markhumphrys.com

Brown Bomber

meditraitor wrote: »

http://markhumphrys.com/irish.left.israel.html

Ive seen this site for a while now and everytime I am using the search for anything about the Irish Left it is on the front page.... now obviously there is no such person as MarkHumphrys and this is a troll site but who put this together.....

Would I be right in thinking that there are financial ways to keep your site on the first page of related queries?

Or maybe I am wrong, is there such an ignoramous around somewere trolling?

markhumprys.com as a conspiracy theory site really would be more appropriately discussed in the conspiracy theories fair to be fair.

This is all you need to know about markhumphrys.com

Robert Spencer is probably the most knowledgeable and intelligent writer on Islam in the world today.
markhumprys.com

You won't find a more idiotic statement than that on the whole boards.ie site.

If your not aware Spencer is a vile, anti-Islamic propogandist who is paid by Pipes to make ignorant folk hate Muslims, (Breivik was a big admirer) while Pipes is paid to make slightly less ignorant folk hate Muslims who is himself financed by Aubrey Chernick, a rabid Zionist.

Here is a crash course on Spencer "the most knowledgeable and intelligent writer on Islam in the world today" :pac:

You can judge for yourself...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmLvD0AzBCc

humphrys

wes wrote: »

Getting rid of illegal settlers is not extremist,

"Getting rid of" 1/2 million Jews is not extremist?

You seem like an incredible extremist to me.

wes wrote: »

So to add to the hypocrisy, you seem unable to stick to one position, and I can't trust a word you say. You flip flop so fast, when someone calls out the extreme positions you take.

I don't understand. What are the two contradictory positions I am supposed to have held?

humphrys

Brown Bomber wrote: »

If your not aware Spencer is a vile, anti-Islamic propogandist who is paid by Pipes to make ignorant folk hate Muslims, (Breivik was a big admirer) while Pipes is paid to make slightly less ignorant folk hate Muslims who is himself financed by Aubrey Chernick, a rabid Zionist.

Here is a crash course on Spencer "the most knowledgeable and intelligent writer on Islam in the world today" :pac:

You can judge for yourself...

Yes, that's right.
Anyone who criticises Islamic terror (jihad) and Islamic oppression (sharia) is a Nazi.
Anyone who cares about the human rights of minorities, Christians, atheists, gays, women and liberal Muslims in Islamic countries is a racist Nazi.
Yawn.

If you are impressed by that idiotic video, see my reply:

http://markhumphrys.com/anti.counterjihad.html

http://markhumphrys.com/islamophobia.html

wes

humphrys wrote: »

"Getting rid of" 1/2 million Jews is not extremist?

You seem like an incredible extremist to me.

Getting rid of half a million illegal settlers who invaded someone elses land is not extremist. Your claims have no basis in reality and are simply delusional. Again, you views are very extreme, and are quite frankly very much to the far right.

Also, I mentioned equitable land swaps, so not all of them would have to be removed, as long as Israel gave Palestinians land equal in size and quality in exchange. It seems to me that you ignore parts of posts when it suits you. None the less, every single settler is there illegally, which is something you seem to choose to ignore, for your own nonsensical reasons. Then again, it seems to have a rather massive distaste for facts.

humphrys wrote: »

I don't understand. What are the two contradictory positions I am supposed to have held?

You support Israeli expansion and then claims to support a 2 state solution. These 2 things a most certainly contradictory. To claim otherwise like you are, is just another example of you trying to pretend that your views aren't as extreme as they clearly are.

Also, you call for the Palestinians to engage in non-violence, while supporting Israeli exapnsion, which is achieved via violence. So again you are engaging in hypocrisy. Plenty of other example of your bias, double standards and extremist views through out the thread.

Frank Grimes

humphrys wrote: »

Yes, that's right.
Anyone who criticises Islamic terror (jihad) and Islamic oppression (sharia) is a Nazi.
Anyone who cares about the human rights of minorities, Christians, atheists, gays, women and liberal Muslims in Islamic countries is a racist Nazi.
Yawn.

