Pamela Geller's Blog, page 1000

Obama's Polygamist Muslim Brother in Kenya Marries Teen More Than 30 Years Younger

File photo of child bride in Islam -- this is not Obama's brother, but you get the picture

This needs no comment. The prism through which Obama sees the world and what shaped his world view is all in my book.

Obama's half brother in Kenya says he married teen AP

NAIROBI, Kenya – President Barack Obama's polygamist half brother in Kenya has married a woman who is more than 30 years younger than him.

The 19-year-old's mother told The Associated Press on Friday she is furious that her daughter quit high school and married the 52-year-old.

Mary Aoko Ouma says her daughter tried to marry Malik Obama two years ago, but the mother says she wouldn't give permission.

Malik Obama, who is Muslim, has two other wives. Polygamy is legal in Kenya if it falls under religious or cultural traditions.

Malik Obama not only married a teenager, following in the way of the "perfect model" of Muhammad, but he also fulfilled the other obligation of the sharia (Islamic law), of having up to four wives.

Right Wing News: The Pamela Geller Interview

Blogging icon John Hawkins over at the trailblazing Right Wing News did an interview with me on a range of issues. Here's a short excerpt, but don't settle for less, read the whole thing:

I've known Pamela for a long while. Back in 2008, we had lunch together in New York (along with my pal Karol Markowicz) and we paid a little visit to the UN's Knotted Gun Disarmament Sculpture. [photo]

If you're wondering what Pamela is like in private, she's exactly like she is in public. She's extremely passionate about what she believes, she's genuinely concerned about the world her daughters are going to grow up in, and she's perfectly willing to be vilified, smeared, and demonized to prevent the spread of radical Islam in the United States. Pamela isn't perfect (no one is), but I can tell you that she's a decent person, her heart is in the right place, and she knows what she's talking about. This would be a better country if a lot more people were paying attention to what she's saying.

What follows is the slightly edited transcript of the conversation that I had with Pamela earlier this week. Enjoy!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

JH: Let's say a Muslim came up to you and said, "Pamela I'm against terrorism. I don't want Sharia in this country. I don't want to see Israel destroyed. I consider myself to be a moderate. But, I keep hearing people in the news claim you hate people like me. So I want to hear it straight from you. Is that true? What would you tell that person?

GELLER:  "I love people like you and I hope that you and I will fight together this oppression, this gender apartheid," and if this moderate knows anything about me, he or she knows that I fight for the moderates. I fight for people that are leaving Islam. I've created a gateway, a network of information, safe houses, and other people, other resources for Muslims in trouble to go to because it is so hush-hush. I do not hate people. It's why I do what I do.

I do have a problem with the ideology that inspires Jihad. I do have a problem with gender apartheid and the oppression of women. I do have a problem with hatred of infidels and the non-Muslims. And we have seen in the 20,000 attacks since 9-11, Islamic attacks across the world, each one with the imprimatur of a Muslim cleric, that there is a problem with the ideology that inspires Jihad and all men and women that love freedom must fight it.

JH: Every time I read a story about you these days, I seem to see a quote from Charles Johnson in it. I know a lot of people are still scratching their heads wondering what happened to him. Here's a guy that used to run one of the most popular, most read blogs on the planet. Then he started attacking you, started attacking other conservatives, moved way over to the left and the traffic on his blog imploded. Talk a little bit about that and what happened to Charles Johnson.

GELLER: I'm not equipped. Psychiatry is out of my field.

It's one thing to evolve in your thinking. It's another thing to become the reviled enemy of that which defines you. His sole purpose is to destroy people. I can't relate to it. I don't understand it. We can all sit here and scratch our heads and say, "Is he an operative? Is he being paid or what happened?" Who cares? He's a destructive force.

Of course, the left will quote him even though I have absolutely nothing to do with him. I (don't) read his site. I don't know what he's talking about. The enemy is, the last time I looked, it was creationism. I don't see people being burned alive and slaughtered over Adam and Eve. So to me, there's really nothing to talk about with him.

He adds nothing to the dialogue. He adds nothing to the discourse. He seeks solely to destroy the most effective voices on the Right. So to me, he's lower than even a Kos and I don't think the left trusts him either because he's such a traitor. To say that he's abandoned his principles is actually giving him too much credit. He now reviles the thing that he once was. You explain it.

