We are not looking at the son of black American parents … we’re dealing with a nominally Christian white American parent and a sub-Sarahan African Muslim parent, and we know that we are. No Arab Christians here either, and we know that too. The only identity matching his name is a Muslim one.

That this identity is telegraphed to the whole Muslim world via the media, and that at some point Obama would be forced to deal with it, may be lost on you but it isn’t on the umma – and therefore it is worth discussing.

The point being, no one besides Muslims, Arabs and modern-day American blacks – for whom (and for no one else) it became fashionable to give their Christian children names that are found all over Africa – give their children Arabic names. For American blacks, that gesture might be incidental; but that was not the case during the entire history of our respective civilizations. When any other society names their child with an Arabic name, it means only one of two things: either (1) they’re Arab or (2) they’re Muslim.

As it applies to Baraka Hussein Obama: we know he isn’t an Arab, or from American black parentage. We also know he didn’t just name himself; someone named him. (It happens to be his father’s name, so nothing nefarious here necessarily.) But significant? You bet.

It’s clear his mother didn’t assert any Christian identity with regards to his name, not even a middle name; nor did she appear to assert any Christian identity when he was sent to madrassa instead of the American School at Kuala Lumpur, and raised under two different Muslim heads of household, until middle school.

Not until he was returned to Hawaii and raised by his maternal grandparents did his environmental influences revert to what we Americans consider, and should consider, “normal”.

The fact that you’ve never head of me before has no bearing on my logic WRT your bigotry toward those with Arabic names who may or may not be Muslim. Nor does anything else in your comment above. Face it: you’re a bigot. It’s understandable–what with those who are of that double culture who want to kill those of us who are not. I’ve even admitted to much of my bigotry toward Arab Muslims on my site when the UAE ports issue was in the news. (Not to mention how Arab Muslims have treated black Africans over the past several centuries.)

The problem with you, Ms. Schussel, is that you view your bigotry as a feature rather than a bug.

… he [Steyn] constantly laments the growing lists of countries and cities in Europe where Mohammed is the most popular new baby name. Why would he do that?

The money quote: “It’s the demography, stupid.”

[Vinnie]

Let’s use your own “logic,” Ms. Schlusselupagus [Roman?]. Your last name, Schlussel, has a decidedly Germanic ring to it.

Is it not safe for us to assume, then, that you may be a Nazi? Or at the very least, a sympathizer? Because, according to you, we are all allowed to judge someone by their name.

Her position is what it is; no need to caricature it further by (1) glossing over the difference between a given name and a family name, (2) equating making judgments of any kind to making “safe assumptions” or (3) confusing a case of mistaken identity with the real thing.

On #1 – Debbie’s “logic” – keep in mind that she is opposing a categorical negative: “not allowed to judge people by their [Muslim] names” means NO names are allowed, so the opposite is not necessarily *all* names or *any* name. To be fair, we ought to check the examples she provides.

I did; it turns out that both she & Steyn deal primarily with first or “given” names. When we compare apples to apples the idea isn’t nearly so ridiculous as your conjecture implies: her first name, Deborah, is a Hebrew name; Nazi parents did not, as a rule, give their children Hebrew names; therefore it’s extremely unlikely her family background was Nazi. Nothing ridiculous in that judgment whatsoever.

Debora – Deba, Deborah, Debby, Debra; 21.09.
hebräisch; emsige Biene

On #2: Debbie’s “logic” does not request blanket permission to make “safe assumptions” about anyone or anything, it requests the removal of a blanket taboo that anything be concluded whatsoever. The conclusion that a child born in Germany in the 1930’s named Zachariah was not destined for the Hitler Youth is a good example of where a warranted conclusion ought not be prevented by the kind of blanket taboo suggested by your ridicule.

Having said that, of course I condemn the the pseudo-science of “namerology”, where people determine a person’s stool softness, ticklish zones and favorite color based on their name. And I’ll agree that whoever believes in that is kooky; but identity is a different matter entirely. I condemn idol-worship of names as much as the next guy; it’s what’s behind the name that interests me (though I can’t speak for Debbie or anyone else). The Baraka Husseins of the world – like the Mohammed babies of Steyn’s article – didn’t just name themselves. Like it or not, [one-time] Muslim identity is embodied in the name. Did Mrs. Obama ever consider naming her son Peter or George? Why did the parents bestow on their child a Muslim name, the very embodiment of Muslim identity[, apartheid and supremacy]?

[Beth]

I guess all the black men and women (and children!) in America with Muslim-sounding names (Aisha being a very popular one) are all now terrorists or sympathizers now, aren’t they? HA!

No, nor do they have Muslim identities, so they’re not the issue. And to mistake one for the other would be idiotic like you suggest. But there is no case of mistaken identity here. We are not looking at the son of black American parents, who might be just as apt to name their boy Carlos or Kwame as they are Jamal (or their girl Keisha vs. Aisha); we’re dealing with a nominally Christian white American parent and a sub-Sarahan African Muslim parent, and we know that we are. No Arab Christians here either, and we know that too. The only identity matching his name is a Muslim one.