Where did he say that? You can hardly say that Robert Spencer is an objective, unbiased source to take information about Islam and/or Muslims from can you? His websites are nothing more than hate sites, if you replaced Muslim with any other religious or ethnic group in the contents of his websites he would probably be arrested for inciting racial hatred. Why do you constantly deflect anything that's put to you with this sort of hyperbole?

humphrys

Frank Grimes wrote: »

His websites are nothing more than hate sites, if you replaced Muslim with any other religious or ethnic group in the contents of his websites he would probably be arrested for inciting racial hatred.

Is it possible to criticise Islamic terror (jihad) and Islamic oppression (sharia) without people like you saying it is "inciting racial hatred"?

I doubt it.

One of the reasons there are so many human rights abuses in Islamic countries is that people like you scream "racist" at whoever points them out.

Spencer is not a racist. He shows more concern every week for the brown, black and yellow skinned victims of jihad and sharia than the left has shown in the past decade.

Frank Grimes

humphrys wrote: »

One of the reasons there are so many human rights abuses in Islamic countries is that people like you scream "racist" at whoever points them out.

Where did I "scream racist" - it's hardly 'pc gone mad' to point out that an obviously biased individual is not an objective source of information. Spencer quite obviously hates the religion, and most likely its adherents too, I have little doubt that he couldn't care less what happens to Muslims or anyone else in Muslim states - he's just interested in lining his pockets via the anti-Islam industry. Could you answer that question I asked a while back too, less the hyperbole if possible?

Nodin

humphrys wrote: »

Is it possible (........)than the left has shown in the past decade.

I'm afraid far more than posters here have made the same conclusion with regards to Mr Spencer. The ADL and the Southern Poverty Law Centre have declared his organisation a "hate" group".
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2011/summer/the-anti-muslim-inner-circle

From Earlier -

I find it a bit odd you bring up that, when you deny self determination to millions of Palestinians. why do you constantly refer back to the foundation of Israel, when the issue is the current program of colonisation by Israel outside those borders?

So you lambast Hamas for firing rockets from Gaza after an Israeli withdrawal, but laud continuing Israeli expansion into a peaceful area...

You don't see how that could be seen as sending the wrong message? That doesn't raise any questions for you as regarding Israeli motives?

Don't you see something odd about building civillian housing in a "buffer" zone?

Does Israel allow full democratic participation for the inhabitants of the occupied territories? Has it held a plebiscite on whether or not they wish the occupation to continue, the land be annexed outright etc?

You also asked the question as to why Palestinians didn't emigrate to the occupied territories - I provided an answer to which you may care to respond
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79895961&postcount=114

humphrys

Nodin wrote: »

I'm afraid far more than posters here have made the same conclusion with regards to Mr Spencer. The ADL and the Southern Poverty Law Centre have declared his organisation a "hate" group".
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2011/summer/the-anti-muslim-inner-circle

The SPLC is a far left group that only leftists admire. But anyway, let's look at the page. What exactly does Spencer say on that page that is so objectionable, or even incorrect? Seriously, if he runs a "hate site" (which evokes images of some brain dead skinhead / neo-Nazi site) then surely there is better evidence than this?

The ADL is a more serious organisation. All I could find on the ADL and Spencer was this page:

http://www.adl.org/main_Extremism/911_anti_muslim_bigotry.htm?Multi_page_sections=sHeading_2

But their complaints about Spencer are vague and thin. They don't have a single quote from him. If you are going to label someone a "hate site", you need detailed evidence. I think the ADL really let themselves down with this vague left-wing complaint. There is a strong reply to them here:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/anti-defamation_league_has_strayed_from_its_charter.html

I read Spencer all the time and he is a normal parliamentary democrat. Not a "hate site", that's absurd. I don't agree with him on everything, but that is to be expected.

