Here is an interesting post on ‘Muslims Against Sharia’s’ Blog: ‘Hypocrisy in Action’:
After listing a number of headlines from many various ‘news sources’ from around the world which unanimously decry the Israeli air raid on Gaza, Muslims Against Sharia ask this key question (emphasis and colour accent is theirs):
Where were Egypt, Russia, OIC,
EU, Britain, Sarkozy, US and Austria
when Hamas was pounding Israel
with daily barrage of rockets?
Where indeed…
At least, many people are now asking the question. (Yes, I am an idealistic optimist…) And, ‘questioning’ is the first step towards change.
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 
December 27, 2008 at 16:01
Hi, Xanthippa. Before accepting “Muslims Against Sharia” at face value, you might want to read the following.
http://www.stageleft.info/2008/01/13/meet-ezras-new-non-muslim-muslim-friends/
http://www.stageleft.info/2008/01/15/if-you-cant-beatem/
http://www.stageleft.info/2008/01/15/quotes-from-the-scholars-at-muslims-against-sharia/
Draw your own conclusions.
Xanthippa says:
Thank you, Balbulican – this is indeed food for thought.
You have certainly done some deep digging on this one. It saddens me that this may not, after all, be a voice of moderate Muslims…
December 27, 2008 at 20:04
To set the record straight, someone at Muslims Against Sharia posted a message on one of my blog entries a long time ago (two years at least) and invited me to participate by contributing articles to their blog. I posted a few, although I don’t remember how many. I was disturbed by his (the person who contacted me) propensity to lose his cool and start a virtual screaming match at anyone who opposed his ideas, which I believe to be totally counter productive, so I quit posting, as I did not wish to be associated with someone whose behavior actually works against the aim for which I agreed to join in the first place. I too did not 100% believe the site was a genuine product of a group of Muslims speaking out against sharia. Didn’t then. Don’t now and I don’t know how one can actually verify that. I did tell the guy that I thought he must become a publicly known figure, if he wanted to be taken seriously, just a Zuhdi Jasser is.
Bal, of course, can and will believe what he ever he wants, with or more likely without any effort given to thorough investigation. A smear campaign by Bal is a great endorsement. So thanks, Bal.
It may be worth keeping a eye on the site though, as it seems they claim to be working on an Arabic version of the site. And whether or not there are any genuine Muslims involved, it is a good place to find relevant links to an issue which is very much in the news for the last several years, whether or not Bal wants to take his head out of the sand and acknowledge it.
Xanthippa says:
Thank you, Louise!
Every bit of information helps us get a clearer picture…
December 27, 2008 at 21:09
Louise, read the links and dispute them if you find any errors. Otherwise your thoughts on the issue don’t interest me.
Your association with does you vastly less credit than my honest attempt to find out who they were, and to publish it.
Xanthippa says:
Bal,
Methinks Louise is – in the core of her comment – agreeing with your assessment. Yes, she took a potshot at you – but you called her a ‘puddlejumper’ instead of ‘stubblejumper’, so I cannot say I am surprised she stuck a little barb into you…people usually do not like to be called names that are not their own and tend to react when you do so – regardless of how inoccuous the name may seem.
Yet – personal digs aside – she did say she found the site questionable and did not think it was run by Muslims – or a respectable person….which is why she took care to distance herself from it.
In my never-humble-opinion, you are both in agreement. Both of you say you are highly suspicious of this site and do not find it credible. That does sound like a consensus… and coming from different sides of the political spectrum, it confirms that ‘Muslims Against Sharia’ ought not be taken at face value – as I naively had!
Thank you both for casting some light into this ‘dark corner’!
December 28, 2008 at 07:32
Thanks, Xanth, but I wouldn’t write off that site altogether. It does link to real stories in the news. That’s why it’s a good source.
I’m just saying that if the guy is indeed a Muslim, which he could be (he claims his name is Khalim Massoud), he is doing himself and his cause a disservice by not being upfront about who he and the group for which he claims to be speaking. On the other hand, Muslims who do speak out against the tenets of the faith have been recipients of death threats, so what do I know. For many, though, that hasn’t stopped them.
As far as Bal is concerned. Make no mind about him. I wear his criticism of me like a badge of honour.