JH: I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia, but they had a great quote from you I wanted to ask you about. I'm quoting now from you,

It galls me that the Jews I fight for are self-destructive, suicidal even. Here in America (and the world over), Israel's real friends are in the Republican Party and yet over 80% of American Jews are Democrats. I don't get it. The conventional wisdom on the Left is that Israel is an oppressor and her actions are worse than the world's most depraved and dangerous regimes. Chomsky, Finkelstein, Soros–these men are the killers.

Talk about that.

GELLER: Well, let's talk about Wikipedia. First of all, it is run by a leftist/Islamic group of editors. You cannot edit my page. It does not speak to my work. I just wanted that noted for the record. People have written to me and said, "I've tried to change a page and add things and it disappears within seconds." What is it, monitored 24/7? That's really pathetic.

To my quote, absolutely. What we have in the liberal Jewish mind is not a religion. A religion has nothing to do with it. It's purely political. They worship at the church of human secularism. Their dogma is leftist, their dogma is liberal, and frankly they are part of the problem.

My coalition are freedom loving peoples. Hindus, Sikhs, Zoroastrians -- anyone that fights the individual rights and basic unalienable freedoms. So yes, I think that the Chomsky's and the Finkelstein's are worse than our middle of the road enemies because they wear the mask of, "I am Jewish." They are the enemies of their own people and they deserve to be relegated to the very fringes of society. But they're not because the Left and the Islamic supremacists use them as fronts.

JH: Last question: Your new book is called the The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America. The product description of the book includes this line.

"He envisions himself as more than just a president of the United States, but as a shaper of the new world order and internationalist energetically laying the groundwork for global government, the president of the world."

Is Barack Obama a man who wants what's best for America or do you believe he's looking to deliberately weaken this country for his own reasons?

GELLER: Barack Obama is not only presiding over the decline of America, but he's aiding and abetting it. I have researched Obama since late 2007 and nothing he's doing is a surprise. He's an internationalist and he holds American exceptionalism in contempt. When asked in Europe if he believed in American exceptionalism, he basically said yes, as much as the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and Greek exceptionalism and so forth, which means no one is exceptional.

The reason why this is so critical to his basic thinking is because you have to understand that America's founding principle, everything noble and great and magnificent that she achieved, was based on individual rights and that's what American exceptionalism is, individual exceptionalism.

He would like to see us as just one of many socialist nations. It's deeply troubling but it's reflected in all of his policies, both domestic and international.

Civilizational Victory: Wilders Not Guilty on all Counts! UPDATE: It Ain't Over

                   Photo:Election night here

The final verdict came in today. And while the truth of the case would have been self-evident in a free society, the verdict was hardly assured. Wilders is not guilty and so, in a way, goes the free world. For Wilders was our proxy in this war against the sanctity of free speech. Wilders was our proxy in this trial -- free men, free speech were on trial for our very lives and way of life. It was, in fact, a  heresy trial, a throwback to the Middle Ages, where Islamic law (the shariah) most comfortably lives. That the charges were even brought is indicative of how deep the sharia has penetrated western societies. The totalitarian influence of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) is undeniable, far-reaching and evil -- freedom of speech in the age of jihad.

It is not incitement or discrimination to speak the truth -- and this is the essense of our battle. There can be no candor or criticism of Islam under the sharia.

The very idea that Wilders could be accused of "inciting hatred against Muslims" is laughable. Where, when have we seen this? Nowhere. What we have seen repeatedly and brutally is Muslim hatred against non-Muslims in the Danish cartoon "crisis," the assassination attempts against cartoonists, politicians, artists, etc., embassies burning, etc.

Think about what these useful idiots were attempting to indict.

Wilders not guilty on all counts - Update

The public prosecution department on Friday afternoon stated that Geert Wilders is not guilty of discriminating against Muslims. Earlier on Friday it announced he should also be found not guilty of inciting hatred.

Prosecutors Birgit van Roessel and Paul Velleman reached their conclusions after a careful reading of interviews with and articles by the anti-Islam politician and a viewing of his anti-Koran film Fitna.

They said comments about banning the Koran can be discriminatory, but because Wilders wants to pursue a ban on democratic lines, there is no question of incitement to discrimination 'as laid down in law'.