I read him mainly because he is so good at rounding up the unfashionable horror stories of Islamic oppression and murder around the world. You know, Christians burned alive in Pakistan, that kind of thing. This is the kind of job Amnesty International should be doing.

In fact, these kind of stories:

http://markhumphrys.com/islamist.war.html#classics

Frank Grimes

humphrys wrote: »

The SPLC is a far left group that only leftists admire. But anyway, let's look at the page. What exactly does Spencer say on that page that is so objectionable, or even incorrect?

It isn't some far-left conspiracy to make Spencer and the other people profiled on that website to look like bigots, their own actions do a good enough job at that. Just because you happen to agree with Spencer does not make him an objective or even knowledgeable commentator on Islam.

Frank Grimes

humphrys wrote: »

I read him mainly because he is so good at rounding up the unfashionable horror stories of Islamic oppression and murder around the world. You know, Christians burned alive in Pakistan, that kind of thing. This is the kind of job Amnesty International should be doing.

Don't worry Mark, Amnesty haven't succumbed to dhimmitude just yet - a very quick google throws up http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/pakistan/report-2012 where they talk about 'Islamic' oppression. Although they don't use terms like Islamofascism so you'll have to fill in those yourself.

Nodin

humphrys wrote: »

The SPLC is a far left group that only leftists admire. But anyway, let's look at the (..........) be doing.

In fact, these kind of stories:

http://markhumphrys.com/islamist.war.html#classics

So essentially because a well respected group has reached a similar conclusion its "far left" and thus wrong, rather than being wrong and far left. Very telling.

Yet again - would you answer the questions and points put to you in post 129?

Frank Grimes

And just in case there's any doubt about what type of site Spencer runs, it took me all of 30 seconds looking through comments to find this:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/07/india-35-dead-170000-displaced-in-clashes-between-muslims-and-non-muslims.html#comments

Salah | July 25, 2012 7:59 AM | Reply

"..officers had been given orders to shoot on sight.."

I hope police officers everywhere will finally adopt this approach.

“As the essential principle of his [Muhammad’s] faith is the subjugation of others by the sword; it is ONLY BY FORCE, that his false doctrines can be dispelled, and his power annihilated.” John Quincy Adams writing in about 1829

This type of comment is not unusual, I used to read that site just to get an idea about the type of people it attracts but I actually stopped looking at it because of stuff like that. Just because Spencer isn't saying it himself, he is facilitating it despite what his weasel-worded disclaimer says.

humphrys

Nodin wrote: »

So you lambast Hamas for firing rockets from Gaza after an Israeli withdrawal, but laud continuing Israeli expansion into a peaceful area...

You don't see how that could be seen as sending the wrong message? That doesn't raise any questions for you as regarding Israeli motives?

Look we did all these already.
Yes I am opposed to Islamic terrorist rocket attacks on civilians. Incredible.
Yes I support the building of the wall which has stopped the Islamic suicide bomb attacks on civilians. It has been a great success. It helped win the war. Well done Israel.

No, I do not agonise about Palestinians "losing land". Why? Because they are not democrats. No I don't care about the state they want to set up. Why? Because it will not be a democracy. Why should anyone care if another autocracy is set up? Who cares that Hamas now rules Gaza? How is that a "win" for liberal values?

Nodin wrote: »

Don't you see something odd about building civillian housing in a "buffer" zone?

Well it's up to Israel. It's hardly a terrible crime.

Nodin wrote: »

Does Israel allow full democratic participation for the inhabitants of the occupied territories?

Well a one state solution would mean the end of Israeli freedoms. But I have said repeatedly that Israel should define their borders and then cut the rest free.

You bizarrely assume the Palestinians want "democratic participation". There is no evidence for this. Where is the liberal democracy in Gaza or the PA? Where is the parliament, with regular elections, and a strong opposition party criticising the ruling party without fear of being shot?

