Hannity would never let facts interfere with his fear and hate mongering.

“…all expressed predictable outrage over Yusuf’s inclusion, given his alleged support of the fatwa against author Salmon Rushdie for his tome Satanic Verses.”

ALLEGED.??

Uh apparently Salman Rushdie himself, and thousands of people watching the BBC segment, saw and heard Yusuf Islam’s words coming from his own mouth as he said that Salman Rushdie should be murdered.

Here Cobly watch it for yourself’

http://www.archive.org/details/Hypotheticals-a-Satanic-Scenario

Here is Satanic Verses’ author Salman Rushdie’s letter to the editor in the UK’s Telegraph Newspaper, 2007;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/3639714/Letters-to-The-Sunday-Telegraph.html

Cat Stevens wanted me dead

However much Cat Stevens/Yusuf Islam may wish to rewrite his past, he was neither misunderstood nor misquoted over his views on the Khomeini fatwa against The Satanic Verses (Seven, April 29). In an article in The New York Times on May 22, 1989, Craig R Whitney reported Stevens/Islam saying on a British television programme “that rather than go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of the author Salman Rushdie, ‘I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing’.”

He added that “if Mr Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ‘I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like. I’d try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is’.”

In a subsequent interview with The New York Times, Mr Whitney added, Stevens/Islam, who had seen a preview of the programme, said that he “stood by his comments”.

Let’s have no more rubbish about how “green” and innocent this man was.

Salman Rushdie

Sorry, very poor post, Mr. Hall. You didn’t do a very good job with this obvious hit piece on Hannity et al.

Salman Rushdie has responded to Mr. Islam’s appearance:

“I’ve always liked Stewart and Colbert but what on earth was Cat Yusuf Stevens Islam doing on that stage? If he’s a “good Muslim” like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar then I’m the Great Pumpkin. Happy Halloween.”

And: “Just had this from my marvellous Observer colleague Andrew Anthony: “He told me in 1997, eight years after saying on TV that Rushdie should be lynched, that he was in favour of stoning women to death for adultery. He also reconfirmed his position on Rushdie. He set up the Islamia school in Brent, which is currently undergoing council-backed expansion. Its mission statement three years ago explicitly stated that its aim was to bring about the submission of the individual, the community and the world at large to Islam. For this aim it now receives state funding. Its an incubator of the most bonkers religious extremism and segregation, and is particularly strong on the public erasure of women. Why do people go to such lengths to ignore these aspects of Yusuf Islam’s character and philosophy?”

Go ahead and attack Rushdie now.

Salman Rushdie weighs in:

“I’ve always liked Stewart and Colbert but what on earth was Cat Yusuf Stevens Islam doing on that stage? If he’s a “good Muslim” like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar then I’m the Great Pumpkin. Happy Halloween.”

Oh baby, it’s a wild world!
———————————–

What about the fatwa against capitalism by the Democratic Party?

a touch of dry humor on my part.”

Who would have thought that Yusuf would have gone to Joy Behar for PR advise?

Latin2 said:
ALLEGED.??

That’s like John Edwards’ “alleged” love child, Bill Clinton’s “alleged” perjury and Barney Frank’s “alleged” gay brothel.

Colby, you can clearly see that Yusuf Islam, aka Cat Stevens, was DEAD SERIOUS, and not joking and not holding back what he was saying when he agreed that Salman Rushdie should be murdered and even set on fire.

http://www.archive.org/details/Hypotheticals-a-Satanic-Scenario

Now Colby, who I am to believe, VH1 who is part of Stewart and Colbert’s Comedy Central OR YUSUF ISLAM AND SALMAN RUSHDIE back then?

I believe Yusuf said it and meant it and I believe that Rushdie KNEW that Yusuf said it and meant it.

Yusuf Islam: “I can see SALMAN RUSHDIE hanging from my house!

notsofast said:
a touch of dry humor on my part.”

Who would have thought that Yusuf would have gone to Joy Behar for PR advise?

Well he didn’t look like HE WAS LAUGHING or joking when he, Yusuf, said it…and apparently Salman Rushdie WROTE that Yusuf Islam WANTED HIM DEAD.

Just watch and tell me he is making a “jokey-joke”?

http://www.archive.org/details/Hypotheticals-a-Satanic-Scenario

Why is it that Liberal will try to say something was only a “joke” but in fact THEY MEANT what they say?

Apparently Mr. Rushdie didn’t think Mr. Islam’s comments were vague. Sorry, “alleged” comments.

One would think he would know more about it than others. Perhaps not but he’s certainly a major figure to be considered in whether Islam was serious or not.

Sorry, “allegedly” serious.

Even more remarkable? That none of the panelists knew that Yusuf has repeatedly clarified that his comments were completely taken out of context.

He’s full of shit, Colby. That you’re buying it doesn’t make it remarkable that more discerning people aren’t. What is remarkable is that you don’t reference the comments in their supposedly exclupatory context, nor acknowledge the numerous times he’s stood by them.

As Rushdie asked: “Why do people go to such lengths to ignore these aspects of Yusuf Islam’s character and philosophy?”

Apparently because those “wingnuts” on the right are promoting this story, Mr. Hall feels a need to reject it.

Ideology over facts.

None of the panelists, nor Sean Hannity, appear to have ever watched VH1’s episode of Behind the Music on Cat Stevens, (witch you can watch here.)

And you call yourselves journalists?!? Funny stuff, Colby.

wow…what Liberal reporters will do to protect other Liberals…even LIE.

I posted that video under your other story about Yusuf Islam….did you even verify and watch it Colby, or are you just taking your talking points from your Media Matter’s email memo’s word for it?

Not a big surprise the left would embrace Yusef, hell they’d run Manson for congress if they thought he’d get enough votes. They have absolutely no moral compass.

The big takeway here? None of the panelists, nor Sean Hannity, appear to have ever watched VH1’s episode of Behind the Music on Cat Stevens, (witch you can watch here.)”

Yes, all commentators need to consult “Behind the Music” before commenting on Jusuf.

On February 21, 1989, Yusuf Islam addressed students at Kingston University in London about his conversion to Islam and was asked about the controversy in the Muslim world and the fatwa calling for Salman Rushdie’s execution. He replied, “He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.”

…and what Salman Rushdie wrote was TRUE. Early islamic scholars documented that Prophet Muhammad told his close followers and companions that he BELIEVED he was possessed by Satan. Even his child bride, Aysha, documented that she believed that Muhammad was possessed by Satanic magic.

Thus the Satanic Verses and that is why there was a fatwa placed on Rushdie’s head…for writing the truth.

…and Yusuf Islam CONDONED the fatwa of death on Rushdie.

Hey, Yusuf weighs only about 110lbs. so he could never be e threat, right, libs?

‘Even more remarkable? That none of the panelists knew that Yusuf has repeatedly clarified that his comments were completely taken out of context.”

Which is a bunch of crap. I remember when Stevens was doing this, and he can backtrack all he wants, he can lie all he wants, but he clearly said that _his_ religion imposes the death penalty on blasphemy, and he made no excuses for that, and he didn’t give any qualifiers. He was very straight forward. So, one of two things:

1) As a muslim, he believes that Rushdie should be killed. or…

2) He’s not really a muslim.

Stevens is either a liar, or a pussy, or is a lying pussy.

“None of the panelists, nor Sean Hannity, appear to have ever watched VH1’s episode of Behind the Music on Cat Stevens, (witch you can watch here.)”

That’s about as valid a reference as “If they would only have watched “Cooking With Martha” they would have understood Ms. Stewarts wrongful conviction on insider trading”

Hard hitting journalism boys and girls!!

notsofast said:
The big takeway here? None of the panelists, nor Sean Hannity, appear to have ever watched VH1’s episode of Behind the Music on Cat Stevens, (witch you can watch here.)”

Yes, all commentators need to consult “Behind the Music” before commenting on Jusuf.

yeah….the same people who were behind Stewart’s and Colbert’s rally.

Yes, Yusuf said Rushdie should die for writing his book. The left just doesn’t care.

Maybe Stewart could line up Charles Manson to read someof his poetry at his next rally . …So nutball Islamics are just kidding with us ? Jon Stewart should draw Mohammed on his next show , and bring out Molly Norris from backstage to show what a good sense of humor
Islamics have .

” appear to have ever watched VH1’s episode of Behind the Music on Cat Stevens, (witch you can watch here.)”

Yes, which is apparently a greater sin than failing to include Salman Rushdie’s comments about Cat Stevens/Yusuf Islam’s appearance.

How can you do a piece on this matter and NOT include Rushdie’s response?

writer said:
Yes, Yusuf said Rushdie should die for writing his book. The left just doesn’t care.

They didn’t care about Daniel Pearl either.

