Of dogs and rats

2012, Aug. 29th.                                                                                                             FFI Editor

FFI received (amongst many) these two emails yesterday (28th Aug. 2012).

One from “mundosinislam.com”:

Dear editors,
It is usual for me to have attacks on my website from Muslims around the world, at least once in a month. Several times it was hacked and the server hosting my site used to be attacked periodically by the Muslims. This time it has been attacked once again after my actions against Islam have been increased. And the sad thing is that even the hosting company has given up. They told me that attacks by Muslims disturb (damage) many other sites being hosted on the same server as mine. That is why they won’t be able to host my site anymore.
Actually it is not a very serious concern for me. There are millions of other web hosting companies which I can hire for hosting my site. If everything goes fine, next week my site will be back in action.
My question to Muslims is: What do you gain by doing this?
Oh, I am so so so sorry. I have asked the wrong question to the wrong people. Actually I should not expect any answer or explanation from Muslims. I know why they attack on my site. It is because attacking is the principal rule what they have learned from the cunning and cruel Muhammad.
ATTACK… ATTACK… ATTACK, this was the favourite word of Muhammad. Attack all those who do not accept the slavery that is Islam. Muhammad taught his followers to not allow any kind of freedom of expression. That is why Muslims attack people like us physically psychologically and virtually. But do their attacks matter to us? NO, of course not. There was a time when we used to feel afraid and hide our identities before criticizing Islam. But not any more.
Listen you Muslims, I live in Madrid. My email, picture and address, everything is available on internet. Do all that you can to me. It doesn’t make any difference to me. You will be tired of attacking and hacking my site but I will create many more sites. If my destiny is to be killed by demons while I am fighting for truth, then I really do not mind. If before I die, I can take some Muslims out of the Islamic illusion that will mean a great deal for me.
Right now I am in the process to bring my site back on internet. So, I’ll see you guys in a week’s time when I will be back in action with much more strength and spirit to resist Islam. Thanks for all of your support, especially to all the editors who always publish my articles on their great sites.
www.mundosinislam.com (World without Islam) is coming back soon.
Imran Firasat
(Madrid – Spain)

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -

The very courageous Imran Firasat who (as he says) does not hide his identity despite being a self-declared apostate from Islam. Indeed, according to Islam he is “an enemy to Allah, the Prophet and the Umma” since he has not only apostatised, but is an outspoken critic and resister of Islam and therefore ‘deserving’ of being murdered by “Allah Akbar” shouting Jihadis.
This man is prepared to put his life on the line, both literally and virtually.
To date the attacks on Imran have mostly been virtual – though a U.K. Muslim group has called for a political (whatever that means, if anything) Jihad (i.e. ‘holy’ war and killing) against him – and I hope that the assaults against him remains “virtual”, though given the case histories of many such critics, ranging from Van Gogh (murdered), through Rushdie (who received a murder-fatwa) to Hirsi and Wilders (needing 24/7 protection), I am not placing any bets on this.
All to often Islam’s way of dealing with its critics has been to silence them, not by argument and debate but by murder. This does not of course silence the criticism, but it does silence the critic and “ups the ante” for anyone else “daring” to criticise Islam at the same time.

Then there was the second email, referring us to an article from SunNews:

TORONTO — A Facebook page inviting people to walk their dogs outside an east-end mosque is becoming a hotbed of hostility.
Facebook administrators removed a post from the “Walk Your Dog at Mosque” page early Monday that threatened to throw attending dog owners in a “lake of fire” and shoot their beloved pooches on the spot.
Posted by Ali Shirazi, who identified himself as an Iranian-born resident of Toronto, it was aimed at the dog owners who plan to attend the Sept. 14 event at the Salahuddin mosque and community centre.
Some devout Muslims believe dogs to be unclean and vehemently [sic] avoid them.
The Facebook page emerged in the wake of the Al-Quds Islamic rally held at the legislature just over a week ago. The yearly anti-Israel demonstration, started by Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979, was also attended by counter-protestors, one of whom was a Jewish man [Allen Einstoss] who brought his 160-pound English Mastiff.
Allan Einstoss was arrested by police after getting into a scuffle when he was told by Muslim demonstrators to keep his dog away. His dog, Cupcake, was also kicked by at least one demonstrator.

“I’ll tie you all up and throw you all in a lake of fire if you show up at the Salahuddin mosque … every dog will be shot on (the) spot,” wrote Shirazi.