On the comparison of the Koran with Mein Kampf, the prosecutors said the comparison was 'crude but that did not make it punishable'.

Dealing earlier on Friday with incitement to hatred, Van Roessel and Velleman said some comments could incite hatred against Muslims if taken out of context, but if the complete text is considered, it can be seen that Wilders is against the growing influence of Islam and not against Muslims per sé.

On Tuesday, the prosecutors said the MP should not be found guilty of group insult.

The public prosecution department was forced to take the case by the high court after anti-racism campaigners protested at its refusal to prosecute Wilders.

UPDATE:  It ain't over - *sigh* What the prosecutors say is not necessarily what the judge will say. Let's hope the judge follows the prosecutor's guidelines and even then, the plaintiffs may still appeal. Unending. (hat tip Harrie)

JT Wenting adds:

He could still get a year in prison, and/or a big fine.
That's the maximum penalty for the original charges that were brought (if they'd been valid).
And of course, if found guilty, a next step would be for someone to try to get his political party declared illegal, under Dutch law it's possible for a court to declare an organisation illegal if its leader(s) are convicted of crimes for activities related to the organisation's running.

 

UK Honor Killing: 23-Year-Old Woman Set on Fire Dies

More Islamic gendercide in the West; the third one this week (that we know of). And the band plays on.

Woman Found on Fire At House Dies Yahoo

The 23 year old woman was found on fire behind the house and died at the scene, Cloudsdale Avenue, Bradford, West Yorkshire, after police and fire crews were called at 7.15pm on Thursday October 14th 2010.
A neighbour Aziza Khan believes the woman lived at the property with her husband, mother-in-law and two sisters-in-law.
Miss Kahn also said some neighbours had told her that a group of around five men were seen coming out of the house around the same time as the incident happened.
Another neighbour, Rahana Kosar, said she believed the woman was Asian [Muslim] and had been in the UK for less than a year but she rarely came out of the house.

"I've heard she's an Asian [Muslim] lady and I don't think her parents are in this country," she said. "We're all Asians [Muslims] round here but she never came out the house. We have the excuse of taking the kids to school and everything and us women all stand and talk a lot, but that woman's not involved."

And this at The Telegraph:

A West Yorkshire Police spokesman said: "The woman was pronounced dead and inquiries are ongoing at the scene.

"A post-mortem is due to take place later."

A police cordon remained in the road today while forensic experts carried out inquiries.

The inquiry is being led detectives in the Homicide and Major Enquiry Team at West Yorkshire Police.

UK: Rape 'impossible' in Marriage, says Leading Muslim Cleric

According to Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed, president of the Islamic Sharia Council in Britain, it is not possible for rape to occur in marriage. He claims women falsify rape claims to try and obtain a divorce. If a woman is brutalized by her husband, he claims this is undesirable, but an apology should suffice. Sayeed runs the largest network of Sharia courts in the UK. His comments have brought an outcry among law enforcement officials who fear that Sayeed's comments will further discourage women from reporting being raped. (hat tip Danielle)

Note to feminazis who carry water for the most radical, intolerant ideology in the world: lay back and enjoy it, slave.

Rape 'impossible' in marriage, says Muslim cleric

A senior Muslim cleric who runs the country's largest network of sharia courts has sparked controversy by claiming that there is no such thing as rape within marriage.

Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed, president of the Islamic Sharia Council in Britain, said that men who rape their wives should not be prosecuted because "sex is part of marriage". And he claimed that many married women who alleged rape were lying.

His comments have angered senior police officers, who say that such statements undermine the work they do to encourage women to report rape, a notoriously under-reported crime.

Sheikh Sayeed made the comments in an interview with the blog The Samosa, before reiterating them later when contacted by The Independent.

He told the website: "Clearly there cannot be any rape within the marriage. Maybe aggression, maybe indecent activity... Because when they got married, the understanding was that sexual intercourse was part of the marriage, so there cannot be anything against sex in marriage. Of course, if it happened without her desire, that is no good, that is not desirable."

Later he told this newspaper: "In Islamic sharia, rape is adultery by force. So long as the woman is his wife, it cannot be termed as rape. It is reprehensible, but we do not call it rape."