Of course neither the PA or Gaza are like this. Palestinians do not believe in such things. You are projecting your western values onto people who do not share them.

Nodin wrote: »

You also asked the question as to why Palestinians didn't emigrate to the occupied territories - I provided an answer to which you may care to respond
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79895961&postcount=114

I was making the point that Israeli Arabs have a great life, and any Israeli Arab would be insane to want to live under the PA, when they could live in Israel instead. Did you know many Arabs campaigned to keep their territories in Israel and out of the PA territory?

http://markhumphrys.com/church.islamism.html#israeli.arabs

A survey of residents of Umm el-Fahm .. in the summer of 2000 asked whether they would like to include their city in a potential Palestinian state. The question elicited resounding opposition from 83% of respondents. Among those opposed, 54% cited as explanation for their position the desire to continue living under democratic rule, and the fact that they enjoy a good standard of living.

In East Jerusalem, residents say they would fight a handover to Abbas regime, Mark Mackinnon, October 16, 2007 - Arabs in Jerusalem horrified at the thought they might be forced out of Israel and into the corrupt, oppressive Palestinian Authority.

Similar quotes from Arabs of Jerusalem in 2000: "The international community and the Israeli Left seem to take it for granted that we want to live under Mr. Arafat's control. We don't. Most of us despise Mr. Arafat and the cronies around him, and we want to stay in Israel. At least here I can speak my mind freely without being dumped in prison"

Sept 2011 poll: 39 percent of Arabs in Jerusalem prefer Israeli citizenship to Palestinian citizenship. 42 percent say they would try to move to Israel if their neighbourhood became part of a Palestinian state.

Like the notable lack of West Germans moving to East Germany, the lack of Israeli Arabs rushing to live under Hamas or the PA speaks volumes. What nutcase would want to live under the rule of Fatah or Hamas?

Nodin

humphrys wrote: »

Like the notable lack of West Germans moving to East Germany, the lack of Israeli Arabs rushing to live under Hamas or the PA speaks volumes. What nutcase would want to live under the rule of Fatah or Hamas?

Once again, the cold war era tone of some of your rhetoric is striking - you'll find East Germany is no longer with us. I've already pointed out why Palestinians would not move.

Do you think the two-tier system of justice, settler only roads and sectarian/racist prioritising of resources is justified?

humphrys wrote:

Look we did all these already.
Yes I am opposed to Islamic terrorist rocket
attacks on civilians. Incredible.
Yes I support the building of the wall
which has stopped the Islamic suicide bomb attacks on civilians. It has been a
great success. It helped win the war. Well done Israel.

No, I do not
agonise about Palestinians "losing land". Why? Because they are not democrats. No I don't care about the state they want to set up. Why? Because it will not be a democracy. Why should anyone care if another autocracy is set up? Who cares that Hamas now rules Gaza? How is that a "win" for liberal values?

You seem hellbent on avoiding mentioning the settlements, amusingly enough. Always the "wall" never the colonies.

I find this odd - Its ok to impose a colonial and undemocratic autocratic regime, take territory and maltreat populations if they fail to live up to some ill defined standard. A bizarre bit of doublethink. Somewhat akin to racist justifications for the taking of Africa, India etc. They are "other" thus what we do is legitimate.

humphrys wrote: »

Well it's up to Israel. It's hardly a terrible crime.

Actually, its specifically forbidden since the 1940's so yes, it is a crime.

And as these things are built on Palestinian land, their inhabitants terrorise locals, and resources are taken from locals to supply them, they are indeed a terrible thing.

humphrys wrote: »

Well a one state solution would mean the end of Israeli freedoms..

A plebiscite wouldn't. You seem to be rather keen on the freedoms of one group with no concern whatsoever for the other.

humphrys

Nodin wrote: »

So essentially because a well respected group has reached a similar conclusion its "far left" and thus wrong, rather than being wrong and far left. Very telling.

