Video: Fox, NBC profile Christian converts to Islam
posted at 1:08 pm on July 5, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
My fellow agnostic, INDC Bill, dared me to post these just to see how many comically hysterical comments they’d draw. Heh. The over/under is 125. “They’d never profile Muslim converts to Christianity!” comments don’t count on grounds of obviousness.
I confess, I did raise an eyebrow at the woman in the second clip heralding the “freedom” she’s found since she strapped on her new headgear. Click the images to watch.
Update: All right, here’s one from Influence Peddler that goes the other way. Walid Shoebat is of course another very high profile convert from Islam to Christianity.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 [2]
Not that I’m interested in seeing the downfall of Islam, but I was surprised to learn that Islam is losing more followers than it’s gaining, because I really had been given the impression that it was the other way around.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 3:42 PM
NBC is blatantly airing islamist propaganda. As with everything they air, from their global warming tripe to this … it has a purpose, to bend the will of the average American to theirs. Good thing it only works with IQ’s below 50.
darwin on July 5, 2007 at 3:43 PM
I’ll go to best source, for matters such as this:
Matthew 10:33 - But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 5, 2007 at 3:47 PM
Do a search and look at how many times in these threads that Atheists are grouped with Hitler, Stalin and Mao.
Now tell me again how Christians have a tolerant discussion without
.
Do not criticise me for the speck in my eye until you take the brick out of yours. (Paraphrased)
JayHaw Phrenzie on July 5, 2007 at 3:51 PM
Erich Fromm wrote the definitive book on the submissive psychology behind this gesture: “ESCAPE FROM FREEDOM“.
Some people are masochists.
The sadists in Islam welcome them with open whips.
Some people want a pre-made identity.
The mindcontrollers of Islam are ready to reduce them to uniform zombies.
Jesus said: “Blessed are the peacemakers.”
Mohammad said: “Strike at their necks.”
Either these “reverting” folks are unaware of the tremendous difference between the fundamentals of the two faiths, or they just like the idea of beheading and stoning and raging… and even get a giggle out of being threetened with death if they ever try to leave Islam.
They should read “THE FUTURE OF AN ILLUSION“.
If they can.
profitsbeard on July 5, 2007 at 3:52 PM
I agree with the comment on Muslim men being allowed to have 4 wives. Doesn’t sound like freedom and equality to me, as the women in the vids stated. Also note that under Islamic law it takes the testimony of two women to equal the testimony of 1 man. Think about that one.
I think Robert Spencer could go over the over/under number of posts all by himself.
Snidely Whiplash on July 5, 2007 at 3:58 PM
JayHaw Phrenzie, LOL, You’ve been p’owned, now park it.
KCtheKat on July 5, 2007 at 3:58 PM
It’s a plank, not a brick. The spec is basically one of wood, so it’s moving from a conversation about a smaller and a larger peice of wood, comparing apples to just bigger apples.
But to say that some of the worst atrocities carried out have been because of atheists is not name-calling. It’s simply history.
It isn’t name-calling when atheist bring up the Spanish Inquisition either.
But last, I didn’t call you a nazi. I haven’t called you any names whatsoever. The verse about the plank and the spec are about a person looking in the mirror, not looking at the other people who follow Christianity.
In fact, that’s exactly what it’s preaching for Christians to not do.
So in order to follow the scripture, I need only look at myself, not other people on this thread.
In doing so, I find that I’ve said nothing against atheist, or any other belief for that matter, and am only making a comment about how pathetic it is that some people cannot discuss religion like an adult and can only use insults.
And to be clear, the above statement is not limitted to atheist either, which is something you would have seen in my previous post had you not been so hell-bent against anything Christian.
When you have a problem with everyone around you, maybe they’re not the problem.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 4:01 PM
hmm… Makes one wonder if these people were really Christians to begin with.
Lawrence on July 5, 2007 at 4:05 PM
The verse also says, “First remove the plank from your eye so you can help your brother remove the speck from his own.” In other words, recognize your own faults, don’t be arrogant and in that spirit help others with their own short comings.
srhoades on July 5, 2007 at 4:09 PM
I enjoy these threads. It gives me insight into who the people are behind the screen names.
It is interesting to me how the atheists always seem to think that they are somehow enlightened by their inability to grasp some of the most basic concepts. They can talk a wordy talk but their ability to comprehend is so limited. As an engineer, I am blessed to be surrounded by some of the most intelligent people on the planet and I have been struck by the fact that so few of them are atheists.
“Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.”
“God does not care about our mathematical difficulties. He integrates empirically.”
“Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of god.”
“My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind.”
Who said this?
Guardian on July 5, 2007 at 4:10 PM
Though female circumcision is practiced in some predominantly Muslim countries (in addition to non-Muslim societies), the practice is not mandated nor specified by Islam.
BillINDC on July 5, 2007 at 4:13 PM
Let’s check back in with them after their husband puts a gorrila beating on them for driving to the store without a family, male escort, and then throws some battery acid on her face for letting her hair slip out of her hijab or marries her 11 year old neice.
Alden Pyle on July 5, 2007 at 4:23 PM
True enough, though I should have mentioned that in my personal Christian walk, I’m still very much in the trying to remove the plank from my own eye stage.
I’m not proud to admit it, but I’m very backslidden.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 4:24 PM
No, it isn’t. It is a strawman argument that is completely non sequiter.
The common thread between the worst killers n history is the elevation of Dogma over Reason.
For Hitler it was the Dogma of National Sociolism.
For Stalin and Mao it was the Dogma of Communism.
For most other killers in history it was religious dogma, Catholic, Mormon, Muslim, Hindu, doesn’t matter they all have blood on their collective hands.
But whether it is Religious, Political, Sociological, Racial, whatever, dogma kills. And all religion is based on dogma.
Hitler, Mao, Stalin and the pope all have one thing in common, they believe that their dogma (religious or political) is more important than humanity and human lives.
For this reason and this reason alone, religion deserves no respect.
So, for as long as deluded Christianists insist on this presenting this straw man (Hitler, etc) , I see no need to moderate my opinion that all religion is a delusion.
You may enjoy the comfort that comes from knowing that 100s of millions of people share your delusion, but it is a mass delusion.
Enjoy the kool aid.
JayHaw Phrenzie on July 5, 2007 at 4:30 PM
An atheist is certain that theists are wrong.
A theist is certain that atheists are wrong.
An agnostic holds their coats and hits on their girlfriends.
profitsbeard on July 5, 2007 at 4:39 PM
An agnostic believes in nothing and doesn’t have a girlfriend.
Just following your logic. :)
Guardian on July 5, 2007 at 4:49 PM
You can’t even stay on topic. This has nothing to do with whether or not you believe what I believe or is you even respect me or my belief.
As I said, it matters very little, if at all, if you think I’m nuts. I don’t validate myself based on your opinions.
However, maturity has allowed others to discuss this opinion that you have without resorting to childish name-calling. That and that only is what I’ve said against you this entire time.
Actually, you’re still wrong. I never said that Hitler, Stalin, etc. did what they did because they were atheist. I only said that their actions, which were some of the worst in recorded history, were the actions of people who were atheists.
It’s simply a fact.
And it’s a fact that is trotted out to explain to people who, like you, seem to think that evil can only come from religion, ignoring the fact that man can be evil and come up with their own evil ideas apart from anything religious.
Whether or not their ideas then became dogma, is irrelevant to the fact that these ideas were born of atheist men and not religion.
You can argue that Hitler wasn’t actually an atheist, and many do; however, that still leaves Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao Zedong, so it doesn’t do anything to the principle argument, which is that dogma doesn’t care if you believe in God or not and that dogma is much more than an invention of religion.
Really, pure comedy.
It doesn’t matter what I say, you still respond with worthless insults.
I suppose you’ve grown fond of that chip on your shoulder.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 4:56 PM
Actually, I think the logic is that the agnostic is
of nothing and has no girlfriend.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 4:58 PM
There is something “freeing” about covering up your body, in a pathetic sort of way. Why don’t the men have to hijab up?
bloggless on July 5, 2007 at 4:59 PM
At last, we’re in agreement.
BillINDC on July 5, 2007 at 5:05 PM
Hitler was a Catholic, who based a lot of his dogma on Paganism.
I searched extensively, but I could find no record of his leaving or being excommunicated by the catholic church.
Can you support your thesis that he was an Atheist, or did you just make that up?
JayHaw Phrenzie on July 5, 2007 at 5:06 PM
Esthier-
Agnostic means that you are looking, not believing or certain of things that are beyond our scope.
But it knows what is worthwhile here on Earth.
Not fighting over any theory, but refining all.
And enjoying the search.