UPDATE: OT but related. More tales from the gender apartheid front.

(The Independent hat tip Urban Infidel)

An Afghan woman whose ears and nose were cut off by her abusive husband as punishment for running away – and whose mutilated face featured on the front of an international magazine – has undergone extensive plastic surgery.

The 18-year-old, Aisha, was featured by Time magazine in an article that revealed how her husband, a commander in the Taliban, had disfigured her and left her to die.

The magazine also helped arrange for her to travel to the US for the reconstructive surgery.

 UPDATE: What about these women?

Sharia against women:

UK: Rape 'impossible' in Marriage, says Leading Muslim Cleric

According to Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed, president of the Islamic Sharia Council in Britain, it is not possible for rape to occur in marriage.  He claims women falsify rape claims to try and obtain a divorce.  If a woman is brutalized by her husband, he claims this is undesirable but an apology should suffice.  Sayeed runs the largest network of Sharia courts in the UK.  His comments have brought an outcry among law enforcement officials who fear Sayeed's comments will further discourage women from reporting being raped. (hat tip Danielle)

Note to feminazis that carry water for the most radical, intolerant ideology in the world: lay back and enjoy it, slave.

Rape 'impossible' in marriage, says Muslim cleric

A senior Muslim cleric who runs the country's largest network of sharia courts has sparked controversy by claiming that there is no such thing as rape within marriage.

Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed, president of the Islamic Sharia Council in Britain, said that men who rape their wives should not be prosecuted because "sex is part of marriage". And he claimed that many married women who alleged rape were lying.

His comments have angered senior police officers, who say that such statements undermine the work they do to encourage women to report rape, a notoriously under-reported crime.

Sheikh Sayeed made the comments in an interview with the blog The Samosa, before reiterating them later when contacted by The Independent.

He told the website: "Clearly there cannot be any rape within the marriage. Maybe aggression, maybe indecent activity... Because when they got married, the understanding was that sexual intercourse was part of the marriage, so there cannot be anything against sex in marriage. Of course, if it happened without her desire, that is no good, that is not desirable."

Later he told this newspaper: "In Islamic sharia, rape is adultery by force. So long as the woman is his wife, it cannot be termed as rape. It is reprehensible, but we do not call it rape."

UPDATE: OT but related. More tales from the gender apartheid front.

(The Independent hat tip Urban Infidel)

An Afghan woman whose ears and nose were cut off by her abusive husband as punishment for running away – and whose mutilated face featured on the front of an international magazine – has undergone extensive plastic surgery.

The 18-year-old, Aisha, was featured by Time magazine in an article that revealed how her husband, a commander in the Taliban, had disfigured her and left her to die.

The magazine also helped arrange for her to travel to the US for the reconstructive surgery.

 

Bedside Reading

For those off times you aren't reading Atlas

Ahmadinejad on the Israel/Lebanon Border: "Death to Israel" "Zionists are Mortal"

And the world yawns and whispers get on with it already.

Aligned by a hate of America, they wield self righteousness and victimhood like a club to advance Islamic imperialism across the world, while oppressing and subjugating their own people under the sharia.

This is not static, and the failure of imagination of our elected leaders to see what is going to happen mimics the same failure of imagination prior to World War II. The unthinkable was made possible because of those who refused to think it.

And now again. Ahmadinejad means what he says. What are we, in the West, going to do to stop the mahdi's madmen?

A world without America's forceful presence is a world of chaos and havoc. Plato said that the natural order of the world was chaos, it was war—peace was a parenthesis, it had to be achieved and worked at. Obama is ............. anti-platonic, and the world is spiraling out of control.

The Islamic world hates democracy, hates the West. Freedom is the enemy. Non-Musims are the enemy. The goal of Iran, Hamas, Hezb'allah, Al Qaeda, MILF, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Muhajiroun, The Armed Islamic Group, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, MILF, CAIR, ISNA, Fatah, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, the Armed Islamic Group of Algeria...is all the same. They all read the same playbook.

Ahmadinejad tells Israelis their country is doomed The Daily Star, Lebanon

BEIRUT: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday Israel was doomed to perish as he addressed thousands of supporters of Hizbullah at a rally in Bint Jbeil, just four kilometers from the Israeli border.