That this identity is telegraphed to the whole Muslim world via the media, and that at some point Obama would be forced to deal with it, may be lost on you but it isn’t on the umma – and therefore it is worth discussing. The concern isn’t without precedent either; Lackawanna and Mike Hawash are emblematic of a wider susceptibility to the appeal of Muslim identity that causes abrupt psychic changes in otherwise rational people.

But like I said in an earlier post, this is a “fringe” concern. My real worry is that he has never confronted his family’s identity in the way that Walid Shoebat or Ali Sina have, doesn’t understand his vulnerability to the charge of apostasy, and thus won’t be fully prepared to deal with it when the time comes. Maybe my worry is unfounded. But only Obama himself has the power (and I dare say the obligation) to understand where he fits into the big picture and bring clarity to his own situation as eloquently and forcefully as do Shoebat, Sina, Wafa Sultan or Ayaan Hirsi Ali on a regular basis.

Obama is scum just being a liberal, he doesn’t even need more fuel added to his bio. Being a liberal is enough for me to not like him.

All Muslims are terrorists. All people with Arabic names should be questioned because they might be sympathetic to terrorists.

Nobody is taking you seriously, buddy.

- Arabic does not equal Muslim

True.

- Muslim does not equal terrorist

Wrong. Now we move on to double jeopardy where the stakes are, oh say, your life. Muslim equals follower Mohammad and the Koran. Koran equals sharia law. Sharia law equals slavery or death to infidels. Infidel equals Christian or Jew. You know nothing of the nature of the enemy.

- One’s faith is not defined by someone else’s view of what it should be

No. But its defined by the people or barbarians that practice it.

- People should be judged by their words and their actions, not their name or their heritage

Ohhh, almost. But I’ll give you partial credit. People should be judged only by their actions. No muslim outrage at terrorism equals moral corruption. Moral corruption equals sick b@st@rds.

So by the property of transitivity your argument is total bs.

- Arabic does not equal Muslim

True.

- Muslim does not equal terrorist

Wrong. Now we move on to double jeopardy where the stakes are, oh say, your life. Muslim equals follower Mohammad and the Koran. Koran equals sharia law. Sharia law equals slavery or death to infidels. Infidel equals Christian or Jew. You know nothing of the nature of the enemy.

- One’s faith is not defined by someone else’s view of what it should be

No. But its defined by the people or barbarians that practice it.

- People should be judged by their words and their actions, not their name or their heritage

Ohhh, almost. But I’ll give you partial credit. People should be judged only by their actions. No muslim outrage at terrorism equals moral corruption. Moral corruption equals sick bastards.

So by the property of transitivity your argument is total crap.

Gee, Debs, I’m shocked you’re not threatening to sue because Allahpundit had the temerity to link you.

Let’s use your own “logic,” Ms. Schlusselupagus.

Your last name, Schlussel, has a decidedly Germanic ring to it.

Is it not safe for us to assume, then, that you may be a Nazi? Or at the very least, a sympathizer?

Because, according to you, we are all allowed to judge someone by their name.

Vinnie on December 20, 2006 at 11:51 PM

Newsflash for Vinnie: America defeated the Nazis over 60 years ago. Germans aren’t the enemy anymore.

So, how f’ing stupid are you? We are at war with a people that will do anything for the ummah. Apparently you are completely ignorant of the nature of this enemy.

If we can’t even contemplate the possibility that his past muslim experiences may have the ability to influence future decisions … or his loyalty, then why the hell do we even care anymore? Let anyone run for political office and give them carte blanche.

“Muslim does not equal terrorist”

With everything that has happened and will probably continue to happen with ever increasing frequency … “muslim” most certainly equals terrorist. The tacit approval by the worldwide muslim population leaves a rational person no choice but to be wary of all.

“People should be judged by their words and their actions, not their name or their heritage”

Exactly … I’ve heard the words (or lack of), witnessed the actions (or lack of) and conclude that anything touched by the cult of islam must be looked upon with a critical and wary eye. That’s not saying one can’t be examined and found to be free of islamic influence, but it’s better to have questioned than not at all.

Since we (or actually just me–Debbie Schlussel) are now not allowed to judge people by their names-that’s now strictly not allowed by these few minor pundit police who are mad I’d dare note Barack Obama’s middle name, are you now going to condemn Mark Steyn?

Condemn seems a bit harsh, but I’ve certainly deprecated him. The eloquence and humor in his opinions do not abate their odiousness.

As for your post:

- Arabic does not equal Muslim
- Muslim does not equal terrorist
- One’s faith is not defined by someone else’s view of what it should be
- People should be judged by their words and their actions, not their name or their heritage

I’d certainly never vote for him, but I don’t need to stoop to questioning of his loyalty to this country to make that decision.

Wow, this is all coming as a bit of a surprise. Someone is actually reading Deschamps Blog. You wouldn’t know it from the amount of comments I get, but I’m not complaining.Yesterday, Blogs of War cited my post regarding Debbie Schlussel’s attack on….

Speaking of lacking critical thinking skills, you moron, Baldilocks wasn’t a member of the Nation of Islam. Her parents were, YEARS ago.

