Interview
A Great set of interviews at the Rally for Sanity
This was sent to me by a young friend and I think it is well worth watching:
I find it amazing that many admit to getting their news from John Stewart or Keith Olbermann. But the coverage of the latest elections showed the “fair and balanced’ nature of the big three cable news networks:
SE Cupp Interviewed on C-SPAN
A Condoleezza Rice Update
Sally Pipes is Interviewed By ReasonTV
Thomas Sowell Discusses His Book-Dismantling of America-and Culture, Society, and the Political Landscape
COEXIST?
The idea that many faiths can co-exist with Islam is laughable. The question remains: “Would you want a person to be more like Muhammad (following his example), or Jesus (following His example)?” It a simple concept. Muhammad married a six-year old and had sex with her when she was nine. He ordered the slitting of the throats of 700-to-900 people (men, women, and children) and in fact personally helped in this endeavor. He even ordered his followers to lie (Taqiyya). Jesus, when peter struck off the ear of the Roman soldier, healed it – saying: “those who live by the sword will die by it.” He invited children into the inner circle of Jewish Pharisees and used them as examples of faith, often you will see in paintings Jesus smiling with children around. You do not see this with the militaristic person of Muhammad. Also, Jesus loved truth, even proclaiming it will set you free.
This espouses a great quote from a world religion scholar that I love:
The nine founders among the eleven living religions in the world had characters which attracted many devoted followers during their own lifetime, and still larger numbers during the centuries of subsequent history. They were humble in certain respects, yet they were also confident of a great re¬ligious mission. Two of the nine, Mahavira and Buddha, were men so strongminded and self-reliant that, according to the records, they displayed no need of any divine help, though they both taught the inexorable cosmic law of Karma. They are not reported as having possessed any consciousness of a supreme personal deity. Yet they have been strangely deified by their followers. Indeed, they themselves have been wor¬shipped, even with multitudinous idols.
All of the nine founders of religion, with the exception of Jesus Christ, are reported in their respective sacred scriptures as having passed through a preliminary period of uncertainty, or of searching for religious light. Confucius, late in life, confessed his own sense of shortcomings and his desire for further improvement in knowledge and character. All the founders of the non-Christian religions evinced inconsistencies in their personal character; some of them altered their prac¬tical policies under change of circumstances.
Jesus Christ alone is reported as having had a consistent God consciousness, a consistent character himself, and a con¬sistent program for his religion. The most remarkable and valuable aspect of the personality of Jesus Christ is the com¬prehensiveness and universal availability of his character, as well as its own loftiness, consistency, and sinlessness.
Robert Hume, The World’s Living Religions (New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1959), 285-286.
All this understanding is summed up in this graphic that “spoofs” [tells the truth] about a good deal of Islam:
Media Guessing Game-Islamophobia Seems To Be Their First Guess
(Click to Watch MSNBC Interview)
NewsBusters will start out this little test of fact versus fiction. As all the facts reveal, Islamophobia seems to have NOTHING to do with this knifing.
CNN’s Deborah Feyerick joined the media guessing game as to the motivation behind the stabbing of Muslim taxicab driver in New York City, emphasizing the possibility it may have been “connected to this big Ground Zero controversy, where we’re hearing so much anti-Muslim sentiment.” Feyerick raised this hypothesis during reports on Thursday’s Rick’s List and The Situation Room.
The correspondent’s first report on the attack aired 12 minutes into the 4 pm Eastern hour of Rick’s List. Anchor Rick Sanchez played a clip from victim Ahmed Sharif’s press conference on Thursday before introducing Feyerick. She began by stating that when “Michael Enright, the suspect, was arrested, he had numerous journals and notebooks on him, all of them filled with writings, some of it completely illegible. That is now with authorities, all of that being vetted and looked through to see whether, in fact, there was anything indicating that he had undergone some sort of a mental or emotional change.”
Feyerick did mention that Enright “ironically…was a volunteer working for a non-profit organization that promotes peace,” but didn’t mentioned that the organization, Intersections International, actually supports the planned mosque near Ground Zero. She continued with the speculation over the possible motivation of the attack, including the “anti-Muslim” charge….
…(read more)…
The Wall Street Journal points out some media bias here:
…Then–in paragraphs 28 and 29–comes this:
Mr. Enright is also a volunteer with Intersections International, an initiative of the Collegiate Churches of New York that promotes justice and faith across religions and cultures. The organization, which covered part of Mr. Enright’s travel expenses to Afghanistan, has been a staunch supporter of the Islamic center near ground zero. Mr. Enright volunteered with the group’s veteran-civilian dialogue project.