Ahmadinejad's tour in south Lebanon drew sharp criticism from the US and Israel as tensions ran high on the Lebanese-Israeli border. Israeli officials have said the tour represented an attempt to set up an advanced front line for a proxy war between Iran and Israel.

"Bint Jbeil is alive and today stands proud and cherished against all enemies whereas the Zionists are mortal after the sons of Bint Jbeil made the enemy taste defeat," Ahmadinejad said while supporters chanted "death to Israel."

UPDATE: Ahmadinejad Visits 'University of Jihad'

Ahmadinejad on Israeli/Lebanon Border: "Death to Israel" "Zionists are Mortal"

And the world yawns and whispers get on with it already.

Aligned by a hate of America, they wield self righteousness and victimhood like a club to advance Islamic imperialism across the world, while oppressing and subjugating their own people under the sharia.

This is not static, and the failure of imagination of our elected leaders to see what is going to happen mimics the same failure of imagination prior to World War II. The unthinkable was made possible because of those who refused to think it.

And now again. Ahmadinejad means what he says. We are we, in the West, going to do to stop the mahdi's madmen?

A world without America's forceful presence is a world of chaos and havoc. Plato said that the natural order of the world was chaos, it was war—peace was a parenthesis, it had to be achieved and worked at. Obama is ............. anti-platonic, and the world is spiraling out of control.

The Islamic world hates democracy, hates the West. Freedom is the enemy. Non-Musims are the enemy. The goal of Iran, Hamas, Hezb'allah, Al Qaeda, MILF, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Muhajiroun, The Armed Islamic Group, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, MILF, CAIR, ISNA, Fatah, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, the Armed Islamic Group of Algeria...is all the same. They all read the same playbook.

Ahmadinejad tells Israelis their country is doomed

EIRUT: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday Israel was doomed to perish as he addressed thousands of supporters of Hizbullah at a rally in Bint Jbeil, just four kilometers from the Israeli border.

Ahmadinejad's tour in south Lebanon drew sharp criticism from the US and Israel as tensions ran high on the Lebanese-Israeli border. Israeli officials have said the tour represented an attempt to set up an advanced front line for a proxy war between Iran and Israel.

"Bint Jbeil is alive and today stands proud and cherished against all enemies whereas the Zionists are mortal after the sons of Bint Jbeil made the enemy taste defeat," Ahmadinejad said while supporters chanted "death to Israel."

The New Career of a Madman: Johnson Shrieks, "My site gave Geller her 'break' on the web"

Talk about a hot mess. Chuck Johnson has penned his first full length column for the notoriously anti-semitic UK paper, The Guardian, and what is the object of his crazy? Why, Pamela Geller, of course. It's come full circle now.

Wait, it gets better. Johnson takes credit for ...... me. Yes, indeedy. Because I was once a commenter on his blog when he was still sane, this deeply troubled narcissist subheads the article this way:

"My site gave Geller her 'break' on the web."

I kid you not. All of the bloggers out there know how successful you become if you commented at LGF, or any other blog, for that matter. What is galling is how he now takes credit for my blog's success after he did everything he could to destroy it in November 2007 because I would not cave to his libel of an important counter-jihad conference in Europe (the best I have ever attended -- speakers included speakers included David Littman, Dr. Aryeh Eldad, member of the Israeli Knesset, Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, Director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity, Sam Solomon, Director of Fellowship of Faith for Muslims and author of the Charter of Muslim Understanding, Dr. Marc Cogen, Ghent University, Bat Ye'or, world's leading scholar on Islam and the West and Islamic anti-semitism, Robert Spencer, and others).

I was small at the time; he was the biggest. And his vicious campaign routed my readership from roughly 8,000 a day to 2,000. Charles Johnson is a bold-faced liar.

The king of the libel bloggers goes on to say:

As I said to the Times, in those days, Geller was often the first one to take the rhetoric over the top, and the target of her rage was usually (but not always) Muslims. And not just militants or terrorists, but all Muslims; Geller was quite clear, and stated often, that she didn't believe in the idea of a "moderate Islam" at all. (Ironically, this is an opinion she shares with the leaders of al-Qaida, who insist that all Muslims must follow their extreme interpretation of Islam.)