The SPLC has always been far left. This is nothing new.

I ask again: What exactly does Spencer say in the SPLC profile page that is so objectionable? I don't get it.

humphrys

Frank Grimes wrote: »

And just in case there's any doubt about what type of site Spencer runs, it took me all of 30 seconds looking through comments to find this:

I see.

Have you any material on Spencer himself, as opposed to people who are not Spencer?

humphrys

Nodin wrote: »

Actually, its specifically forbidden since the 1940's so yes, it is a crime.

And as these things are built on Palestinian land, their inhabitants terrorise locals, and resources are taken from locals to supply them, they are indeed a terrible thing.

So if the Israeli occupation - and the Israeli settlements - are so bad, how come they made the "oppressed" Palestinians 3 times richer?

http://markhumphrys.com/israel.future.html#gdp

Before Arafat wrecked it with his intifada, the Palestinians were prospering under Israeli occupation, with a growing economy linked to Israel and Israeli settlements.

GDP per capita was, in 1990 dollars, $ 1,790 in 1967, and $ 5,312 in 1999. That is, the Israeli occupation made the "oppressed" Palestinians 3 times richer.

There was also a massive rise in Palestinian life expectancy from 54 to 73 under Israeli occupation.

I don't think things are as black and white as you make out. The Israeli economy is the most dynamic in the region. When Palestinians get a slice of that, it is wonderful for them. When enemies of the Palestinians like Arafat and Hamas cut them off from that action, it is terrible for them.

Frank Grimes

humphrys wrote: »

I see.

Have you any material on Spencer himself, as opposed to people who are not Spencer?

Besides his quite obviously biased books and web material? I guess no I haven't. You're presenting him as an authority on Islam when he most clearly is not, at least have the honesty to admit that much. It's the equivalent of me starting a thread on the economics forum about capitalism and recommending that everyone read Das Kapital by Marx as an unbiased and objective source of information about capitalism.

Brown Bomber

humphrys wrote: »

Yes, that's right.
Anyone who criticises Islamic terror (jihad) and Islamic oppression (sharia) is a Nazi.
Anyone who cares about the human rights of minorities, Christians, atheists, gays, women and liberal Muslims in Islamic countries is a racist Nazi.
Yawn.

If you are impressed by that idiotic video, see my reply:

http://markhumphrys.com/anti.counterjihad.html

http://markhumphrys.com/islamophobia.html

The video was of secondary importance. It was just to give a brief overview of the hatemongering nonsense peddled by Spencer.

I was, and still am interested to find out if you actually stand by the hilarious claim that

“About Islam, I recommend essentially everything written by Robert Spencer,”

No, wait...that was Anders Breivik. You said: "Robert Spencer is probably the most knowledgable man in the world on Islam".

Do you stand by this? And on what basis do you make the claim?

I briefly scanned over your "reply". It's just the same extremist blather you see on any other anti-Muslim conspiracy theory site. I had a quick scan over your site and to be frank it's a joke.

On the top banner you have an emotional plea to free Pollard because he "was spying for an ally." I find it extremely hard to believe that anyone could make such a ludicrous claim with a straight face.

From memory on your "Islamic attacks on Irish people" section, or more accurately paragraph you're forced to accept that no attacks have happened in Ireland "yet".
,
This is like me saying Mark Humprhys hasn't raped anyone (yet). It's weasel tactics to use nasty insinuations despite evidence to the contrary. Anyway, as you want to create the illusion of a Muslim threat in Ireland you are then backed into a corner and list off some events which are attacks on Irish people without adding any kind of political context whatsoever, such as occupation, injustices, nationalism, seperatism and so on, it's always Islam first, last and always (even when Islam has absolutely nothing to do with it). Apparently all you have to be is a non-western, brown person with a rifle and you are apparently an sharia loving jihadi Islamofacist hellbent on forced conversions of the poor little white Irish kids. . You really clutch at straws too - I believe you used the assasination of RFK -- an American -- by Sirhan Sirhan -- a Christian -- as an example of Islamic terror attacks against Irish people. You use attacks orchestrated by Abu Nidal, a Marxist...y'know a militant atheist like yourself as an example of Islamic terrorism. Ironic I know, but not quite as Ironic as your use of the Irish cyclist kidnapped in Balochistan Iran 10 years ago as an example of Islamic terror attacks.

