Thursday, January 20, 2005


Fighting Fire With umm... Signatures

I can see from my referrer logs that a link within Paltalk has sent some traffic toward my earlier report on the Jihadi implications of the murder of an Internet user. Despite this, I am yet to receive a reply from Paltalk and their news page makes no mention of the case whatsoever. I appreciate they may have zero liability in this matter, but considering the number of web pages that (according to Google) specifically refer to Paltalk in this matter, haven't they heard of damage control? The silence is of concern...

Meanwhile, following one of these links led me to this petition. It states:
Too all Islamic terrorist and those who support them.This is your last warning. We the following demand the immediate end too the global jihad against Christians, Jews, Buddhist, Hindus and all that are non Muslim.The flying of planes into buildings, the hijackings, beheadings, homocide bombings, mass murders, rapes and torture and all forms of violence must stop or you and your cause will suffer dire consequences.There will be NO negotiations, NO talks, there will be NO conditions of surrender.
Wow. Pretty tough sounding PETITION. I bet the terrorists you are aiming it at are quaking in their jackboots.

Sorry to break it to you guys, but petitions are one of the cornerstones of democracy. This is not a concept Jihadists generally aspire towards. I do acknowledge your intent (if somewhat poorly written) but the fact is, if you have declared war as you imply, this is not how one normally wins. See the cartoon here.

I am generally suspicious of online petitions. How do signatories know it wasn't set up by a Paltalk user looking to collect email addresses of their enemy? I don't want to suggest this is the case here, nor for any other online petition but the circumstances of this latest murder cause one pause and consider the privacy implications. For what it's worth, I believe your argument is noble (even if it does say it is aimed at a single Islamic "terrorist" instead of "terrorists") and I support it.

Petitioning terrorists is probably inappropriate. Petitioning media outlets, politicians and Religious and Government leadership might have some more merit though. If anything, it may put the issue of Jihad on their agenda. Give it a try and let me know! Oh, and have someone proofread it this time.

Jihad Watch has some interesting inside-information on the New Jersey murders.
Many Copts are regarding the murders as a warning to the Coptic community as a whole, related to the increasing strife between Copts and Muslims in Egypt and the Copts' energetic efforts in America to get the truth out about the differences between Middle Eastern Christians and Muslims -- differences that the Islamic lobby, with its disingenuous talk of "Arab Americans," routinely glosses over and hopes you don't notice. The Copts, to their immense credit, have been particularly outspoken among Middle Eastern Christians about Muslim oppression. And yes, many are active on Pal Talk debating Muslims.

The nature of the warning? The murders send a signal from the Muslims to the Copts: we are going to behave here the same way we behaved in Egypt, and the First Amendment and American law enforcement will not protect you. Don't expect America to keep you safe from us. The oppression and harassment you thought you had left behind in Egypt has now come to you.

See also my previous post on Jihad in America.

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? .