Appreciating the Buddha, Lao Tzu, Jesus, Micah, Socrates, Hyaptia, Hercalitus, Hume, Henri Bergson, Edmund Husserl, and the prophet Groucho Marx.
Can I hold your coat?
profitsbeard on July 5, 2007 at 5:09 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler#Childhood_and_heritage
Your turn, Esthier, please show a source for your assertion that Hitler was an Atheist.
Now, I am prepared to stipulate that in Hitler’s case, his dogma was nationalistic and sociolistic, not religious, but he was not an Atheist. He was one of yours!
JayHaw Phrenzie on July 5, 2007 at 5:11 PM
You refer to yourself as “it”. What are you? A typing coat rack?
Guardian on July 5, 2007 at 5:16 PM
All you did was show that Hitler’s parents were Catholic. Not whether Hitler himself professed to be. Try again.
Guardian on July 5, 2007 at 5:19 PM
JayHaw-
Hitler was an Aryan pagan Teutonic Old Gods cultist when it served his purposes. And became anything else that worked to manipulate the gullible.
A cynic, of world-historical dimensions, riding his suckered people like one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse, to their Gotterdammerung.
He believed in Adolf.
Nothing else.
profitsbeard on July 5, 2007 at 5:19 PM
Profitsbeard,
Well said.
terryannonline on July 5, 2007 at 5:21 PM
I dont have anthing useful to contribute to this thread, I just wanted a chance to write the name Walid Shoebat.
Mike D. on July 5, 2007 at 5:23 PM
Guardian-
“it” refers to “agnostic”, the concept.
In the philosophical sense.
(Animated coatracks may exist on Second Life, or Disney.)
profitsbeard on July 5, 2007 at 5:24 PM
It’s a little warm here for coats. But your definition sounds about right. I’ve even heard of some who claimed to be Christian agnostics, believing in Christianity but not being certain that it is correct.
Did you miss the part where I said many have argued that Hitler wasn’t an atheist?
Do you get those sort of blinding headaches when you’re angry that make it difficult for you to read a computer screen?
Hitler was a bad guy alright, but his death toll doesn’t even compare to Stalin, so I can’t understand why you’d rail against the assertion that Hitler was an atheist as though that somehow makes others forget that atheists still have the biggest death toll numbers.
From Wiki (did you not read the whole thing, or do you really believe one must only be born to Christian to be a Christian?????):
In the psycho’s own words:
He kinda sounds like you in that last one….
As I said before, his atheism is called into question, but when you read his own words, it’s impossible to see him as a Christian.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 5:31 PM
This one is good too:
I especially wouldn’t want our Movement to acquire a religious character and institute a form of worship. It would be appalling for me, and I would wish I’d never lived, if I were to end up in the skin of a Buddha!
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 5:32 PM
Exactly.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 5:33 PM
“If at this moment we were to eliminate the religions by force, the people would unanimously beseech us for a new form of worship.”
Murderer though he was, he was also intelligent enough to know what he needed to be and do in order to keep his power.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 5:37 PM
Isn’t pointless to debate on which group (atheist or religious people) has the bigger body count. Almost every religion or non-religious group and race or nationality has some skeletons in their history.
terryannonline on July 5, 2007 at 5:40 PM
terryannonline on July 5, 2007 at 5:40 PM
And that’s honestly my point, not that atheists are worse, just that they aren’t necessarily better.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 5:51 PM
Yeah, it’s just a bonus.
ScottMcC on July 5, 2007 at 5:58 PM
Losers.
The women remind me of those felon groupies who fall in love with mass murderers and marry them on death row. As for the guy, who hasn’t met someone like him before—never accepted by the cool kids, picked on in school—sad, but true.
On a brighter note, there’s always the real possibility that a fair percentage of these “converts” are undercover agents infiltrating the enemy base of operations.
IrishEi on July 5, 2007 at 6:29 PM
Agreed, but the only two arguments that Christian Theists on this site have can be boiled down to two points:
1) But the bible says so!
2) Hitler was an Atheist
I actually agree that his religion was Nationalism.
I was countering esthiers attempt to end the argument in an edwardsian way with a false call to civility tather than an ability to win the debate.
As an American, I will fight for the death for your right to worship the delusion of your choice, but I will retain the right to think less of you for doing so. And I will absolutely retain the right to express my opinion.