Johnson is a liar. I have never raged "against all Muslims" and have been very vocal about this. I fight the violent ideology that inspires jihad, Islamic antisemitism, and hatred of non-Muslims. If my "rhetoric was so over the top," why not run a few of the most egregious comments? Because he is a smear merchant.

He twists my support of the Serbs.

Geller posted an ode of support to genocidal Serbian war criminal Radovan Karadzic.

Here is the actual Atlas post:

Stella Jatras on Karadzic: "I am not defending Radovan Karadzic..."

And here is every post I have published on Serbia/Kosovo/Bosnia, etc. Read it all. I stand by every word. It was wrong for the US to pave the way for a militant Islamic state in the heart of Europe.

He further soils himself when he lies about my coverage of the Boer genocide in South Africa and fabrciates out of whole cloth support for Eugene Terreblanche, a man I do not know. I never wrote about him or supported his work, but he was brutally murdered in cold blood. I do not believe or support vigilantism or wholesale slaughter. Perhaps Johnson does, hardly surprising considering how unprincipled and unhinged he has become.

I am not fisking the whole thing. Too much to do and he's too small a boy.

Johnson's unhinged obsession with me is both sad and curious. He hangs on my every word, blogs about every typo, and posts relentlessly on Geller. I must be having quite an impact, eh, Chuckster?

Charles Johnson, blogger cum cyber stalker. Bwahahahahahahaha.

Spencer nails the madman here. Here's an excerpt:

Libelblogger Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs has been blogging daily for around ten years now, and in all that time has contented himself with a few lines of comment on news stories he has blogged about; he has never written a single stand-alone, full-length article about anything -- until now. Columnist Johnson makes his debut today in The Guardian's Comment Is Free section in a characteristic way: by spreading lies about my colleague Pamela Geller.

This is what this man has allowed himself to become: after betraying all his principles and alliances, he is despised by the Right and held in contempt by the Left, while he himself stands for nothing at all except the destruction of those principled individuals alongside whom he used to fight. And their destruction is the chief cause to which he devotes his time nowadays; hence this present hit piece on Pamela. As I said yesterday, "It is testimony to the effectiveness of my colleague Pamela Geller, in raising awareness of the issues surrounding the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero and Islamic supremacism in general, that the mainstream media is gunning for her with relentless fury." Johnson is no Reuel Gerecht, and doesn't even approach Jeffrey Goldberg, but since he is spreading this nonsense in The Guardian now and not just at his rapidly sinking hate site Little Green Footballs, it warrants setting the record straight.

"Pamela Geller and the bloggers of hate," by Charles Johnson in The Guardian, October 14 (thanks to James):

Johnson spends most of his piece retailing Leftist scare words about conservatives, so as to semaphore to Guardian readers that Pamela Geller is Not One Of Us and thus not to be trusted. Thus without explanation he calls her an "extreme rightwing blogger" and claims that she has "arguably done more than anyone else to incite fear and hatred over the so-called 'Ground Zero Mosque.'" He offers no evidence for this; he's just slinging smear words with no content. Maybe he thought the Guardian site was called Content Is Free. And with a puritanical distaste that he would deride if it came from any conservative, he claims that the New York Times profile of her last Sunday featured a photo of Pamela "posing in her bikini." This, too, is false.

Then Johnson claims that through him "Pamela Geller got her start on the internet":

One thing you'll discover in the article is that Pamela Geller got her start on the internet by commenting at my site, Little Green Footballs. She posted more than 6,000 comments at LGF in our earlier days, when our comment moderation policy was much more laissez faire than it is now.

As I said to the Times, in those days, Geller was often the first one to take the rhetoric over the top, and the target of her rage was usually (but not always) Muslims. And not just militants or terrorists, but all Muslims; Geller was quite clear, and stated often, that she didn't believe in the idea of a "moderate Islam" at all. (Ironically, this is an opinion she shares with the leaders of al-Qaida, who insist that all Muslims must follow their extreme interpretation of Islam.)

Johnson here confuses moderate Islam with moderate Muslims. In Ibn Warraq's lapidary formulation, there are many moderate Muslims, but no moderate Islam. In other words, there is no traditional, mainstream sect of Islam or school of Islamic jurisprudence that does not teach warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers. But that doesn't mean that every Muslim is with that program, any more than Jesus' teaching means that every Christian turns the other cheek and loves his enemies. The teachings of a religion are one thing and the way every individual believer puts those teachings into practice is quite another.