1. The kidnapping had **** all to do with Islam. The only motivation was to receive ransom money.
2. It was the Islamic republic of Iran who seen to it that he was freed.
3. It was Jundullah who carried out the kidnapping. Jundullah are a criminal/terrorist group who are bought-and-paid-for agents of the state of Israel.

Either you are genuine but piss-poor researcher or you are pumping out all this manure to pursue an agenda. I hope it's the former but either way actions have consequences sadly.

Jonathon Githens-Mayer and Dr Robert Lambert, a former London Police officer co-authored a report directly linking anti-Muslim hate crimes, up to murder to media fabrications and distortions and anti-Muslim rhetoric by politicians and so-called "experts".

I'd just like to finish by answering a question you pose on your site:

Islamophobia - People scratch their heads about the cause of "Islamophobia". Are westerners just hostile to "difference"? I suggest the main cause of "Islamophobia" is the never-ending series of Islamic terror attacks.

The answer is quite simple...

This network of hate is not a new presence in the United States. Indeed, its ability to organize, coordinate, and disseminate its ideology through grassroots organizations increased dramatically over the past 10 years. Furthermore, its ability to influence politicians’ talking points and wedge issues for the upcoming 2012 elections has mainstreamed what was once considered fringe, extremist rhetoric.
And it all starts with the money flowing from a select group of foundations. A small group of foundations and wealthy donors are the lifeblood of the Islamophobia network in America, providing critical funding to a clutch of right-wing think tanks that peddle hate and fear of Muslims and Islam—in the form of books, reports, websites, blogs, and carefully crafted talking points that anti-Islam grassroots organizations and some right-wing religious groups use as propaganda for their constituency.
Some of these foundations and wealthy donors also provide direct funding to anti-Islam grassroots groups. According to our extensive analysis, here are the top seven contributors to promoting Islamophobia in our country:

• Donors Capital Fund
• Richard Mellon Scaife foundations
• Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
• Newton D. & Rochelle F. Becker foundations and charitable trust
• Russell Berrie Foundation
• Anchorage Charitable Fund and William Rosenwald Family Fund
• Fairbrook Foundation

http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...amophobia.html

Out of interest do you receive any outside funding to spread your message?

P.S. Will you attending the Zion, sorry SION meet in Stockholm? Your hero, Spencer will be there. You could meet most of your readers there I am sure tea party, Kahanists, JDL, EDL, JTF, SD PVV and lot's of other anti-Islam bigots.

Well I say readers but I'd be surprised if many of them could even spell EDL.

humphrys

Brown Bomber wrote: »

On the top banner you have an emotional plea to free Pollard because he "was spying for an ally." I find it extremely hard to believe that anyone could make such a ludicrous claim with a straight face..

You deny that Israel is an ally of the US?

Brown Bomber wrote: »

From memory on your "Islamic attacks on Irish people" section, or more accurately paragraph you're forced to accept that no attacks have happened in Ireland "yet".
,
This is like me saying Mark Humprhys hasn't raped anyone (yet). It's weasel tactics to use nasty insinuations despite evidence to the contrary..