…and Rushdie is not even a Conservative, he is a Liberal. He was a moderate Muslim when he wrote the Satanic Verses and he is now an atheist. Meanwhile Yusuf is USING TAQQIYA on Liberals because they are too stupid to see the truth.

We should keep in mind that Yusuf is one of the good ‘mainstream’ Muslims.

I wish Mr. Stevens had not appeared, but I think a more important and relevant question is: Has any of the money from foreign sources through Rove and Gillespie to the C of C and into Republican ads and voter suppression efforts come from terrorist sources? We know that the funds have come from Chinese corporations and numerous Indian and Arab sources, but Rove and Gillespie and the C of C have refused to disclose fully. We really need to make sure that terrorist money is not financing our campaigns, Republican, Tea Party or otherwise. We should be focusing on that instead of this interesting, but not terribly important story. And, I call on Rove, Gillespie and the C of C to be transparent here.

writer said:
We should keep in mind that Yusuf is one of the good ‘mainstream’ Muslims.

Yes, a typical “moderate” Muslim.

The Real Royal King said:
I wish Mr. Stevens had not appeared, but I think a more important and relevant question is: Has any of the money from foreign sources through Rove and Gillespie to the C of C and into Republican ads and voter suppression efforts come from terrorist sources? We know that the funds have come from Chinese corporations and numerous Indian and Arab sources, but Rove and Gillespie and the C of C have refused to disclose fully. We really need to make sure that terrorist money is not financing our campaigns, Republican, Tea Party or otherwise. We should be focusing on that instead of this interesting, but not terribly important story. And, I call on Rove, Gillespie and the C of C to be transparent here.

Oh don’t even try King, sweet jesus, go hijack another thread ya putz.

The Real Royal King said:
but I think a more important andrelevant question is: Has any of the money from foreign sources through Rove and Gillespie to the C of C and into Republican ads and voter suppression efforts come from terrorist sources?

100%, totally irrelevant to the topic as usual!

And of course, the King jumps in to try and change the subject.

ijpl;p5544812

The Liberals will always make excuses for terrorists and murderers. Liberals and the Liberal MSM PROMOTE terrorism by not seeing the truth and making excuses for terrorist threats like Yusuf’s on Salman Rushdie.

That is why Terrorism thrives, because Liberals don’t want to acknowledge that it exists in the world.

Latin2 said:
The Liberals will always make excuses for terrorists and murderers.

That’s because liberals are the terrorists and murderers.

Latin2 said:
The Liberals will always make excuses for terrorists and murderers. Liberals and the Liberal MSM PROMOTE terrorism by not seeing the truth and making excuses for terrorist threats like Yusuf’s on Salman Rushdie. That is why Terrorism thrives, because Liberals don’t want to acknowledge that it exists in the world.

If they admit it exists, they lose. Plain and simple.

notsofast said:
100%, totally irrelevant to the topic as usual!

timzank said:
Oh don’t even try King, sweet jesus, go hijack another thread ya putz.

writer said:
And of course, the King jumps in to try and change the subject.

I realize how uncomfortable this topic makes all Republicans and Tea Partiers. As well, it should, and I understand your rabid need to change the subject.

“Has any of the money from foreign sources through Rove and Gillespie to the C of C and into Republican ads and voter suppression efforts come from terrorist sources?”

Good question. Why don’t you take off 6 months and investigate this yourself? Come back with your conclusion.

We’ll all be waiting anxiously for your report.

Good luck and Godspeed.

Heck, make it a full year and not just half of one.

The Real Royal King said:
I realize how uncomfortable this topic makes all Republicans and Tea Partiers. As well, it should, and I understand your rabid need to change the subject.

Did you read the title of the post?

Lets be real, they could have fired W. Bush out of a cannon while he showered the crowd with tax cuts and Revolutionary Era costumes and splashed down in a toxic pool of affluence and Hannity still would have found something to be jingoistic and partisan about.

The Real Royal King said:
I realize how uncomfortable this topic makes all Republicans and Tea Partiers. As well, it should, and I understand your rabid need to change the subject.

you are a total moron.

Latin2 said:
The Liberals will always make excuses for terrorists and murderers. Liberals and the Liberal MSM PROMOTE terrorism by not seeing the truth and making excuses for terrorist threats like Yusuf’s on Salman Rushdie.

That is why Terrorism thrives, because Liberals don’t want to acknowledge that it exists in the world.

notsofast said:
That’s because liberals are the terrorists and murderers.

You are always claiming President Obama is liberal, a point with which I disagree, but, I don’t think that you can deny that there has been no successful terrorist attack on the US during his administration. They same can’t be said about his conservative predecessor. In fact, President Obama has already thwarted a terrorist attack three times further into his administration that W.

timzank said:
If they admit it exists, they lose. Plain and simple.

The Real Royal King said:
We know that the funds have come from Chinese corporations and numerous Indian and Arab sources, but Rove and Gillespie and the C of C have refused to disclose fully.

We do? How? Was that in Behind the Laughter?

Oh and just to be clear, I don’t condone or forgive anything Cat Stevens has ever said politically.

The Real Royal King said:
You are always claiming President Obama is liberal, a point with which I disagree,

I think Obama would disagree with YOU as would any sane person.

I believe Liberals, like always, are mental sick. That is why they cannot see what is right in front of their own eyes.

Even Salman Rushdie, the man who Yusuf said should die, came out yesterday and said YUSUF ISLAM IS A TERRORIST SUPPORTER.

…but Colby is like….”nah..nah…nah…I’m not listening…nah…nah…can’t hear you. I only see Hannity and he is a Conservative, so he is the CRIMINAL. American Conservatives are the only terrorists in the world”, meanwhile Yusuf is a terrorist supporter.

Yesterday Islamic terrorist killed and wounded over 100 innocence Catholic Iraqis, and yet the Tea Party are the terrorists in Liberals, and the Liberal MSM’s eyes..proving who the real crazies are.

King, are you still being ‘chased’ by kids with Cheeto stained fingers? Eeewwwww!

The Real Royal King said:
You are always claiming President Obama is liberal, a point with which I disagree, but, I don’t think that you can deny that there has been no successful terrorist attack on the US during his administration. They same can’t be said about his conservative predecessor. In fact, President Obama has already thwarted a terrorist attack three times further into his administration that W.

Barack Obama is Kenyan for Jasper Schuringa? I did not know that.

/Carson FTW!

Some_Dude said:
Oh and just to be clear, I don’t condone or forgive anything Cat Stevens has ever said politically.

So condoning someone should be MURDERED is “political”?

HUH?

” I don’t think that you can deny that there has been no successful terrorist attack on the US during his administration. ”

Attempt #2 to change the topic.

And Nidal Hasan’s victims would disagree with you.

I’m curious…is there anything that “conservatives” DON’T fear?

The Real Royal King said:
In fact, President Obama has already thwarted a terrorist attack three times further into his administration that W

He hasn’t “thwarted” shit.

SteveMG said:
” I don’t think that you can deny that there has been no successful terrorist attack on the US during his administration. ”

Attempt #2 to change the topic.

And Nidal Hasan’s victims would disagree with you.

Disclaimer: Nidal Hasan is not 1.5 billion Muslims.

Hugo Daun said:
I’m curious…is there anything that “conservatives” DON’T fear?

YOU!

Hugo Daun said:
I’m curious…is there anything that “conservatives” DON’T fear?

Big difference between fear and common sense.

Hugo, we do fear writing books that aren’t favorable to Islam. Those seem to bring on death threats.

Hugo Daun said:
I’m curious…is there anything that “conservatives” DON’T fear?

Personal responsibility.

Whilst we’re talking about O’Hannity, another important question is: Why won’t O’Hannity investigate the possibility that terrorist money is being used to fund the Rove and Gillespie efforts, via the C of C, to promote Republican candidates and suppress voting? Shouldn’t O’Hannity, an avid Republican who shamelessly promotes Republican candidates on all of his shows, be at least as concerned about the integrity of our elections as he is about a has been singer? O’Hannity may not be a news program, but it’s not “Entertainment Tonight” either.

Hugo Daun said:
I’m curious…is there anything that “conservatives” DON’T fear?

Work, paying OUR taxes, liberals,etc.

Hugo Daun said:
I’m curious…is there anything that “conservatives” DON’T fear?

Campbell’s Cream of Chicken soup?

Pablo said:
Personal responsibility.

Really? You all seem to run from it constantly.

notsofast said:
I think Obama would disagree with YOU as would any sane person.

I think he’s been pragmatic. If he was truly liberal, like me, DADT would be gone, the health care bill would have been more comprehensive, we would be done completely with Iraq in any military sense, there would be substantial immigration reform in the works, and the stimulus would have been comprised of about 20% tax cuts instead of 40%. Just off the top of my head.

The conservatives on this board make the mistake of thinking that everyone is as extreme as them. Obama is the definition of a moderate that makes concessions.

