My friend and colleague, Jim Horn has just published a new book entitled, "Experiencing Islam". Jim is a former Foreign Service Officer stationed in the Middle East, so he knows what he is talking about.The book is in paperback and published by Create Space. It is available on Amazon.
"This essay was redacted by the CIA, and has been banned by librarians because of its controversial nature.
Written by James E. (Jim) Horn, it is a politically incorrect no-nonsense discourse regarding the future of America. A book critic has opined that this is the unvarnished truth that every American, should read, especially every politician and law enforcement official in America.
A veteran, Jim Horn is a retired American Diplomat who served at American missions in the Middle East for more than a decade. Horn has worked in counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism where he was a leader in making several American embassies and consulates bomb–proof. He has received a rare civilian award for VALOR.
Horn, a political activist has been identified by the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) with a fatwa declaring him, among other things as a hate monger."
From your description, and knowing what you mean by the words you use, it sounds like pure nonsense to me.
ReplyDeleteAs a CIA agent, he has a lot to answer for, since his agency engaged for years in building up the Islamists, thinking they would be a good counter-weight to various forms of communist, Arab (national) socialist and vaguely left-rhetoric tribal politics in the middle east.
Projecting that he is writing about Islam, per se, is a dead giveaway that the man has an ax to grind. "I'm an expert, take my word for it."
(CAIR's criticisms of him may be invalid. When one man with an ax to grind is critiqued by others with another ax to grind, it doesn't grant any of them significant credibility).
"Jim Horn"???
ReplyDeleteWill that be the same Jim Horn who stated that Islam is not a "religion" but a "cult" at a speech to a Republican Woman's Group.
You can tell a lot about a person by the friends they keep. Your anti-Muslim hatred, though often latent, is still very evident Mr. Gary Fouse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EEDBMhVusk&feature=relmfu
Seems like a scam.
ReplyDeleteI Googled the book and the author apparently has published another book titled "DiDiDawDawDiDi" which is also sold as being "censored by the CIA".
Either the CIA is incompetent when it cannot prevent books it censors from being sold on Amazon.com or the author "Jim Horn" is a huckster.
I believe the latter.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteCensored by the CIA is a sub-title.
Nelly,
I don't know if its the same person or not nor do I care. Do I have take the time to go to your site? As for my latent anti-Muslim hatred, you should know by now that if I hate anyone, I wil tell
you. My beef is with the terrorists, the jihadists, the Islamists, the subversive groups like CAIR and the hate-filled imams here and in other countries who preach hate and violence against non-Muslims. Ordinary everyday Muslimsjust trying to get along I have no beef with.
Clear enough?
C'mon, Y'all! I'm not forcing you to buy it.
Gary, you doth protest too much. Your statements about not hating Muslims is sort of like the liberals who used to protest "Some of my best friends are Negroes." (Yeah, conservatives sometimes did that too, but it was the liberals who really made a cliche of it.)
ReplyDeleteYou say that "Ordinary everyday Muslims just trying to get along I have no beef with," which would be a good thing, if true. But you also boost those who insist that the entire religion of those ordinary everyday Muslims, not just a military faction, but Islam itself, is inherently evil.
There are those who think Jews are fine, as long as they don't practice Judaism, and Indians are fine, as long as they look, talk, think, and act like Englishmen. You have nothing against Muslims, as long as they don't practice Islam.
Siarlys,
ReplyDelete"But you also boost those who insist that the entire religion of those ordinary everyday Muslims, not just a military faction, but Islam itself, is inherently evil."
Good point. That question is a central point of discussion today, isn't it? It is the crux of the controversy in Orange, Ca where a city councilman linked 9-11 to the doctrines of Islam on his Facebook page. Whether you agree or disagree with that point, the open and free deiscussion of that point should not be silenced.
As you may recall Gary, absolute commitment to the First Amendment is one of the things we totally agree on. That is why we haven't argued about the so-called Irvine 10. One more time where these cretins come between a willing speaker and a willing audience with their loud interruptions and they should all be locked up.
ReplyDeleteAnd, it is perfectly acceptable for anyone to say "Islam is a religion that at its core is inherently and ineradicably hostile to Jews and supportive of violent suppression of other religions." whether it is true or not. One principle of the First Amendment is that we don't trust government agencies to weight the truth or falsehood of a matter being debated.
So I'm not telling you, or Horn, or Geller, to shut up. I'm not trying to close down your web sites. I'm exercising my free speech to say that they are wrong, despicable, and dangerous, worthy of contempt, which I freely express, without shouting them down.
What I'm saying to you is, you can't have it both ways. If you tell someone who is a good, peaceful, hard-working Muslim, supporting their family and getting along politely with their neighbors, that the religion they profoundly and devoutly believe in is inherently terrorist and evil, beyond any possibility of redemption without committing apostasy and spitting on the words of the Prophet, then you can hardly claim with integrity that you accept "good Muslims."
The only good Muslim, in that framework, is a non-practicing Muslim. It is like saying "I have nothing against Christians, as long as they deny the divinity of Jesus and accept that the Gospels are a bunch of half-baked myths."
Now I don't believe any of that. I believe that any religion is capable of generating a militant, intolerant, dominion-supremacist vision, and right now, Islam has generated one. But I would never insinuate that that is the essence of Islam, any more than I would insinuate that Ambrose's pointed demands for the extermination or forced conversion of the Jews is the essence of Christianity.
"What I'm saying to you is, you can't have it both ways. If you tell someone who is a good, peaceful, hard-working Muslim, supporting their family and getting along politely with their neighbors, that the religion they profoundly and devoutly believe in is inherently terrorist and evil, beyond any possibility of redemption without committing apostasy and spitting on the words of the Prophet, then you can hardly claim with integrity that you accept "good Muslims." "
ReplyDeleteI have not said those words, but I do defend the right to discuss that question because it is being talked about, if not publicly. As for Geller and Spencer, yes, they have the right to speak and you have the right to criticize what they say. That is the position I take at UCI with, say, Amir Abdel malik Ali. I have never suggested that his right to speak be taken away. I think it is incumbant on university administrators to respond to hate speech with specitivity.
What do you propose as the proper response to "hate speech"? And who, given our common commitment to the First Amendment, is to judge what speech is hate speech and what speech is not. If I called Bull Connor a racist, should he have the right to sue me for using hateful language about him. Do I need to prove he IS a racist in order not to be guilty of criminal hate speech?
ReplyDeleteThe university certainly shouldn't SPONSOR Ali's speech. But if he is invited in the context of a limited open forum, the fact that his viewpoint is derogatory toward Jews is not a valid reason to act against him. The antidote to wrongful speech is more and better speech.
As for your "I have not said those words," you have said the same thing in slightly different words. You have done much more than uphold the right of bigots like Geller to spout their bigotry in public. You have endorsed and sponsored their expression, implying that they are right. That loses your "good Muslim" comments any credibility they might otherwise have had.
Siarlys,
ReplyDeleteI have addressed the question about hate speech many times and how to respond to it.
I have heard Geller speak, and I don't consider her a bigot. She is against radical Islamists and those who are engaged in stealth Jihad. I hope I don't have to explain what that is to you.
Have you never considered the idea that Geller et al are fighting against hate and intolerance?
Siarlys, you jump to conclusions pretty fast without even having an idea of what you're talking about. You haven't even read the book and you condemn me and my book based on your ignorance. Fantastic!
ReplyDeleteFor Anonymous. It is so easy to criticize when your mind is vacant. Ya gotta read it to know it, and you obviously don't know anything about either book.
ReplyDeleteJim,
ReplyDeleteSiarlys doesn't have to read the book. He is an expert on everything.