Countercontempt has produced the below video which brings out certain unpleasant facts about the two speakers who appeared at Yorba Linda on February 13.
http://www.countercontempt.com/archives/1443
The videos of Amir Abdel Malik Ali are legion and speak for themselves. I have personally heard him speak many times at UC-Irvine. I have directed critical questions to him and on two occasions have engaged him in informal debate immediately after his speeches. Ali would probably be offended if anyone tried to pass him off as a "moderate".
Siraj Wahhaj is, as the video says, cautious about what he is caught saying on video. He has been admitted into the realm of respectable circles to be presented as a true moderate. Yet certain audios have make their way out into the world-wide web, sermons before his own followers in which he speaks of jihad and the need not to take non-believers as close friends. They have been posted previously by Creeping Shariah and others. Here is his Discover the Networks entry.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=716
It is not because Muslims were having a charity dinner in Yorba Linda that brought out protesters. It was the fact that the Islamic Circle of North America chose these two individuals as their speakers that sparked anger. They cannot defend that selection. In their news releases about Yorba Linda, they don't even mention who their speakers were.
In my view, the actions of those who chanted slogans against the attendees were wrong-especially since children were present. The ICNA knew a protest would be held. Why didn't they advise those attending not to bring children? Nonetheless, once children entered the picture, the chants should have ceased.
The intent of the protest was to speak out against radical speakers and radical Islam-not to defame all Muslims-as many of the speakers including myself pointed out. On that issue, we stand by our message.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
The ICNA knew a protest would be held. Why didn't they advise those attending not to bring children?
I don't understand why you keep bringing this up. As somebody else pointed out, you're playing a "blame the victim" game here. Maybe they knew there would be a protest, but they didn't know that people would be shouting at people to "go home" and all kinds of other hateful comments. Maybe they did tell them, but the people couldn't get babysitters. There are tons of possible reasons and the fact that you keep bringing this up makes me think that you're trying to deflect away any guilty feelings you might have for being associated with these people.
Lance,
Let me be clear. It does not absolve those who were yelling. Yet you seem to imply that the possibility that the ICNA saw a great photo op and possibly encouraged people to bring kids should not even be considered or discussed.
Gary,
"the possibility that the ICNA saw a great photo op and possibly encouraged people to bring kids"
Is 100% conjecture. Twice you use variations of the word "possible" but you present no "definite" in your statements. That's a lot of speculation going on without evidence to bring to you the point where you could draw up a possibility.
Your "hunch" cannot be considered or discussed in good faith. Without evidence or witnesses, a dangerous potential is created for discussing something that never happened, aka "spreading lies and rumors".
However, I'll try to play your game.
If we acknowledge that there is a possibility that what you state did transpire, without any evidence backing your possible scenario, we must acknowledge there is an equal amount of possibility that it did not transpire. Where does that leave you? Right back where you began. You have no evidence with which to discuss or consider any possibilities of either scenario. Any conclusions you come to are still 100% conjecture without evidence.
In the US legal system "possibilities" do not preclude facts. Without some sort of evidence you have no case. "Possibilties" cannot be allowed to condemn the accused if you presume to stand up for justice in America.
Without evidence, the scenarios you are considering and want to discuss exist only in and is limited only to your own imagination. My imagination could be greater than yours but it doesn't make any conclusion I come to any more truthful than your own - without evidence.
If your intention is to find the truth in anything, considering the "possibility" without any evidence is a very very bad place to start. Formally, it's called "argument from ignorance". The discussion appeals to ignorance and the participant's knowledge of what actually has or has not transpired. I will presume you want an informed discussion. However, without evidence we have no informed reality to discuss but instead whatever thought may cross your mind in regard to ICNA's actions, be they actual or otherwise. It's a discussion that will not result in revealing any truths because you have no knowledge of the reality of events.
Derek,
It is possible. Maybe they did-maybe they didn't.
There. I just said in two lines what it took you 5 paragraphs to state.
And once again, the point completely whooshes over Gary Fouse's head.
Let me try and make this plain: People shouldn't have to explain themselves when they're doing something that they have every right to be doing - in this case, taking their kids out in public.
But why does Gary Fouse ask this question? Is it because he thinks that Muslims shouldn't be allowed to have children? Why else would he be wondering this?
Is the above statement ridiculous? Of course. But it's the same kind of thing you're doing.
I am not defending the crowd yelling at kids.
The parents have every right to bring their kids to hear Malik Ali speak. But why would a parent want his kid to hear the stuff he spews?
Did you watch the video? A mother being proud her kid commited a suicide bombing?
Maybe he didn't spew that type of stuff at this event. But I still would not want to bring my kid to an event where someone who spews those types of ideas gives a speech.
In a similar way, if David Duke was going to be a keynote speaker to a cause I believe in, I wouldn't bring my kids. I wouldn't go either - even if it was for a good cause.
Lance is exactly right. It's these bigot protestors who needed to modify their behavior, not the people with children. Definitely some victim blaming going on here.
I come to listen to Malik Ali every time he comes to UCI, but for vastly different reasons. He needs to be confronted and rebuked as wella s be reported so the public knows what he says. I have to question the motives of those who would actually pay money to come and lsiten to him speak. Why would you expose your kids to that-even if they are in a separate baby-sitting room?
There is criticism to go around. The bottom line is that ICNA reveals itself to be a radical organization by having these two speakers address them.
"And once again, the point completely whooshes over Gary Fouse's head."
yeah, like an errant fast ball that sails into the stands.
Gary, maybe you can answer this.
What do you think Malik Ali means when he says Zionist state instead of Israel? Has anyone ever asked him how he defines Zionism and Zionist state and how that is different than Israel and the rights of Jews having a homeland and rights of self-determination?
I know he sees a difference but I don't know what the difference is in his head. Would he call someone like Obama who supports the two state solution and for the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state a Zionist?
Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the local chapter of CAIR, looks like a guy who has a us vs them mentality.
Has CAIR ever denounced anything Malik Ali has said?
Has he ever said the students who repeatedly disrupted Michael Oren's lecture did anything wrong?
Has he ever said anything negative about any local radical Muslims?
And From Jewish Voice for Peace. which has also convienetly forgotten that notorious anti-Semite Malik Ali just ahppened to be speaking at the "fundraiser":
*Villa Park Councilwoman Deborah Pauly in Orange County, who called a fundraiser for womens’ shelters sponsored by the Islamic Circle of North America Relief USA(ICNA) “pure unadulterated evil” and said, “I know quite a few Marines who will be very happy to help these terrorists to an early meeting in paradise.”
*Efforts to stop the building of mosques and Muslim community centers around the country.
*The District Attorney’s unprecedented criminalization of Muslim students in Orange County for engaging in a garden-variety student protest.
Post a Comment