The Real Royal King said:
Whilst we’re talking about O’Hannity, another important question is: Why won’t O’Hannity investigate the possibility that terrorist money is being used to fund the Rove and Gillespie efforts, via the C of C, to promote Republican candidates and suppress voting? Shouldn’t O’Hannity, an avid Republican who shamelessly promotes Republican candidates on all of his shows, be at least as concerned about the integrity of our elections as he is about a has been singer? O’Hannity may not be a news program, but it’s not “Entertainment Tonight” either.

Hijack attempt #3

Some_Dude said:
I think he’s been pragmatic. If he was truly liberal, like me, DADT would be gone, the health care bill would have been more comprehensive, we would be done completely with Iraq in any military sense, there would be substantial immigration reform in the works, and the stimulus would have been comprised of about 20% tax cuts instead of 40%. Just off the top of my head.

The conservatives on this board make the mistake of thinking that everyone is as extreme as them. Obama is the definition of a moderate that makes concessions.

How very true.

The Real Royal King said:
Why won’t O’Hannity investigate the possibility that terrorist money is being used to fund the Rove and Gillespie efforts, via the C of C

Why doesn’t FOX investigate the possibility that Nancy Pelosi is a serial killer or Harry Reid is a pedophile?

The Yusuf appearance clearly wasn’t thought through. I’ve come to believe that the artistic community may have accepted his explanation after they initially called for a boycott, but to be honest, I really don’t care. I don’t own any of his music; I don’t turn him up on the radio and most of the people in the audience were born around the same time as the Rushdie book.

The train idea was cute, but as the past few days have shown, the inclusion of a fellow with a couple of minor hits from 30-35 years ago has distracted from the overall message and it would’ve been much better, if the people in charge of the booking had thought of another motif.

timzank said:
Big difference between fear and common sense.

Liberals don’t have common sense…they are mentally sick.

“Disclaimer: Nidal Hasan is not 1.5 billion Muslims”

Correction: Nowhere did I claim he was.

And that Rand Paul supporter who reacted irresponsibly (and probably criminally) is not all of the Tea Partyers.

But for some reason, all of the Tea Party was smeared because of it.

(And I’m no fan of the Tea Party, that’s for sure).

Some_Dude said:
If he was truly liberal, like me, DADT would be gone, the health care bill would have been more comprehensive, we would be done completely with Iraq i

Thank you for admitting BHO is a liar!

notsofast said:
Why doesn’t FOX investigate the possibility that Nancy Pelosi is a serial killer or Harry Reid is a pedophile?

Because the issues have never been raised by a responsible source, Nutso?

The Real Royal King said:
Whilst we’re talking about O’Hannity, another important question is: Why won’t O’Hannity investigate the possibility that terrorist money is being used to fund the Rove and Gillespie efforts, via the C of C, to promote Republican candidates and suppress voting? Shouldn’t O’Hannity, an avid Republican who shamelessly promotes Republican candidates on all of his shows, be at least as concerned about the integrity of our elections as he is about a has been singer? O’Hannity may not be a news program, but it’s not “Entertainment Tonight” either.

He’s busy investigating the possibility that Obama is not a liberal. Hey, can we get someone to investigate the possibility that Obama used terrorist money in his campaign? We could start with the donations from Gaza.

This President has passed the largest stimulus in history (nearly $1 trillion), the greatest expansion and far reaching changes in healthcare in American history (affecting more than $2.5 trillion of our economy) and the most expansive financial regulations since the Great Depression.

All of this in less than 2 years.

And his critics on the left complain he didn’t do enough? He’s not a liberal?

Mr. Obama is a liberal Democrat. He’s not a Marxist or socialist or radical. He’s a liberal.

For some on the left you can never be liberal enough (yes, it’s also true on the right).

The Real Royal King said:
I realize how uncomfortable this topic makes all Republicans and Tea Partiers. As well, it should, and I understand your rabid need to change the subject.

Not at all. You’re just an idiot who visits idiot web sites, gets suckered into caring about stuff that doesn’t exist, and like a good little idiot, start repeating things like a parrot. You’re like the drunk at a party that approaches this group and that and starts rambling about stuff that no one cares about, and everyone’s thinking, “Jesus, just go away, idiot”.

The Real Royal King said:
Because the issues have never been raised by a responsible source, Nutso?

Dems are a reliable source?

LMAO

The King had no fear at all of the Crips attending his all white private school.

SteveMG said:
“Disclaimer: Nidal Hasan is not 1.5 billion Muslims”

Correction: Nowhere did I claim he was.

Nor did you specifically deny that Yusuf Islam is 1.5 billion Muslims. You don’t want to end up like Juan Williams, do you?

Oh, wait…

Cat Stevens is changing his story again. There was no doubt at the time that he was serious; that he meant what he said. Yes, he has since “clarified” his position. He changed his mind. He said that at the time he was a relatively new convert and still grappling with the meaning of the koran, what it allowed and what it didn’t allow for. I think he blamed it on the “overenthusiasm” of a neophyte. But this, I-was-just-joking defense is new to my ears.

“Nor did you specifically deny that Yusuf Islam is 1.5 billion Muslims. You don’t want to end up like Juan Williams, do you? ”

Sorry, your post went right over my head.

I’ll work for half what Williams got.

Okay, a third.

Next, FOX investigates the possibility of intelligent life forms at MSNBC!

The Real Royal King said:
I realize how uncomfortable this topic makes all Republicans and Tea Partiers. As well, it should, and I understand your rabid need to change the subject.

Actually it was YOU that was changing the subject. Aren’t YOU always telling people not to do that. I expect you to NEVER make that accusation again… tool.

Alas, I must bid you all adieu, as I am off to Big “D” for a meeting with some insurance underwriters. But, I leave you two questions:

#1 If the Rove, Gillespie, C of C fund-raising, Republican campaign efforts and voter suppression efforts are on the up and up, why won’t they address the question of terrorist funds?

#2 Why won’t FOX “News” cover this story?

The Real Royal King said:
Alas, I must bid you all adieu, as I am off to Big “D” for a meeting with some insurance underwriters. But, I leave you two questions:

#1 If the Rove, Gillespie, C of C fund-raising, Republican campaign efforts and voter suppression efforts are on the up and up, why won’t they address the question of terrorist funds?

#2 Why won’t FOX “News” cover this story?

They’re waiting for you to stop beating your wife.

Hugo Daun said:
I’m curious…is there anything that “conservatives” DON’T fear?

nottooswift said:
YOU!

That’s good. I’m as peaceful and loving as they come.

timzank said:
Big difference between fear and common sense.

It would be a welcome change to see more “conservatives” demonstrate the latter.

Pablo said:
Personal responsibility.

Rather vague…sort of a Palinesque answer.

The Real Royal King said:
Campbell’s Cream of Chicken soup?

Can’t blame them for this one…stuff is gross!

King, I think it would only be fair to respond to your questions the same way you respond to ours. Throw out a few insults, then say we have to leave the site.

The Real Royal King said:
Alas, I must bid you all adieu, as I am off to Big “D” for a meeting with some insurance underwriters. But, I leave you two questions: #1 If the Rove, Gillespie, C of C fund-raising, Republican campaign efforts and voter suppression efforts are on the up and up, why won’t they address the question of terrorist funds? #2 Why won’t FOX “News” cover this story?

Nah, he’s just off to the Palin thread.

The Real Royal King said:
#1 If the Rove, Gillespie, C of C fund-raising, Republican campaign efforts and voter suppression efforts are on the up and up, why won’t they address the question of terrorist funds?

Show evidence that there are such funds and that the Dems are not receiving such funds.

The Real Royal King said:
#2 Why won’t FOX “News” cover this story?

Because it is not a story anymore than the story of a Bigfoot with a family of 5 is now receiving food stamps, even though that would be a more believable story than the terrorist funds myth.

This is an absolute disgrace. I wish I had time to do a full response, but all the evidence says he wasn’t joking. He consistently, repeatedly endorsed the fatwa. And as recently as 2007 in the NYT, he refused to rebuke Hamas or label it a terrorist organization, saying that is a “very, very difficult question.”

In the passage quoted above, he also forgets to mention or explain that AFTER the “Hypotheticals” show was taped, but before it aired, he asked about it by the NYT, and he stood by all his comments.

Complete disgrace!

Colby, please, oh please, find the NYT article where he was asked about the Hypotheticals show and link to it. I just don;’t have time to do it myself today, but it is necessary to evaluate the veracity of Yusuf’s latest whitewashing of his past misconduct.

timzank said:
Nah, he’s just off to the Palin thread.

He is really losing it.

Last week he was accusing people of being anti-Semitic against the Agnostic Joy Behar who thinks people should go to hell.