You deny the existence of the Waterford terrorist plot?
http://markhumphrys.com/roundabout.html#irish.plot

You deny the existence of the plot to bomb Ballsbridge?
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/extremist-sketched-israeli-embassy-floor-plan-after-visit-to-ballsbridge-office-block-470110.html

Sure there have been no attacks yet, but given that there have been attacks in Bulgaria, France, Australia, Norway, Germany, Denmark, Canada, Italy, Sweden, Holland, Spain, Belgium, Switzerland, Greece and Austria, as well as the UK and US, it's hard to believe we'll be the exception.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Anyway, as you want to create the illusion of a Muslim threat in Ireland you are then backed into a corner and list off some events which are attacks on Irish people without adding any kind of political context whatsoever, such as occupation, injustices, nationalism, seperatism and so on, it's always Islam first, last and always (even when Islam has absolutely nothing to do with it). Apparently all you have to be is a non-western, brown person with a rifle and you are apparently an sharia loving jihadi Islamofacist hellbent on forced conversions of the poor little white Irish kids. ..

Which one of those attacks never happened?

Feel free to compile a list of "Jewish terror attacks on Irish people".
Send me the URL when you're ready.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You really clutch at straws too - I believe you used the assasination of RFK -- an American -- by Sirhan Sirhan -- a Christian -- as an example of Islamic terror attacks against Irish people..

You believe wrong. Not against Irish people, but certainly the RFK killing in 1968 was the first terror attack in the West on behalf of the jihad of the modern era. As I say here, it can be seen as the start of the modern war:

http://markhumphrys.com/islamic.attacks.west.html

He was an Arab Christian, yes, but he was fighting for the broader jihad against Israel. The PLO supported Sirhan, and even killed people to try to get him released.

http://markhumphrys.com/left.terror.html#rfk

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You use attacks orchestrated by Abu Nidal, a Marxist...y'know a militant atheist like yourself as an example of Islamic terrorism..

Born Muslim, educated at Islamic school, joined Fatah / PLO, split with them, spent his life killing Jews, buried in an Islamic cemetery.
Whatever he believed, he was part of the jihad.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Ironic I know, but not quite as Ironic as your use of the Irish cyclist kidnapped in Balochistan Iran 10 years ago as an example of Islamic terror attacks.

1. The kidnapping had **** all to do with Islam. The only motivation was to receive ransom money.
2. It was the Islamic republic of Iran who seen to it that he was freed.
3. It was Jundullah who carried out the kidnapping. Jundullah are a criminal/terrorist group who are bought-and-paid-for agents of the state of Israel.

.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/2003/1228/ireland/kfcwqlcwmhcw/
An Irish man kidnapped in Iran together with two German tourists was today released by a group claimed to have links with al Qaida.

Do you have any proof that it was Jundallah / PRMI? Send me links.
I'm not defending Jundallah. They are jihadis too. It won't make any difference at all to my list if they were involved.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Either you are genuine but piss-poor researcher or you are pumping out all this manure to pursue an agenda. I hope it's the former but either way actions have consequences sadly..

Jonathon Githens-Mayer and Dr Robert Lambert, a former London Police officer co-authored a report directly linking anti-Muslim hate crimes, up to murder to media fabrications and distortions and anti-Muslim rhetoric by politicians and so-called "experts".

Stop trying to blame me and other counterjihad people for things we disapprove of and do not call for. That is totally dishonest.

humphrys

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Quote: People scratch their heads about the cause of "Islamophobia". Are westerners just hostile to "difference"? I suggest the main cause of "Islamophobia" is the never-ending series of Islamic terror attacks.

The answer is quite simple...

So all these Islamic terror attacks never happened?

http://markhumphrys.com/islamic.attacks.west.html

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Out of interest do you receive any outside funding to spread your message?

First I am asked if I am a Jew. Now I am asked if I am paid to do this.
Have you Israel-haters never met a pro-Israel person before?
You need to get out more.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

P.S. Will you attending the Zion, sorry SION meet in Stockholm? Your hero, Spencer will be there. You could meet most of your readers there I am sure tea party, Kahanists, JDL, EDL, JTF, SD PVV and lot's of other anti-Islam bigots.

Well I say readers but I'd be surprised if many of them could even spell EDL.

