that is, just after the deadliest attack on American civilians ever recorded, an attack carried out by a novemdectet of Muslims acting according to their orthodox understanding of the very same texts — Qur’an, Hadith, Sira — that all Muslims rely on for authority. It was President George Bush who decided that, to win Muslim “trust” or to end Muslim “mistrust” — I forget which — so that we could, non-Muslim and Muslim, collaborate on defeating those “violent extremists” who had “hijacked a great religion,” started this sporadic ball unsporadically rolling. And he did what he set out to, by golly, he did. He hosted an Iftar Dinner with all the fixins. It was held just the month after the attacks on the World Trade Center, on the Pentagon, on a plane’s doomed pilots and passengers over a field in Pennsylvania.

And thus it is that, ever since 2001, we have had iftar dinner after iftar dinner. But it was not Jefferson or any other of our learned Presidents, who started this “tradition” that has been observed only “sporadically” — unless we were to count as an “iftar dinner” what was merely seen, by Jefferson, as a dinner given at a time convenient for his exotic guest.

George Bush, that profound student of history and of ideas, kept telling us, in those first few months after 9/11/2001, that as far as he was concerned, by gum, Islam was a religion of “peace and tolerance.” He and Obama agree on that. And just to prove it, by golly, he’d put on an Iftar Dinner with all the fixins. And that’s just what he did. And that’s how the long “tradition” that Sheryl Gay Stolberg, and her many vetting editors at the newspaper of comical record, The New York Times, referred to, began. It’s all of nine years old, having survived and thrived through the differently-disastrous presidencies of Bush and of Obama.

I have a request for The New York Times. It’s a most modest one. All I ask is that the editors of The New York Times apologize for that paper’s misapplication of the adjective “sporadic” in the front-page story by Sheryl Stolberg on the “Annual Iftar” dinner.

Put up, or shut up, dear newspaper of record. Tell us when that “tradition” of “Iftar Dinners” truly began. Cite those Presidents who held dinners that they considered to be “Iftar Dinners.” Give us chapter, give us verse. And if, as I believe, that hollow and recent and transparently determined-to-win-Muslim-hearts-and-minds “tradition” began only in 2001, then tell us. And since your story was on the front page, do what the lawyers do when they have to make legal announcements, and put your retraction, eat your humble pie, right on the same front page.

A failure to do so will be further, and for some the final confirmation, of the sorry record of The New York Times in its coverage of Islam. Most readers with some sense of what Islam is all about are now ready to take any coverage of the matter in The New York Times with a grain – a Pinch – of salt.

Clio, Muse of History, is a stern mistress. Subscribers to stories that live and die between editions may forget or forgive, but Mnemosyne does neither. If I were the “newspaper of record,” I’d want to propitiate not the gods, but the most vigilant and meticulous of muses. If I were Pinch Sulzberger, I’d be mortally embarrassed, and determined to make amends. But then, I have standards.

Which brings us up to today, and the glad news that. President Obama will be paying his first visit to a mosque on American soil. There will be some sort of feelgood exchange, and perhaps even a reference to the “long tradition” of Iftar dinners, or to the great contribution Muslims have made since the very beginning to our American story. No one will have the bad taste to bring up what is actually to be found in the Qur’an and Hadith. Someone may quote 2:256 and 5:32 (but not 5:33). John Quincy Adams will be passed over in silence. I can’t wait. Can you?