New York Times, May 23, 1989

http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/04/18/specials/rushdie-cat.html?_r=3

Cat Stevens Gives Support To Call for Death of Rushdie
By CRAIG R. WHITNEY

ONDON, May 22 — The musician known as Cat Stevens said in a British television program to be broadcast next week that rather than go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of the author Salman Rushdie, ”I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing.”

The singer, who adopted the name Yusuf Islam when he converted to Islam, made the remark during a panel discussion of British reactions to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s call for Mr. Rushdie to be killed for allegedly blaspheming Islam in his best-selling novel ”The Satanic Verses.” He also said that if Mr. Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ”I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like.”

”I’d try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is,” said Mr. Islam, who watched a preview of the program today and said in an interview that he stood by his comments.

Hugo Daun said:
Pablo said:
Personal responsibility.

Rather vague…sort of a Palinesque answer.

I’m not surprised that you don’t understand the concept. It means taking care of yourself.

AnonymousFinch said:
This is an absolute disgrace. I wish I had time to do a full response, but all the evidence says he wasn’t joking. He consistently, repeatedly endorsed the fatwa. And as recently as 2007 in the NYT, he refused to rebuke Hamas or label it a terrorist organization, saying that is a “very, very difficult question.” In the passage quoted above, he also forgets to mention or explain that AFTER the “Hypotheticals” show was taped, but before it aired, he asked about it by the NYT, and he stood by all his comments. Complete disgrace! Colby, please, oh please, find the NYT article where he was asked about the Hypotheticals show and link to it. I just don;’t have time to do it myself today, but it is necessary to evaluate the veracity of Yusuf’s latest whitewashing of his past misconduct.

I don’t think colby has the motivation to do that.

AnonymousFinch said:
New York Times, May 23, 1989

http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/04/18/specials/rushdie-cat.html?_r=3

Cat Stevens Gives Support To Call for Death of Rushdie
By CRAIG R. WHITNEY

ONDON, May 22 — The musician known as Cat Stevens said in a British television program to be broadcast next week that rather than go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of the author Salman Rushdie, ”I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing.”

The singer, who adopted the name Yusuf Islam when he converted to Islam, made the remark during a panel discussion of British reactions to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s call for Mr. Rushdie to be killed for allegedly blaspheming Islam in his best-selling novel ”The Satanic Verses.” He also said that if Mr. Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ”I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like.”

”I’d try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is,” said Mr. Islam, who watched a preview of the program today and said in an interview that he stood by his comments.

So, 1989 he WAS SHOWN A PREVIEW OF THE PROGRAM AND STOOD BY HIS COMMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!

Colby, the press release from Yusuf you quoted is a self-serving lie. You should update your post to link to this New York Times article, which directly and incontrovertibly impeaches the lie he is telling now.

Someone should point out that Salman Rushdie is a very lucky man with exquisite taste. There.

AnonymousFinch said:
So, 1989 he WAS SHOWN A PREVIEW OF THE PROGRAM AND STOOD BY HIS COMMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!

Colby, the press release from Yusuf you quoted is a self-serving lie. You should update your post to link to this New York Times article, which directly and incontrovertibly impeaches the lie he is telling now.

Colby, I truly believe that you are a decent, honest, and fair broker. Please don’t let me down on this. Yusuf is trying to rewrite history. If your journalistic integrity means anything to you, you cannot be come a party to that kind of cynical manipulation. Please, Colby, do the right thing.

I remeber when Yusuf first called for Rushdie’s death. Dennis Miller had a good quote at the time. “So much for that Peace Train crap, huh Cat?”

“remember’. Oops.

Pablo said:
I’m not surprised that you don’t understand the concept. It means taking care of yourself.

Ooooh, saucy!

Actually, I was looking for something more specific, like the other replies, dude…but I will accept your Palinesque “all of them”-type answer.

AnonymousFinch said:
Colby, I truly believe that you are a decent, honest, and fair broker. Please don’t let me down on this. Yusuf is trying to rewrite history. If your journalistic integrity means anything to you, you cannot be come a party to that kind of cynical manipulation. Please, Colby, do the right thing.

Good luck with that.

I remember reading an interview with Christopher Hitchens that was conducted in some pub London. This was probably the late-90′s. In the background a jukebox played the opening strains of Peace Train. (…Da-Da-Daaaaa-Da-Da-Da-d-d-d-d-daaaa-da-da-da) and Hitchens before the opening lyrics began insisted that the bartender turn it off or he would take his (considerable) business elsewhere. I’m sure Hitchens (peace be upon him) will weigh in on this little bit of fun.

wow – such a visceral reaction! I used the term “alleged” because Yusuf has specifically denied supporting the fatwa. He has clarified his comments and said that his specific quote on the BBC was taken out of context.

I’m not claiming that he was telling the truth, in fact I point out that his explanations of this controversy don’t jibe with one another. Also, the alleged crime of not watching Behind the Music? That WAS a joke.

“Colby, I truly believe that you are a decent, honest, and fair broker”

Agreed. I think he tries to be.

But it looks like that because the “rightwing” is pushing this that he won’t accept the facts on the matter. He seems to be more concerned about being viewed as promoting “rightwing” themes or stories than he is about reporting the facts.

“Looks”, “seems”. It’s all speculation on my part but if I’m wrong he can easily disprove me.

Yes, there are ‘rightwing” and “leftwing” stories or memes or issue that both sides try to promote. But just because they’re pushing a story for ideological reasons doesn’t mean it’s a story not worth covering.

What’s going on here, is that these kids who purport to present the news, or analyze the news, don’t remember, and instead of critically investigating, are simply putting out the whitewashed version that’s given to them, because to do otherwise, they’d be agreeing with conservatives. Can’t have that.

Colby Hall said:
wow – such a visceral reaction! I used the term “alleged” because Yusuf has specifically denied supporting the fatwa. He has clarified his comments and said that his specific quote on the BBC was taken out of context.

I’m not claiming that he was telling the truth, in fact I point out that his explanations of this controversy don’t jibe with one another. Also, the alleged crime of not watching Behind the Music? That WAS a joke.

Colby, as the New York Times article I linked to PROVES, it was not taken out of context and it was not a joke. He was shown a preview of the show before it aired. The NYT asked him whether he stood by the call for Rushdie’s death. He said YES!!!

This scumbag is trying to rewrite history. Don’t be a party to his fraud.

“He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.”

Cat is right. There’s all kinds of ways you could take that statement.

Mr.Papshmer said:
What’s going on here, is that these kids who purport to present the news, or analyze the news, don’t remember, and instead of critically investigating, are simply putting out the whitewashed version that’s given to them, because to do otherwise, they’d be agreeing with conservatives. Can’t have that.

You are exactly right. I couldn’t have said better myself.

Colby Hall said:
wow – such a visceral reaction! I used the term “alleged” because Yusuf has specifically denied supporting the fatwa. He has clarified his comments and said that his specific quote on the BBC was taken out of context.

I’m not claiming that he was telling the truth, in fact I point out that his explanations of this controversy don’t jibe with one another. Also, the alleged crime of not watching Behind the Music? That WAS a joke.

What you WROTE doesn’t matter!

It was your intention that matters, your “agenda”, if you will!

And nobody knows those things better than the folks who are criticizing you!

;)

What you WROTE doesn’t matter!

Exactly. Any time someone quotes something embarrassing from the left, it doesn’t matter.

Colby Hall said:
I’m not claiming that he was telling the truth, in fact I point out that his explanations of this controversy don’t jibe with one another.

It’s more that just his “explanations” that don’t jive. His claim that he was joking doesn’t “jive” with the fact that the New York Times asked whether he stood by the call for Rushdie’s death BEFORE THE PROGRAM AIRED (but after he had seen a preview of it) and he said yes!!!

I

writer said:
“He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.”

Cat is right. There’s all kinds of ways you could take that statement.

Exactly. What he meant was let’s all jump on the Peace Train!

He just wanted Rushdie tied to the tracks first.

Yusuf Islam said:
Because of imaginary scenarios set by courthouse TV interviewers, in 1989 I was drawn into making stupid and offensive jokes about Rushdie on a program called, ‘Hypotheticals’; however they were meant to lighten the moment and raise a smile – as good ol’ British sense of humor occasionally is known to do – unfortunately for me…it didn’t.

It sounds like Yusuf is trying blame British dry humor for the misunderstanding of his comments made on “Hypotheticals”. Yusuf Islam is no John Cleese (Monty Python). “Hypotheticals” is described as a show that featured a panel of notable guests to explore a hypothetical situation with moral, ethical and/or political dilemmas. Calling for the death of a person is not a funny dilema.

Colby Hall accepts Yusuf’s explanation for comments made on a British TV program and the panel on Hannity’s show did not see VH1′s Behind the Music so they are jumping to conclusions. “Hypotheticals” is one source. What Yusuf said two months prior to his appearance on “Hypotheticals” is proof he is full of crap and wishes to renew his music career in the United States.