There's much more read it all.

Armaros commented at The Guardian:

14 October 2010 7:12PM

Funny how Charles Johnson used to expose the Guardian and its fanatic leftism and antisemitism. Now he is welcomed as a hero because of some "enemy of my enemy" stance.

This makes two hypocrites out of one piece.

Of course Charles has deleted all his anti muslim posts from lgf.
Some of them were so bad even I saw them as offensive.

Especially when EID came around and he plastered his site with pictures of animal slaughter making it look like as if Muslims were bleeding the streets red in every place they could find a four legged creature.

It was he who ran "Religion of peace attacked today" headlines every day a terror attack came about.

It was he who ran posts titles: Britain has a "tiny little problem" referring to Muslims in the UK. He called the Paris riots an intefada and proclaimed that the UK is under "Islamic overlords".

Since others on his site sometimes disagreed with him on points, sometimes Islam sometimes just specifics, he would ban them faster than a post would appear.
Sooner or later some of his former posters started their own blogs. Geller was one of those.
He furnishes n0 evidence of her lgf posts which he considers too extreme. That is because he was the one who invited them with his headlines.
It would also be hard to peruse his site now as when doing so one can see his posts deleted. Those ones which he now would consider "extreme" but has no problem battering others with.

Gellers site took off somewhere around 2008. a couple of years after it went up
It went from nowhere to high up on the grid. Johnson was furious seeing his former proteges (as he would like to call them) succeed with more hits and posts than his so he went on the attack slandering and bad mouthing everybody who used to stand with him.

He wrote letters to editors and TV producers demanding that they do not interview Geller and attacked the NYT once before for having interviewed him but also allowing Geller to respond to his charges.

It was the greatest disappointment for him. He wanted so badly to be featured in the NYT he ran posts in the days ahead "I will be covered in the Times".
Then when the piece came out and it was balanced and asked the question why be so personal in attacking people this way, he was furious.

It became an obsession as he spent days and weeks stalking other bloggers attempting to "expose them" and run threads where the minutest of disagreement resulted in banning.

It became so ridiculous that he was the joke of the town.

Isn't there any news to report?

Geller, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter were are his favorite targets. Along with Sarah Palin and other conservative women.
Thats right, Charles has a problem with women who disagree with him. His little shattered ego doesn't allow his narcissist self to be disagreed with by some women.
So now his career is following Geller like some stalker probably hitting her site more often than her biggest followers.

He wakes up in the morning to analyze Atlas and Hotair, his posters monitoring comment sections all night then he runs the comments the next day "proving" that all whom he disagrees with are white supremacists and nazis.

If a person attended a meeting with another person who once was at a rally where some nasty people showed up Charles would run a headline

XYZ is NAZI

He would go about 6 degrees of separation trying to link anybody in disagreement with him as a white supremacist or a climate denier.

He banned people for saying that global warming may come from the Sun as did countless scientists. He banned people for saying there may have been a G^d in evolution or mentioning that Darwin believed it so.

His site descended into a North Korea where Charles is Kim and his words are divine. Descent is not tolerated and is punished with banishment.

It is rather pathetic but still comical. Also sad as it shows how success has gotten into the head of someone who started out small and got big fast.
It went to his head and he soon became a caricature of himself.

It is quite a pathetic enterprise if one asked me but alas, we all need bread and we all need exposure.
He is now on the level of the Daily KOS. Went over to the extreme left, appropriate for Cif I shall say.
Of course examining the posts he lists as Geller praising Terreblanche or Karadic, anybody with an eye can see there are no praises. Merely disputes on perceptions. Nowhere did Geller praise Karadiz or Terreblanche.
These are Johnson smears. It seems even the NYT saw his faults and greeted his militancy with suspicion.
He was just not able to get his silly message beyond his own zombie like followers who march in lockstep for the Dear Leader Charles.
This is his new attempt.
I wonder what he would do if Pam Geller retired. Would he go back playing Jazz or ride his bike...who knows......
Until then he has an obsession and as a few pointed out above, he is creating her free publicity