Elizibeth Edwards will not shut up Ann Coulter with false calls for civility and poster “esthier” will not shut out my opinion by using the same pathetic tactic.
Here is a question for the theists out there:
What is the difference between a religion and a cult?
When does a cult become a religion?
Is scientology a religion or a cult?
How about mormonism?
Who makes these determinations?
In the end, is there really any difference between a religion and a cult?
Anywho, I better get back to work. :)
JayHaw Phrenzie on July 5, 2007 at 6:44 PM
Where in blazes did that come from, Jayhaw? “Cult” versus “Religion”? Totally irrelevant in the context of your argument with Esthier.
What you also seem not to realize is that your atheism is as much a religion as Christianity, Islam, or Hinduism. And its adherents can be just as dogmatic.
Another thing: Since when is the Universe required to accept your idea of what is rational or not? Yes, the notion that the Creator of the Universe manifested Himself as a human specifically so he could get Himself buchered and then rise from the dead does seem a bit loopy at first look (and probably even second look). But if there IS a Creator, who in Hades are we to tell Him how he is supposed to act?
Frankly, I find the notion that God created Man no crazier than the idea that there is no Creator at all. And when I find myself insisting that the Universe and God must adhere to my own vision of rationality, I go read up on quantum physics.
I am not saying that we should discard rationality, but that we should accept that, One, people are not inherently rational, and Two, that even when people are being rational they can still come to radically different conclusions.
A lot of harm has been done in the name of Christianity, to be sure, but Christianity has also motivated most of the good that has occured in the West in the last two millenia.
It certainly has done more good in that timeframe than any other religion.
Lancer on July 5, 2007 at 7:21 PM
Wish they asked the idiots to name their favourite Koran verses.
SIJ6141 on July 5, 2007 at 7:30 PM
So they left a religion that has Humility and Self-sacrifice as the paradigm and a savior who practiced both.
And went to a religion that has a Master Slave paradigm and uses fear to subjugate its women. See Islam’s Global War against Christianity @ Americanthinkerdotcom
The hijab is not freedom, love and respect is.
Christ rose from the dead did Mohammed?
They are free to convert and in America we are free to criticize. Not all things are equal.
Irenaeus on July 5, 2007 at 8:17 PM
Much of what Jayhaw has said has been irrelevant, but that’s what happens when an idea or thing sparks as much disdain inside a person as religion does for Jayhaw.
That’s completely false, and your second point completely ignores everything I wrote above, as though you simply couldn’t come up with a decent response.
I actually agree that his religion was Nationalism.
No, not at all. I did not get into a debate with you, I merely pointed out that your knee-jerk reaction to Christianity is to engage in nothing but insults, even when there is no reason to even talk about Christians.
We were not in any debate whatsoever. The entire conversation we’ve had is me explaining that it’s pathetic to always insult religion and you responding by insulting religion.
As I’ve said repeatedly, I don’t care if you respect me, I just think your responses are something to be pitied. In fact, that’s almost word for word what I said.
Again, something I never argued against. To paraphrase Blair, your since of injustice is off base.
You dare compare yourself to Ann Coulter (a woman who shares the “delusion” you so disdain) because I made fun of your knee-jerk reaction? You’ve lost a little bit of reality with that one.
1. I have not asked you to stop. I’ve only said your insults are childish, irrelevant and useless.
2. We were not engaged in any debate and when I refuted what you cherry picked from wikipedia, you’re the one that ignored the facts.
3. When Ann Coulter insults a person or idea, it’s to make a legitimate point. You did no such thing and with your continued whining about free speech and thought, which no one is arguing against might I add, you’re only embarrassing yourself.
I have no problem with atheists. I even have no problem with atheists who think people who believe in God are delusional. I’d rather die than live in a world where people like that cannot exist.
In fact, I married a man who acted as such. He would taunt me and other Christians, tying many of us in logical knots. He had a field day with it and could run circles around most of the Christians who didn’t know their own theology as well as they should have.
Except, he was always intelligent enough to do it without being immature.
The name-calling and insipid insults are, as I’ve stated repeatedly, are childish and pitiful. Those who cannot speak on matters, even ones they think are stupid and/or full of delusions, without relying completely on the above tactics, are not people who can debate.