On February 21, 1989, Yusuf Islam addressed students at Kingston University in London about his conversion to Islam and was asked about the controversy in the Muslim world and the fatwa calling for Salman Rushdie’s execution. He replied, “He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.”

Yufu’s excuse was he was only stating that blasphemy is a capital offense according to the Qur’an.

I swear he wrote Joy Behar’s excusee for calling Sharron Angle a bitch. “I call all my friends bitch.”

In the 70s, Cat Stevens was riding the crest of a successful music career. I guess royalties for his records are getting smaller and smaller.

Jon Stewart’s rally was without controversy, but having Yusef Islam as a musical guest gave his rally a black eye.

Colby Hall said:
wow – such a visceral reaction!

Colby – Pretty much every Rally4Sanity post since Yusuf took the stage has had multiple comments about the booking. In fact a few threads have devolved into primarily being a back and forth about this subject and not the topic at hand. In other words, if you had been reading the comments, you really shouldn’t be surprised.

There’s only three articles with the Cat Stevens tag on them. this one. yesterday’s article and this article: http://www.mediaite.com/online/your-moment-of-glenn-we-think-glenn-beck-should-host-snl/

I think I’d have to watch SNL if that happened.

On a more relevant note, Colby said “Even more remarkable? That none of the panelists knew that Yusuf has repeatedly clarified that his comments were completely taken out of context. Regardless of one believes that to be true, surely it merits mention?.”

You know what else merits mention, Colby? The evidence that clearly shows that Yusuf Islam was NOT joking. The commenters here have provided you with that, yet you have not changed the story in any way. Your journalistic integrity is on the line here.

writer said:
“He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.” Cat is right. There’s all kinds of ways you could take that statement.

Whoops, there it is! What people need to appreciate is that “Yusef” had it right the first time. The problem is inherent in the koran. The power and appeal of the bin ladens in this world is that they have very little difficulty citing with specificity the authority of the koran (i.e., the literal, irrefutable word of god himself!) to support their violence. And where the koran’s apologists cite conflicting statements within the koran, they need to acquaint themselves with the word “abrogation” and the fact that the latter passages of the koran–latter in time, not page numbe (the book is ordered according to length of passage, not chronologically)–are the most incendiary, violent and intolerant. Frankly, I’m pretty despondent over the whole clash-of-civilizations thing. This disease unleashed on the human race can only end badly. I hope I’m wrong. What Westerner wants to live in a world dominated by islam? (1.5 billion followers and growing, as we are often–threateningly–reminded).

Apparently the people outraged by Cat Stevens, are the same ones embracing the Sharon Angle who supports the “exercise 2nd amendment solutions” if your candidate doesn’t win..

“If Christ, in fact, said “I came not to bring peace but a sword,” it is the only prophecy in the New Testament that has been literally fulfilled.”
–Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-1899)

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
Apparently the people outraged by Cat Stevens, are the same ones embracing the Sharon Angle who supports the “exercise 2nd amendment solutions” if your candidate doesn’t win.. “If Christ, in fact, said “I came not to bring peace but a sword,” it is the only prophecy in the New Testament that has been literally fulfilled.”–Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-1899)

I don’t know how old you are, but at the time this fatwa was issued, Salman Rushdie’s life was under a very real threat (and frankly still is). Several people associated with the publication of The Satanic Verses were murdered because of it. At that time and in that atmosphere, for someone of Cat Stevens’ stature to endorse the murder of a man for writing a book is–well, I think “outrageous” is the perfect word to describe his statements. His subsequent backpeddling doesn’t wash with me. I’d like to know what passage in the koran he he cites to contradict that one which demands the penalty of death for blasphemers of “the prophet.”

My question to you is: What sane person isn’t outraged by cat stevens’ statements?

Sean68 said:
What sane person isn’t outraged by cat stevens’ statements?

Actually a better question is how can people be outraged by Cat Steven’s comment but not Sharon Angle’s comment?

“The hands that help are better far than the lips that pray.”
—Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-1899)

“Look at me! I’m an atheist!” LOL

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
Actually a better question is how can people be outraged by Cat Steven’s comment but not Sharon Angle’s comment? “The hands that help are better far than the lips that pray.”—Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-1899)

Did you miss the part where I said that several real-live human beings associated with the publication of the book were actually murdered?

What’s really funny is how the libtards are defending this cretin. Haven’t seen anyone at a TEA party call for someone’s death. What a bunch of hypocritical scumbags. The smoke and mirrors is laughable, ooh Sharon Angle, Karl rove, look over here…. Ain’t working libtards, try calling everyone racist, that’s your usual SOP.

The Real Royal King said:
Alas, I must bid you all adieu, as I am off to Big “D”

Please stay away from Dallas.

Sean68 said:
Did you miss the part where I said that several real-live human beings associated with the publication of the book were actually murdered?

And if Sharon Angle loses, and people decide to exercise 2nd amendment solutions because of that, how will that be different?

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
Actually a better question is how can people be outraged by Cat Steven’s comment but not Sharon Angle’s comment?

Which comments by Angle have your panties in a wad?

writer said:
“Look at me! I’m an atheist!” LOL

Better than being a half-ass, fake Christian, who does the minimum because he thinks it will ensure his salvation.

Fux News considers it too politically incorrect to mention actual death threats coming from the left.

But Fux, it don’t feel the need to remind people of it in every post. You’re as overbearing with your atheism as the worst religious zealot is in pushing his religion. Plus, no one really gives a shit what you think.

writer said:
Plus, no one really gives a shit what you think.

I will believe that when fake-Christian pricks like stop replying to my comments.

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
And if Sharon Angle loses, and people decide to exercise 2nd amendment solutions because of that, how will that be different?

You know damned well that’s not going to happen. And there is a panetary difference between some woman running for governor of nevada and the supreme leader and koranic authority of a major islamic country offering $1 million to any muslim who kills Salman Rushdie and claiming it the duty of all muslims to kill him. Cat Stevens endorsed this murder-for-hire of a man who wrote a book. Salman Rushdie is alive today only because people who don’t think like the ayatollah komeini or cat stevens protected him.

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
I will believe that when fake-Christian pricks like stop replying to my comments.

Fake christians like obama?

Sean68 said:
Fake christians like obama?

Actually you and writer come to mind.

Fux, the other day you were quoting Hemingway’s atheism. Now why don’t you take the next step, like Hemingway did. Do the world a favor.

Notice how Fux absolutely will not address Yusuf Islam calling for Salman Rushdie’s death. What a hypocritical POS. “Look at me! I’m politically correct!” What a stupid horse’s ass.

writer said:
Fux, the other day you were quoting Hemingway’s atheism. Now why don’t you take the next step, like Hemingway did. Do the world a favor.

No writer, unlike you I have people who depend on me. You are miserable little troglodyte who gets his freak on by hating minorities and Muslims. Death would be too good for a rotten piece of shit for you.

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
Actually you and writer come to mind.

Unlike obama, I don’t claim to be a christian.

Why, Fux? Did I write a book knocking Islam? Oh, that’s right. You don’t get offended by things like that. You’re a stupid fucking left wing tool. Please, imitate Hemingway asap.

writer said:
Fux, the other day you were quoting Hemingway’s atheism. Now why don’t you take the next step, like Hemingway did. Do the world a favor.

Hemingway even claimed his catholicism was the only thing he found to cure his impotence. So there’s hope for you, Fox News: We gladly pander person.

Sean68 said:
Unlike obama, I don’t claim to be a christian.

Okay, I stand corrected.

“Update – as a poster graciously points out, the NY Times reported at the time that Yusuf stood by his words after having watched a preview of the program:”

Colby, you are the man! Tell Dan I said you deserve a raise this week.

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
And if Sharon Angle loses, and people decide to exercise 2nd amendment solutions because of that, how will that be different?

It’s different because of the word “if”. For example, if pigs had wings, they could fly. But they don’t have wings, and they can’t fly.

All I said was that I believe in a supreme being, and now Fux has to beat it to death, along with constantly reminding us that he doesn’t believe in one. And you’ll notice, he still won’t address anything about the call for Rushdie’s death. Diversion is all he’s got, and like everything else, he isn’t any good at it.

AnonymousFinch said:
“Update – as a poster graciously points out, the NY Times reported at the time that Yusuf stood by his words after having watched a preview of the program:” Colby, you are the man! Tell Dan I said you deserve a raise this week.

You know what would have been great? If Stewart had managed to surprise cat stevens by bringing up Salman Rushdie on the stage and allowing stevens to apologize to Rushdie face to face. That would have been a moving symbolic statement on behalf of freedom of speech.

writer said:
All I said was that I believe in a supreme being, and now Fux has to beat it to death, along with constantly reminding us that he doesn’t believe in one. And you’ll notice, he still won’t address anything about the call for Rushdie’s death. Diversion is all he’s got, and like everything else, he isn’t any good at it.