Well I have no time for the EDL:
http://markhumphrys.com/what.am.i.html#edl

You need to attack me for what I do say, not for things you imagine that I say.

Frank Grimes

Brown Bomber wrote:

You use attacks orchestrated by Abu Nidal, a Marxist...y'know a militant atheist like yourself as an example of Islamic terrorism.

humphrys wrote: »

Born Muslim, educated at Islamic school, joined Fatah / PLO, split with them, spent his life killing Jews, buried in an Islamic cemetery. Whatever he believed, he was part of the jihad.

So basically you are ascribing motives to people to suit your own agenda. I realise it is a common tactic amongst people who share your outlook to offer up completely reductionist explanations for the actions of Muslims but it is not always as straightforward as: Muslim does something therefore Islam is the explanation. I'm not expecting an answer, but do you apply the same logic used in your post above to the IRA? IRA members were Catholic, therefore Catholicism explains their violent action?

Nodin

humphrys wrote: »

The SPLC has always been far left. This is nothing new.

I ask again: What exactly does Spencer say in the SPLC profile page that is so objectionable? I don't get it.

It would appear that your definition of "far left" is that whatever you term so is so.

The cherry picking, the demonisation....

humphrys wrote: »

So if the Israeli occupation - and the Israeli settlements - are so bad, how
come they made the "oppressed" Palestinians 3 times richer?

I seem to recall the same argument being made by apologists for Apartheid SA. Denying the palestinians the ability to build their own economy and using them as a form of cheap labour in nearby "bantustans" has an all to-familiar ring to it as well.

Theres no reason to automatically link extended life span and the occupation, given progress in medicine etc over the same period and the influx of aid via the UN and other bodies post 1970.

You've avoided referring to the two tier justice system, settler only roads and facilities, the sectarian/racist prioritising of resources again, I note. I wonder why...is it because you're unable to admit and deal with it, because you support same and don't want to admit it....? Also you never acknowledge that the aquistion of territory by force is specifically outlawed, that colonisation is going on.....

Nodin

Humphrys wrote:

Born Muslim, educated at Islamic school, joined Fatah / PLO, split with them,
spent his life killing Jews, buried in an Islamic cemetery.
Whatever he
believed, he was part of the jihad.

So not only is "far left" whatever you say it is, but now a Jihadi is whoever you say it is.....dear o dear o dear. Whose next to become one? Michael D?

alastair

humphrys wrote: »

The SPLC has always been far left. This is nothing new.

I ask again: What exactly does Spencer say in the SPLC profile page that is so objectionable? I don't get it.

The misbegotten term “Islamo-fascism” is wholly redundant: Islam itself is a kind of fascism that achieves its full and proper form only when it assumes the powers of the state.”

Robert 'not a bigoted loon at all' Spencer:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/08/robert-spencer-loonwatch-one-half-of-the-leftist-mooslim-alliance/

humphrys

alastair wrote: »

Quote: The misbegotten term “Islamo-fascism” is wholly redundant: Islam itself is a kind of fascism that achieves its full and proper form only when it assumes the powers of the state.”

That comes from here:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101.html
The person who said it is not Spencer.

Let's try to be accurate.

By the way, which critics of Islam do you like? Or is all criticism of Islam racist?

Nodin

humphrys wrote: »

..............

By the way, which critics of Islam do you like? Or is all criticism of Islam racist?

There's a race called "Islam" now? I was under the impression it was a term covering all religions based on the Koran.

alastair

humphrys wrote: »

That comes from here:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101.html
The person who said it is not Spencer.

Let's try to be accurate.?

Fair point. It's only quoted from a primer on Islam from Spencer's own website. A primer which Spencer clearly supports and hosts.

humphrys wrote: »

By the way, which critics of Islam do you like? Or is all criticism of Islam racist?

The criticism of Islam on Jihadwatch is certainly bigoted - as is your own site.

SeanW

It's your side that seems to think Islam is a race ...