Joseph Ward III, the director of communications for Intersections, said that if Mr. Enright had been involved in a hate crime, it ran “counter to everything Intersections stands for” and was shocking.
It’s shocking, all right. It’s also news! The Times hasn’t exactly buried the lead here: The attack is a significant story in itself, and it’s an entirely defensible editorial decision to begin by simply telling what (allegedly) happened.
But revealing the suspect’s association with the pro-mosque left so low in the story shows atrocious news judgment. Rehearsing the America-hates-Muslims narrative first strongly suggests that the Times’s reporting is driven more by an ideological agenda than by the facts of the case.
That ideological agenda is shared by Intersections International, as evidenced by the organization’s Aug. 2 statement supporting the Ground Zero mosque:
The controversy surrounding this project stems from the fact that the proposed building location lies in close proximity to the former World Trade Center, the site of the horrific terrorist attack in New York City on September 11, 2001. Intersections grieves along with those who suffered losses in that tragedy. Intersections acknowledges that any association between that event and this project is a fabrication. Further, Intersections applauds the work of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and Daisy Khan, principals in The Cordoba House, for their long-term and steadfast commitment to interfaith relations. While acknowledging the real pain that 9/11 continues to evoke, Intersections deplores those who would use this project to promote fear and vitriol for personal gain or partisan politics….
…(read more)…
And the woman interviewed at the beginning will take us out. Above she is interviewed by Contessa Brewer. Below she is interviewed by Michael Medved:
Sophia Nelson Interviewed About Islamophobia from Papa Giorgio on Vimeo.
Romesh Ratnesar and Michael Medved Islamophobia (UPDATE: Bobby Ghosh)
This is a FLASHBACK to August of 2010 to a Time Magazine article titled, “Is America Islamophobic?” Michael challenges Mr. Ratnesar on many points in the article/society. This is a VIMEO recovery and meant for an old post I titled: “Discussing Mosques and Men” (https://religiopoliticaltalk.com/discussing-mosques-and-men/)
You’re all racists, homophobes, sexists, Islamophobic, heterosexist, speciesist, paternalistic, hate-filled, bigoted, uncompassionate, war-loving, theocratic, gun-toting, flag-waving, patriotic jerks! With that said, could we now deal with the mosque issue using common sense and logic? (TOWNHALL)
New Yorkers On Ground-Zero Mosque
Walid Shoebat Discusses Why Islam Is Not A Religion of Peace
How many radical Muslims are there in the world?
Writing at the Weekly Standard, Robert Satloff takes apart a new book by John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed, both of them professional pro-Islam propagandists, published by the Gallup organization, where Mogehed is executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies. Satloff shows how, through fraudulent definition of the word “radical,” the authors make it appear that a multi-year study of Muslim opinion worldwide showed that only seven percent of Muslims are radical, when, in reality, by any fair reading of the authors’ own polling data, the correct number is 37 percent.
The authors define Muslim radicals as those who say the 9/11 attack was “completely justified,” which was seven percent of the sample. However, there were two other categories of respondents who said that the attack was at least partially justified, and they are labeled by the authors as “moderates.” The first of those groups comprises 6.5 percent of the sample, the second comprises 23.1 percent. Further, the respondents in that last category, making up 23.1 percent, also said that they hate America, want to impose Sharia law, support suicide bombing, and oppose equal rights for women. Yet Esposito and Mogahed call them “moderates.”
7 plus 6.5 plus 23.1 equals 36.6 percent of 1.2 billion Muslims, or 439 million radical Muslims in the world. Just a tiny unrepresentative minority.
The theme of the Esposito-Mogahed book is that most Muslims are just like us, a notion mocked by the title of Satloff’s article: “Just Like Us! Really?” This is most ironic, given that the Weekly Standard is a leading supporter of President Bush and his Islam democratization policy, which is founded on the assumption that Muslims are … just like us. The Standard thus happily takes apart leftists who say that Muslims are just like us, while it remains silent about and keeps supporting the president who says that Muslims are just like us.
Clearly, the right-liberal hand doesn’t know what the left-liberal hand is doing, or, more precisely, the right-liberal hand refuses to recognize that it is doing the same thing as the left-liberal hand, even as it condemns the left-liberal hand.
Ravi Zacharias Interviewed by Fox’s Lauren Greene about His Book~Has Christianity Failed You?
Here is an interview with Ravi Zacharias by Lauren Green from FOX News. Here we see a battle between what the Emergents view is why people leave the church, and what I see (have seen and have it confirmed in yet one more way) as the main reason – people are not having their intellectual argument.