I think the only rational belief is uncertainty. It’s an atheist’s rookie move to equate someone’s statement that there may be a supreme being with someone stating a belief in one of the revealed religions.

Fux is as intolerant with his atheism as the worst religious zealot. But steering onto that keeps him from ever directly addressing anything, such as Yusuf Islam calling for Salman Rushdie’s death.

Sean68 said:
You know what would have been great? If Stewart had managed to surprise cat stevens by bringing up Salman Rushdie on the stage and allowing stevens to apologize to Rushdie face to face. That would have been a moving symbolic statement on behalf of freedom of speech.

And you know what would have been even better? If Rushdie had decked him.

But seriously, Yusuf is not going to apologize to Rushdie, as is best evidenced by the fact that he won’t even admit that he did anything wrong. Yusuf could apologize right now, today. But he’s not. Instead he’s going around trying to revise history and threatening You Tube with lawsuits if they don’t take down every video of him saying Rushdie should be burned alive. If Yusuf’s beliefs have really changed, he should put a video on You Tube saying here’s what I said, and here’s why I was wrong. Maybe he should also donate some royalties from Peace Train to the families of people who were actually killed as a result of the Satanic Verses fatwa.

Sean68 said:
I think the only rational belief is uncertainty.

Thank you, Mr. Kierkegaard.

Well, not quite, I guess. Kierkegaard would have said you fling yourself into the abyss despite the uncertainty. Close enough.

writer said:
Notice how Fux absolutely will not address Yusuf Islam calling for Salman Rushdie’s death.

Typical left wing extremist lemming. Call out everything that’s bad about religion(except muslim), Christians, Conservatives. His libtard buddies shoot themselves in the foot with a headliner that wants to kill someone, and it’s Angle’s fault. Go figure.

Colby Hall said:
He has clarified his comments and said that his specific quote on the BBC was taken out of context.

Let’s see the lib excuses:
1. It was a joke
2. Bitch means good
3. It was out of context

Out of context? That what he said. You libs are delusional.

Rev. Wright said his remarks were taken out of “context” when they were taken from CDs he was selling at his church!

I surprised that it hasn’t been mentioned that these comments were made 20 years ago. IMO that’s pretty dam relevant.

In a 2000 Rolling Stone magazine interview:

I’m very sad that this seems to be the No. 1 question people want to discuss. I had nothing to do with the issue other than what the media created. I was innocently drawn into the whole controversy. So, after many years, I’m glad at least now that I have been given the opportunity to explain to the public and fans my side of the story in my own words. At a lecture, back in 1989, I was asked a question about blasphemy according to Islamic Law, I simply repeated the legal view according to my limited knowledge of the Scriptural texts, based directly on historical commentaries of the Qur’an. The next day the newspaper headlines read, “Cat Says, Kill Rushdie.” I was abhorred [appalled?], but what could I do? I was a new Muslim. If you ask a Bible student to quote the legal punishment of a person who commits blasphemy in the Bible, he would be dishonest if he didn’t mention Leviticus 24:16.

which is
16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him; as well the stranger, as the home-born, when he blasphemeth the Name, shall be put to death.

So yes, he said some ugly things, over 20 years ago, and somehow we judge him all this time later for those ugly words, out of hundreds of thousands, as unfit to sing peace train, and attend the rally for sanity.
What kind of fucked up standard is that. It’s just Hannity and Fox doing what they do. Digging an ogly thing out of a person’s life and highlighting it as if it’s the sum total of that person. It’s ridiculous and unfair, and the kind of condemning judgmental bullshit we should be rejecting.

When the press and a politician were condemned for bringing up 20 year old comments from ODonnell and Paul I agreed.
20 years from now will we be condemning the guy who stomped on a woman’s head as if such an act can never ever be forgiven and you can’t be allowed to offer anything positive ever again. What a horrible unjust standard that is.
It’s one more non news story blown out of proportion for the sake of ratings and political agenda. It’s exactly the kind of setting ants on fire crap that Stewart correctly pointed out as our media failing to do a positive job.
Shame on those of you who are so eager to crap on the rally because of this. It should be beneath you.

Something isn’t adding up. Fux claims to be against all organized religions, yet he always jumps to the defense of Muslims. Could it be that the atheism is a ruse, and he’s actually a Muslim? That would explain why his feathers get so ruffled any time someone says something about Muslims.

Cosmos, Cat was quoting the Koran. Has it been changed in the last twenty years? It no longer says what Cat was quoting?

CosmosDan said:
So yes, he said some ugly things, over 20 years ago, and somehow we judge him all this time later for those ugly words, out of hundreds of thousands, as unfit to sing peace train, and attend the rally for sanity.
What kind of fucked up standard is that.

First, tell that to Salman Rushdie and the others who still live in fear over the fatwa 20 years later.

Second, I might accept that issue if he clearly and unequivocally denounced what he said in the past and admitted he was wrong. He has not done that. He’s denied that it was ever said.

Third, there are plenty of more recent events that give reason to be skeptical about this guy. He has: (1) contributed large sums of money to “Islamic charities” that are fronts for terrorists organizations; (2) openly associated with racial clerics who preach jihad agains the U.S.; and (3) in 2007, in the New York Times, he refused to criticize Hamas or admit that it is a terrorist organization.

“Shame on those of you who are so eager to crap on the rally because of this. It should be beneath you.”

Sorry, who is “crapping” in the rally? Folks here are raising the question of the propiety of inviting an artist who advocated the murder of a fellow artist for practicing his art. And at a rally against extremism.

That’s puzzling, is it not?

Anyway, here’s what Mr. Rushdie has said: “I’ve always liked Stewart and Colbert but what on earth was Cat Yusuf Stevens Islam doing on that stage? If he’s a “good Muslim” like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar then I’m the Great Pumpkin. Happy Halloween.”

And: “Why do people go to such lengths to ignore these aspects of Yusuf Islam’s character and philosophy?”

That’s the question: Not the rally but Mr. Islam’s attendance.

CosmosDan said:
When the press and a politician were condemned for bringing up 20 year old comments from ODonnell and Paul I agreed.

There’s a big difference between saying, “20 years ago I didn’t believe in masturbation” and “20 years ago I called for the public burning of an innocent man.”

CosmosDan said:
CosmosDan says:
November 1, 2010 at 1:24 pm CosmosDan(Quote)
At a lecture, back in 1989, I was asked a question about blasphemy according to Islamic Law, I simply repeated the legal view according to my limited knowledge of the Scriptural texts, based directly on historical commentaries of the Qur’an

Total lie!

http://pajamasmedia.com/eddriscoll/2010/10/30/video-riding-the-peace-train/

It must be nice to go through life as gullible as you are.

The left never explains why they’re able to point out the intolerant aspects of every other religion, but when it comes to Islam, one of the most intolerant, they believe nothing should be said. It’s not politically correct. Where the hell did they come up with that rule?

Cat Stevens was in his early 40s when he made those remarks. Plenty old enough to know better. But he does quote the koran correctly. I’d like to know where in the koran it says to show mercy to anyone who defames “the prophet.” Did cat really change his mind or just learn what’s kosher and what ain’t in Western Civ. I know one thing, so long as you’re not a white, conservative christian, liberals have a very short memory.

” It’s not politically correct. Where the hell did they come up with that rule?”

I think – and it’s just speculation for the most part – it’s because they view Islam as almost a race. How many times have you heard someone on the left say criticism of Islam (fair or not) is “racist”?

And because they view Islam as a religion of “people of color” and as a non-western one, they see criticism of it as being racist or ethnocentrist or bigoted.

As you note, they’ll (I’m generalizing of course) defend or excuse practices of Islam that they’d never defend in a western religion.

Plus, because conservatives are critical of it, there’s a knee-jerk need to defend it. The enemy of my enemy sort of thing.

It’s very strange, isn’t it?

Steve, I think you’ve nailed it.

Compare and contrast what the Christian evangelical Jerry Falwell had to say about 9/11 attacks with that of the Muslim Cat Stevens.

Cat Stevens:
I wish to express my heartfelt horror at the indiscriminate terrorist attacks committed against innocent people of the United States yesterday. While it is still not clear who carried out the attack, it must be stated that no right-thinking follower of Islam could possibly condone such an action. The Qur’an equates the murder of one innocent person with the murder of the whole of humanity. We pray for the families of all those who lost their lives in this unthinkable act of violence as well as all those injured; I hope to reflect the feelings of all Muslims and people around the world whose sympathies go out to the victims of this sorrowful moment

Jerry Falwell:
“The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way — all of them who have tried to secularize America — I point the finger in their face and say ‘you helped this happen.’” –on the 9/11 attacks

Somebody took it seriously.