I guess all the black men and women (and children!) in America with Muslim-sounding names (Aisha being a very popular one) are all now terrorists or sympathizers now, aren’t they? HA! And I guess all of the black Americans who have African names are now real Africans, too? How about those named…John Smith? Are they really Englishmen?

And yeah…Schlussel…sounds awfully German to me. Let me guess, you’re a Jewish Nazi sympathizer?

Idiot. Aren’t Obama’s left-of-Pelosi-and-Kennedy politics ENOUGH? You must have so little faith in your own political views that you have to resort to this risible nonsense. Pathetic. Next I suppose you’ll be saying he would declare war on the British–what with him being of Kenyan descent. You know, that Mau Mau is just IN HIS BLOOD. “One drop,” etc. etc.

P.S. My last name is Cleaver–OMG! I guess that makes me a Black Panther!!! Call the FBI!
(Oh wait, I forgot–the FBI sympathizes with terrorists too, right?)

Debbie Schlussel: The “Truther” of the Paranoid Extreme Right.

Let’s use your own “logic,” Ms. Schlusselupagus.

Your last name, Schlussel, has a decidedly Germanic ring to it.

Is it not safe for us to assume, then, that you may be a Nazi? Or at the very least, a sympathizer?

Because, according to you, we are all allowed to judge someone by their name.

Since we (or actually just me–Debbie Schlussel) are now not allowed to judge people by their names-that’s now strictly not allowed by these few minor pundit police who are mad I’d dare note Barack Obama’s middle name, are you now going to condemn Mark Steyn? After all, Steyn’s book that Allah lauded–as did this illogical “ex”-Nation of Islam follower Baldilocks (whose site I never heard of until today, but who apparently loves Steyn and his comments about Muslim names)–is full of lamentations about people named Mohammed and Mahmoud being terrorists-Steyn points out several with those specific names. And he constantly laments the growing lists of countries and cities in Europe where Mohammed is the most popular new baby name. Why would he do that? That’s “bigoted” and “racist” (Islam’s now a race?) by the new standards now unilaterally imposed on me by these few holier than thou sites, including those two linked above, who’ve appointed themselves the Muslim PC police. After all, we can’t judge people by their Muslim names, right? Shame on you, Mark Steyn. That’s intolerant, just like Schlussel, right?. And while you’re at it, you might as well condemn Mark about noting the Muslim birth rates in Europe (something I’ve also written about for years), b/c why is that a problem? We can’t judge people based on their religion like Debbie Schlussel did, right?

Allah, just asking. The sites you linked to with approval about my post have the same illogic as you on this issue. So should I tell Mark Steyn, you were really lying when you said you liked his book–b/c isn’t that whole “judging people by their Muslim names” thing is just far-fetched? I mean “aren’t you skeptical in the extreme with the reasoning and the conclusions” of Steyn in judging these people named Mohammed?

Again, just asking. And I suppose Drudge is also a racist, too, b/c he posted a story on how Mohammed is now the most popular UK name for a baby. Why should we care? That there is even a story is racist and bigoted, right? We can’t judge people by their Muslim names. That’s just wrong.

What would denouncing the horrific and violent acts muslims have visited upon mankind solve? Are you for real? Lay off the booze and try prescription drugs.

“I don’t publicly denounce black people when they do something I don’t agree with (I’m black)”

Why not? Yeah, nevermind, I understand. Bill Cosby tried to interject some common sense and I saw what happened to him.

I didn’t answer because it was the same exact statement you made earlier with a visual. You want to know why Muslims don’t step up and publicly denounce (or kick the ass of) other extremist Muslims, sorry bud, sometimes we just can’t know why people do or don’t do something. And I honestly asked if you were serious because it isn’t plausible that a majority of people from one religion physically kick the asses of extremists of the same religion (who happen to be armed).

Your questions of “why” are meaningless considering that I’m not a Muslim and can’t seriously answer you.

I seriously can’t believe I’m reading this. Look, just stay out of the way, keep your head in the sand and we’ll let you know when it’s safe to come out.

Oh yeah … don’t ever run for any political office.

This is absolutely the most asinine answer I’ve ever heard. They have the ear of every major media outlet in the world.

Is this kind of like the “Jews control the media” line or am I seeing something more into this? What do you mean Muslims have the ear of every major media outlet in the world? Can they just call up CNN and get on a live feed or something? What would denouncing them solve? I don’t publicly denounce black people when they do something I don’t agree with (I’m black), and I don’t plan to–why? Because I don’t think it’s necessary and it wouldn’t solve anything. And what does this have to do with Obama; he isn’t a Muslim?

What, am I typing incoherently or something? That’s exactly what I’m asking. It’s a damn serious question that deserves a damn serious reply which you obviously don’t want to answer.

I didn’t answer because it was the same exact statement you made earlier with a visual. You want to know why Muslims don’t step up and publicly denounce (or kick the ass of) other extremist Muslims, sorry bud, sometimes we just can’t know why people do or don’t do something. And I honestly asked if you were serious because it isn’t plausible that a majority of people from one religion physically kick the asses of extremists of the same religion (who happen to be armed).

Your questions of “why” are meaningless considering that I’m not a Muslim and can’t seriously answer you.