Facebook spokesman Meg Sinclair said administrators would keep an eye on the site for other threatening posts.
“We’ll continue to remove specific posts on the page that violate (Facebook) terms, but the page as a whole is going to remain up for the time being,” Sinclair said.
He added that Facebook has received complaints about the dog-walk page but declined to say exactly how many.
Shirazi’s main Facebook page was also nowhere to be found as of late Monday, and messages left for him were not returned.
By late Monday, the dog-walk page listed 114 planning to attend the event and 1,550 still invited to take part.

Abdul Ibrahim, chief administrator for the Salahuddin mosque, said they would be ready for whatever trouble the dog-walk might bring.
“This is a community centre here, it has nothing to do with Al-Quds,” said Ibrahim, adding that around 3,000 Muslims attend weekly. But Ibrahim also did not rule out the possibility of confrontation, and called on government for help. “Let them come, then what will happen will happen.”

People are intending to protest the arrest and detention of a man (Einstoss) for walking his dog in a Public place and defending himself when he and his dog were attacked by Muslims protesting ‘al-Quds’.
Whilst there is at best a tenuous link to the Mosque, the point that the protesters wish to make is that Public rights of way are not to be trumped by hate-filled Islamic protests taking place in Public places. As one commentator put it: “We cannot allow our rights to free movement be limited by threats of violence from anyone for any reason.” Yet the Mosque Administrator Ibrahim is clearly hoping (expecting?) that the “government”, i.e. Toronto City Authority and/or Police, will help them by, one presumes, banning the protest or else forcing the dog-walkers away from the Mosque in a parallel to the way that they earlier arrested the victim of an attack by Muslims.

So here we have two examples of behaviour by Muslims. One a cyber attack on an Islam-critical website and the other the threat of physical attack from Imran Shirazi and at best a lack of distancing from such threats by Mosque administrator Ibrahim, who is reported to be quite comfortable with letting “what will happen” (on-the-spot shooting of dogs and people set on fire?) happen.
From the comment quoted above, it is clear that others too perceive all this as a threat of violence against law-abiding citizens.
This leads to the question: will the “government” be brave (like Imran) and stand up to threats of intimidation and violence, or will it – as so many Western governments seem to – roll over and ban law-abiding citizens from exercising their lawful rights to free movement? Time will tell.

These two incidents bring another point to mind:
Are we faced by yet more groups of Muslims and Muslim individuals who strangely and mysteriously “misunderstand Islam” as the PC brigade would be inclined to deduce whenever Muslims attack others (in any way), or are we seeing in these two cases a snap-shot of the reality of how Islam reacts to the “other” in the world – with an “attack dog” (or is it a “cornered-rat”) mentality that sees the use of violence (either cyber or physical) as the “answer” to criticism which must be silenced.

An attack-dog is trained to react with aggression and violence to many stimuli.
A cornered rat attacks out of fear.

How did Mohammed react to challenges? He did several things in fact.
Sometimes he clearly reacted with violence: Muslims are “trained” by the Koran to regard non-Muslims as sub-humans (K.2:257; 8:22,55; 98:6), to hate them (K.4:10), to fight (K.2:216; 3:142-3, 195; 4:74,76,84,95; 8:65-69) against non-Muslims (K.8:12,15-17,38-39, 9:5,29,36,123; 47:4,35); so there is the “attack-dog” in Islam.
In other cases he employed assassination to silence critics and satirists (comedians beware!). In other cases he just curses (K.3:61) his critics. In no case did Mohammed ever debate his critics. Rather than addressing critics, Mohammed removes (or ignores) them. This is a fearful response.

And as Mohammed, so with some Muslims. They react with violence or the threat thereof partly out of fear and partly out of an Islamically-induced reflex.
Not content to merely close their eyes (less they see something…) and their put their fingers in their ears (lest they hear something … that disturbs their tranquillity) they seek to permanently silence or remove the source of the “offence” they feel. This is a reaction based on fear.
The fear in this case would be that “offensive” material might well strike home. Perish the thought that Muslims would actually think about Islam! Such an event could so easily spread “al-fitnah” (tumult and discord) within the Umma as Muslims realise the nonsense of Islam. What must make this fear greater is that sites such as this are run by ex-Muslims who have had just such a revelation (and a true one at that!) about Islam.

Attack dogs or cornered rats? In one sense it matters little in that whether you’re killed by a dog-bite or a rat-bite you are just as dead either way.

Thus we give thanks for those who are brave enough to stand up to Islamic threats and violence and hope that our governments may follow their lead and that the days of appeasement may draw to a close.

Short URL: http://www.archive2012.faithfreedom.org/?p=39829

Posted by FFI Editor on Aug 29 2012. Filed under Op-Ed. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.