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/theo_van_gogh/index.html

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
Compare and contrast what the Christian evangelical Jerry Falwell had to say about 9/11 attacks with that of the Muslim Cat Stevens.

Cat Stevens:
I wish to express my heartfelt horror at the indiscriminate terrorist attacks committed against innocent people of the United States yesterday. While it is still not clear who carried out the attack, it must be stated that no right-thinking follower of Islam could possibly condone such an action. The Qur’an equates the murder of one innocent person with the murder of the whole of humanity. We pray for the families of all those who lost their lives in this unthinkable act of violence as well as all those injured; I hope to reflect the feelings of all Muslims and people around the world whose sympathies go out to the victims of this sorrowful moment

Jerry Falwell:
“The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way — all of them who have tried to secularize America — I point the finger in their face and say ‘you helped this happen.’” –on the 9/11 attacks

Fine, Jerry Falwell is a jerk, and if he were alive today I would not invite him to any event I host and I would not cheer him on stage.

Now, can we get back to the issue at hand, and will you admit that Yusuf Islam is thug and a liar?

Difference is, Fux, while you don’t mind criticizing Falwell, you’re very averse to ever criticizing Islam. For an atheist, doesn’t seem like you’d mind pointing out the bad things about either one.

AnonymousFinch said:
Now, can we get back to the issue at hand, and will you admit that Yusuf Islam is thug and a liar?

He is a religious nut. I condemn all religious nuts who take their faith too far and their religious texts too literal.

But with Muslims…..not so much.

And then when we cite an outrage (comment, act, et cetera) from a Muslim (and yes, most Muslims are fine people), the left’s reaction is to try and equate it with something from a Christian believer. “Well, Timothy McVeigh was a Christian”, et cetera.

They simply cannot condemn the Islamic act or behavior. They have to point elsewhere. Somehow pointing to the outrage by a Christian excuses those from a Muslim.

Simply put: I think they view opponents of radical Islam as a greater danger than the Islamists.

I was wondering where the right-wingers were getting this gem from. Hannity: figures.

“On February 21, 1989, Yusuf Islam addressed students at Kingston University in London about his conversion to Islam and was asked about the controversy in the Muslim world and the fatwa calling for Salman Rushdie’s execution. He replied, “He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.”

Newspapers quickly denounced what was seen as Yusuf Islam’s support for the assassination of Rushdie and the next day Yusuf released a statement saying that he was not personally encouraging anybody to be a vigilante, and that he was only stating that blasphemy is a capital offense according to the Qur’an.”

Sounds to me like a good reason to not be Muslim, but Hannity and friends are just trying to undermine any attempt to restore sanity. Crazy-talk is what they prefer on FoxPAC. (That’s why they haven’t fired Beck.)

So Yusuf saying that Rushdie should die is excusable, but Hannity quoting him is crazy talk. Gotta love that far left mindset. Any mention of something bad coming from Islam has to be diverted elsewhere at all costs.

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
Compare and contrast what the Christian evangelical Jerry Falwell had to say about 9/11 attacks with that of the Muslim Cat Stevens.

Why? Falwell was a goof too.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/07/deathforrushdie_advocate_headl.html

SteveMG said:
And then when we cite an outrage (comment, act, et cetera) from a Muslim (and yes, most Muslims are fine people), the left’s reaction is to try and equate it with something from a Christian believer. “Well, Timothy McVeigh was a Christian”, et cetera. They simply cannot condemn the Islamic act or behavior. They have to point elsewhere. Somehow pointing to the outrage by a Christian excuses those from a Muslim. Simply put: I think they view opponents of radical Islam as a greater danger than the Islamists.

Despite the fact that McVeigh wasn’t a christian and didn’t carry out his crime in the name of christianity.

Penguin60 said:
Why? Falwell was a goof too.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/07/deathforrushdie_advocate_headl.html

Jerry Falwell was an influential religious leader whose teachings, church and University continue to mold the lives of many people..

Wait a second: Criticizing the invitation of someone who advocated the murder of a person for their art is crazy talk?

Not the advocacy of murder? But criticism of that advocacy? Or are both equally crazy?

What the heck is the problem here? The unwillingness to acknowledge that, horrors!, the conservatives may have a point? Is that the problem?

If you do, that doesn’t mean you’re a wingnut or you’re Hannitized.

Lordy, you guys so much don’t want to be associated with conservatives that you’re twisting your thinking into all sorts of logical inconsistencies.

So Falwell influenced many minds, but the Koran doesn’t. That explains it.

Fox News: We gladly gin up anger and fear for ratings. said:
Jerry Falwell was an influential religious leader whose teachings, church and University continue to mold the lives of many people..

They also have a great hockey arena, the LaHaye. My dealings on their campus and with their students was very favorable. Falwell was still a goof.

“some_dude” and “the royal racist king” seem to be the same person. What other names does this person use?

writer said:
So Yusuf saying that Rushdie should die is excusable, but Hannity quoting him is crazy talk. Gotta love that far left mindset. Any mention of something bad coming from Islam has to be diverted elsewhere at all costs.

That’s not the point. The crazy talk is trying to dump on the rally as a whole, because of something Yusaf said over 20 years ago.

It seems like pretty bad judgment to me to continue to condemn someone for 20 year old words, and transparent and foolish to try and trash the rally as a whole for that one participant’s 20 year old comments. It’s about perspective.

I’ll keep repeating, I think there are some important realistic discussions to be had about Islam, and Muslims condemning terrorism, but that discussion needs to include an honest assessment of our own actions and their consequences. Should we get a complete pass on all the civilians we’ve killed because we’re the good guys or are Muslims allowed to criticize that honestly?

SteveMG said:
” It’s not politically correct. Where the hell did they come up with that rule?”

I think – and it’s just speculation for the most part – it’s because they view Islam as almost a race. How many times have you heard someone on the left say criticism of Islam (fair or not) is “racist”?

And because they view Islam as a religion of “people of color” and as a non-western one, they see criticism of it as being racist or ethnocentrist or bigoted.

As you note, they’ll (I’m generalizing of course) defend or excuse practices of Islam that they’d never defend in a western religion.

Plus, because conservatives are critical of it, there’s a knee-jerk need to defend it. The enemy of my enemy sort of thing.

It’s very strange, isn’t it?

During the 2nd world war we interred over 100,000 Japanese Americans but only 11.000 Germans Americans. Do you suppose that has something to do with one looks like us and one doesn’t?

I’d say that there is a real element of bigotry involved in the anti Muslim sentiment we see.
I really haven’t seen people excuse objectionable practices of Islam, that they would condemn in Christianity. What seems to be condemned repeatedly is lumping all 1.5 billion Muslims into one group as if they all practice and believe the same way.

AnonymousFinch said:
There’s a big difference between saying, “20 years ago I didn’t believe in masturbation” and “20 years ago I called for the public burning of an innocent man.”

That is obviously true, but it’s unfair to judge either person on the basis of a 20 year old comment. What should be obvious is that human beings are more complex than one comment they made.

It’s interesting. The Wikipedia page on this topic has changed since this morning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_Stevens'_comments_about_Salman_Rushdie

Now it says, “On February 21, 1989, Yusuf Islam addressed students at Kingston University in London about his conversion to Islam and was asked about the controversy in the Muslim world and the fatwa calling for Salman Rushdie’s execution. He replied, “He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.”

Newspapers quickly denounced what was seen as Yusuf Islam’s support for the assassination of Rushdie and the next day Yusuf released a statement saying that he was not personally encouraging anybody to be a vigilante, and that he was only stating that blasphemy is a capital offense according to the Qur’an.”

“writer” says:
“So Yusuf saying that Rushdie should die is excusable, but Hannity quoting him is crazy talk.”

Did Hannity quote him out of context as the right is wont to do?

I have no idea why someone would convert to Islam. For what it’s worth, I read Satanic Verses and thought it was a pretty clever and interesting novel. If I were a follower of Mohammad, I’m sure I would have had a different view of it. Point is, seems like Yusuf walked back from his position about the fatwa. Not far enough for the far right, but nothing ever is far enough.

Killing is rationalized by fundamentalists of all strips. They’re all screwed up. The fatwa has been lifted. Is that because Sushdie unwrote the book?

writer said:
Cosmos, Cat was quoting the Koran. Has it been changed in the last twenty years? It no longer says what Cat was quoting?

No, but as you know, people’s view and interpretation of what they consider scripture can change.

AnonymousFinch said:
First, tell that to Salman Rushdie and the others who still live in fear over the fatwa 20 years later.

Second, I might accept that issue if he clearly and unequivocally denounced what he said in the past and admitted he was wrong. He has not done that. He’s denied that it was ever said.

Third, there are plenty of more recent events that give reason to be skeptical about this guy. He has: (1) contributed large sums of money to “Islamic charities” that are fronts for terrorists organizations; (2) openly associated with racial clerics who preach jihad agains the U.S.; and (3) in 2007, in the New York Times, he refused to criticize Hamas or admit that it is a terrorist organization.