Esthier on July 5, 2007 at 8:59 PM
I lived in Saudi Arabia from 1996-2000 and, fer sure, I knew more than a couple Muslims. The worst? Converts! Wide-eyed zealots to the last one. All hell-bent on ratting out the westerners who made homemade wine or lounged in their back yards with their legs showing. Sucked up to the Mutawain in order to look all high and holy. Jesus couldn’t placate their lust for a purpose in life, so they swapped teams.
I can’t blame anyone for believing anything they choose, particularly if they were born into their belief system. However, I haven’t a molecule of tolerance for converts. Know-it-all supremacist attitude, condescending bile for anyone else who hasn’t “seen the light.”
Think born-again non-smokers are a blight on society? Try stomaching five minutes with a Muslim convert.
thejackal on July 5, 2007 at 9:12 PM
The headline is misleading. It says “Christians convert to Islam.” But, from their own mouths you can see that they were not Christians. He said, “I felt that there was no God.” The scarf-wearing girl said, “I felt Catholocism wasn’t right for me.” And the other girl said something like “I just followed what felt logical to me.” They were not Christians, they were agnostics or athiests. Just because your parents are Christians, doesn’t mean that you are by right.
p40tiger on July 5, 2007 at 9:20 PM
I guess the Catholic Spanish girl wouldn’t be indicative of the millions of Spanish Catholics in this nation?
sonnyspats1 on July 5, 2007 at 9:23 PM
Here we go! The media portraying islam as the new, hip religion. But, will thigs be so hunky dorey under sharia law?
boomer on July 5, 2007 at 9:42 PM
I don’t pretend that I know people’s hearts.
But I seriously doubt they were ever Christians in the first place.
ToddonCapeCod on July 5, 2007 at 9:54 PM
That woman’s asking for trouble.
Covered Meat means FULLY Covered.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!
An open invitation to lust.
least1 on July 5, 2007 at 10:24 PM
In my opinion these people are living in a fantasy world, or are deliberately painting Islam in a favorable light as a deception. Islam is fundamentally incompatable with democracy and advocates deceit and treachery when dealing with the “infidel” (that’s us).
Conquest for subjugation of the infidel, directives to obey Islamic law which is incompatable with democracy, and unequal treatment are just a few of the incompatabilities that Islam has with western values.
It is unfortunate that these people have bought into a cult ideology that is not only dangerous but is enaged in deliberate effort to dominate all the “unbelievers”.
When, when, when will the United States recognize this enemy for what it is?
omegaram on July 5, 2007 at 10:53 PM
It’s hard to find too many outspoken Muslim to Christian (or Muslims to anything) converts… because the Muslims do their best to silence them i.e. the crime is punishable by death. This from the religion of peace…
vulcannomad on July 5, 2007 at 10:54 PM
Religion of Piece(s) as in you will be cut to pieces if you do anything to outrage them. And everything outrages them.
TruthToBeTold on July 5, 2007 at 11:24 PM
I hope she has the balls to have herself Circumcised!
spike on July 5, 2007 at 11:30 PM
This is a sad story, it shows that we Christians are not doing a good job living our lives in such a way that others can see the joy, love, and freedom that only Christ can bring.
Trtle2001 on July 5, 2007 at 11:58 PM
Anyone woman who would convert to this faith, has to be out of her mind. I know some muslins (white Albanians) and I never witness a faith whose sole purpose is to torment and belittle women. It is beyond sickening..and these muslims are fairly “moderate”. I personally have my own opinion about the “founder” of this faith, and it is not good.
It must be some kind of fad to convert, some people will do anything to be different or to get notice. And since the muslim faith is the subject “du jour” of the planet….well, there you go, some jerks will just jump on the bandwagon.
mag5435 on July 6, 2007 at 2:16 PM
profitsbeard, I think you actually need to study agnosticism, because you didn’t just quote the agnosticism philosophy, but actually it is a form of Modernism (which has been rejected by modernists and they moved to post-modernists).
Agnostic literally means without knowledge. The word comes from Koine “a” meaning without and “gnosis” which means knowledge.
The position that is held by Agnostics is: One can not know, due to the subjective nature of truth. It literally is saying, “I know that I do not know.” There is nothing to refine, because there is no ability to refine truth since it is unknowable.
It is on the most basic level an irrational concept and it is why it has fallen out of view among true philosophers. Even Post-modernists have had to reject agnosticism and declare that truth is unknowable, but experience is. This is why post-modernists work toward finding that final experience.
Tim Burton on July 6, 2007 at 5:45 PM
Comment pages: « 1 [2]