I’m not going to argue whether he was dead serious at the time or whether he recanted in an acceptable way. My point is that to take the 20 year old questionable comments of one participant and make a big deal out of them to try and discredit the overall message of the rally, is ridiculous.

CosmosDan said:
I’m not going to argue whether he was dead serious at the time or whether he recanted in an acceptable way. My point is that to take the 20 year old questionable comments of one participant and make a big deal out of them to try and discredit the overall message of the rally, is ridiculous.

I’m not trying to discredit the rally. I couldn’t care less. I am saying that the guy shouldn’t have been invited and shouldn’t have ben cheered.

CosmosDan said: Yusuf Islam said:
If you ask a Bible student to quote the legal punishment of a person who commits blasphemy in the Bible, he would be dishonest if he didn’t mention Leviticus 24:16.

Yusuf Islam compared a Biblical passage to the Qur’an rgarding blashphemy. He did that to justify Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s bounty for the head of Salman Rushdie. Islam was using ancient text to deal with a modern issue. I don’t the Pope issued a fatwa against the author of “The Last Temptation of Christ” and that someone like Luciano Pavarotti, who was Catholic, would justify the actions of the Pope.

So Yusuf Islam’s argument is full of self-serving crap.

SteveMG said:
Wait a second: Criticizing the invitation of someone who advocated the murder of a person for their art is crazy talk?

Not the advocacy of murder? But criticism of that advocacy? Or are both equally crazy?

What the heck is the problem here? The unwillingness to acknowledge that, horrors!, the conservatives may have a point? Is that the problem?

No. It’s the idea that he shouldn’t be invited because of some ugly things he said 20 years ago that is ridiculous. Things that he has tried to explain and said he did not support several times.

The whole concept of picking out an ugly public moment and presenting that as typical of the person or being worthy of 20 years of condemnation is foolishness, and obviously so.

CosmosDan said:
No, but as you know, people’s view and interpretation of what they consider scripture can change.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/011-taqiyya.htm

And this from the New York Times:

NYT: For all your devotion to education and good deeds, government officials in various countries have tried to link you to extremist groups, including Hamas. What do you think of Hamas?
Islam: That’s an extremely loaded question.
NYT: Can you try to answer it?

Islam: I have never supported a terrorist group or any group that did other than charity and good to humankind.

NYT: O.K., but many of us here in the States would like to see moderate Muslims make more of an effort to denounce the extremist fringe of the faith. Very few mainstream Muslims have publicly criticized their radical brethren.

Islam: If I am not an example of that, then tell me, Who is?

NYT: So would you say you have contempt for a terrorist group like Hamas?

Islam: I wouldn’t put those words in my mouth. I wouldn’t say anything on that issue. I’m here to talk about peace. I’m a man who does want peace for this world, and I don’t think you will achieve that by putting people into corners and asking them very, very difficult questions about very contentious issues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/07/magazine/07WWLN_Q4.t.html?_r=1&ex=1184040000&en=89ca9abec68275b3&ei=5070

Of course, that was way back in 2007 when he said that.

Calvin said:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/011-taqiyya.htm

And this from the New York Times:

NYT: For all your devotion to education and good deeds, government officials in various countries have tried to link you to extremist groups, including Hamas. What do you think of Hamas?
Islam: That’s an extremely loaded question.
NYT: Can you try to answer it?

Islam: I have never supported a terrorist group or any group that did other than charity and good to humankind.

NYT: O.K., but many of us here in the States would like to see moderate Muslims make more of an effort to denounce the extremist fringe of the faith. Very few mainstream Muslims have publicly criticized their radical brethren.

Islam: If I am not an example of that, then tell me, Who is?

NYT: So would you say you have contempt for a terrorist group like Hamas?

Islam: I wouldn’t put those words in my mouth. I wouldn’t say anything on that issue. I’m here to talk about peace. I’m a man who does want peace for this world, and I don’t think you will achieve that by putting people into corners and asking them very, very difficult questions about very contentious issues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/07/magazine/07WWLN_Q4.t.html?_r=1&ex=1184040000&en=89ca9abec68275b3&ei=5070

Of course, that was way back in 2007 when he said that.

The most amazing thing about this is that the NYT (1) admitted that Hamas is a terrorist group and (2) correctly stated that “very few mainstream Muslims have publicly criticized their radical brethren.” I doubt either one of those statements would make it past the NYT editors today, when the supposed islamophobia of the right is the meme of the day.

AnonymousFinch says: “I doubt either one of those statements would make it past the NYT editors today, when the supposed islamophobia of the right is the meme of the day.”

Unlike FoxPAC, the NYTimes doesn’t harp on “the meme of the day.”

AnonymousFinch said:
I’m not trying to discredit the rally. I couldn’t care less. I am saying that the guy shouldn’t have been invited and shouldn’t have ben cheered.

Sp you’re making a judgment call about what other people should think about Yusaf? Okay,

Calvin said:
Of course, that was way back in 2007 when he said that.

Hamas is a lot more than just a military group that attacks Israel. A fair question might have been to ask what he thinks of Hamas concerning several of it’s facets including the charity and aide they give Palestine and their attacks on Israel. I think part of the problem is we need to be willing to hear criticism of Israel and our own policies rather than simply expect people like Yusaf to simply say the words we want to hear.

WOW…

Some of the self-described “conservatives” posting here are truly pitiable creatures.

The bottom line is (no matter what your personal opinion of the man may be) Yusuf was NOT given a platform for his religious/political beliefs at the Stewart/Colbert rally, he was merely invited to SING…and he did so BEAUTIFULLY.

Not everything is political, no matter how hard y’all may try to make it so.

All this indignation is less about Yusuf than it is another bold example of your pathological need to vilify “liberals” with whatever tenuous correlations you can possibly invent between them and the many things you fear…

…which is ironically (and precisely) the type of extreme behavior that the Stewart/Colbert rally was condemning.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled (and fervently indulged) misery.

Hugo Daun said:
All this indignation is less about Yusuf than it is another bold example of your pathological need to vilify “liberals” with whatever tenuous correlations you can possibly invent between them and the many things you fear…

Yusuf doesn’t need to be vilified; he is vile.

And I am tired of the Left’s Polanskization of morality. Drugging and anally raping a 14 year old is wrong, even if you’re a great director; calling for the death of an innocent author is wrong, even if you sing beautifully.

AnonymousFinch said:
Yusuf doesn’t need to be vilified; he is vile. And I am tired of the Left’s Polanskization of morality. Drugging and anally raping a 14 year old is wrong, even if you’re a great director; calling for the death of an innocent author is wrong, even if you sing beautifully.

She was 13.

CosmosDan said:
Hamas is a lot more than just a military group that attacks Israel. A fair question might have been to ask what he thinks of Hamas concerning several of it’s facets including the charity and aide they give Palestine and their attacks on Israel. I think part of the problem is we need to be willing to hear criticism of Israel and our own policies rather than simply expect people like Yusaf to simply say the words we want to hear.

Have you seen this clip?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fSvyv0urTE

Over looking the fact that his boss is a Saudi who ” understands why 911 happened.” Sean Insannity-hero to the peabrained teabaggin masses.
Anonymous Finch-totally disgusting that you would choose that avatar-you do realize he defended a black man against white trash liars, right? Definately NOT your side pal. May i suggest Homer Simpson or Joe McCarthy? About as ignorant as Quitter quoting Clarence Darrow, but i “understand “.

CosmosDan said:
Hamas is a lot more than just a military group that attacks Israel.

Yes, they also attack Palestinians.

Hugo Daun said:
The bottom line is (no matter what your personal opinion of the man may be) Yusuf was NOT given a platform for his religious/political beliefs at the Stewart/Colbert rally, he was merely invited to SING…and he did so BEAUTIFULLY.

Perhaps you can explain that to Salman Rushdie. He doesn’t seem to get it.

Hugo Daun said:
The bottom line is (no matter what your personal opinion of the man may be) Yusuf was NOT given a platform for his religious/political beliefs at the Stewart/Colbert rally, he was merely invited to SING…and he did so BEAUTIFULLY.

What a joke. If David Duke was asked to sing but not “given a platform” that would be OK?
The hypocrisy of the left holds no bounds.

Pablo said:
Perhaps you can explain that to Salman Rushdie. He doesn’t seem to get it.

From Hot Air:

Salman Rushdie: I talked to Jon Stewart about Yusuf Islam, and he doesn’t much care

I spoke to Jon Stewart about Yusuf Islam’s appearance. He said he was sorry it upset me, but really, it was plain that he was fine with it. Depressing.

http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2010/11/02/salman-rushdie-i-talked-to-jon-stewart-about-yusuf-islam-and-he-doesnt-much-care/