December 28, 2008 at 07:58
Xanth, you might want to check out this site:
Interview with Khalim Massoud
Xanthippa says:
Thanks, Louise – interesting reading!
December 28, 2008 at 09:55
Xanthippa,
When a Muslim group takes responsibility for a terrorist attack, nobody ever question their Islamic roots. However, when a Muslim group stands up against terrorism and Islamic extremism that fuels it, every degenerate feels compelled to question their authenticity.
Louise,
“I was disturbed by his (the person who contacted me) propensity to lose his cool and start a virtual screaming match at anyone who opposed his ideas,”
You are confusing calling things what they are with propensity to lose cool. Take this retard, for example. He runs a left-wing blog, but claims that his blog is non-partisan; the blog was nominated for the best non-partisan Canadian blog award. It’s like claiming that MoveOn.org is non-partisan. Now, you (in your terms) can “keep your cool” and try to explain to him how ridiculous his claim is or you can stop mincing words and call him what he is, a retarded f#$k. The latter way wastes less time. Because if someone believes that he could prove anything to a degenerate ideologue, he should have his head examined, pronto.
December 28, 2008 at 10:01
Xanth, if I called Louise a “puddle jumper”, it was with no ill intent – it’s a phrase I know from my days up north, a nickname pilots used for their float planes. It probably just came to my fingers as I type.
One of the interesting things about the Job Meme is that it sheds a bit of light, for me, on how some bloggers approach issues. I’ve worked directly and indirectly in broadcasting, writing and journalism since the late 1970s, and I approach most issues with great scepticism. MAS set off alarm bells immediately when I first visited their site; their links with many of the neoconservative American bloggers (many of whom, like Israpundit and Atlas Shrugs, appear to despise ANY form of Islam), and the notion that they were cheerfully editing the word of their God, and above all, the foul mouthed, troll-like behaviour when confronted with their own contraditions.
I’m glad Louise eventually caught on, albeit after several contributions to their site. Hopefully others will too.
Xanthippa says:
Thanks, Balb!
Being familiar with both terms, I did not think ‘puddlejumper’ was meant as an insult – yet, being an Aspie, I am familiar with how strongly people can react to being called ‘a name that is not their name’ (I have seen Aspie kids break down crying and deeply hurt when someone tried to pay them a compliment by calling them something nice, like, say, ‘a genius’ – but it was ‘not their name’…. truly, I have seen and ‘diffused’ situations like these… and I know this reaction is not limited to Aspies…). So, I thought I understood the ‘barb’ in the response…
I am very uncomfortable with ‘namecalling’ altogether – again, this could be my Aspergers’ side talking. In particular, I am very uncomfortable with the use of descriptive terms as insults…. Being ‘retarded’ literally means ‘slow’ – and ‘retard’, in any of its incarnation, used as an insult angers me (just as calling something or someone ‘gay’ meaning it as an insult really angers me). I once saw a teen boy who went to great lengths to hide his mild retardation (successfully) feel completely and utterly humiliated when an unaware instructor jokingly said: “Are you a retard or something?” Yeah, I might have laid into the instructor a bit… I have an overdeveloped ‘mothering’ instinct.
I understand that my reaction to ‘namecalling’ is stronger than is socially appropriate, so I usually refrain from commenting on it lest I worsen the conflict….
Yet, I would like to explain: I may let comments stand, as they are written (I may add my POV in the bottom – but explicitly identify it as so – I hope this is not breaking any ‘unwritten’ social bolgosphere rules, but I have noted this practice on many European blogs and it seems effective to me) because I despise censorship and do not wish to practice it.
This is an excellent opportunity for me to openly say that I do not approve of name-calling and disagree with it on principle – and I apologize for any insults here. Still, censoring the insults would not allow people the opportunity to learn about them and defend themselves… lesser of two evils…
December 28, 2008 at 11:57
Congratulations, Xant: you’ve just gotten a taste of the true MAS voice. They’re usually a bit more obscene, as you will note from the second link I provided.
On the point raised: our friend is American, and is a bit unclear on the use of the term “non-partisan” in Canada. We explained it to him here:
http://www.stageleft.info/2008/12/07/tickle-me-mohammed-the-imaginary-talking-doll-non-scandal/
but as you see…some folks are a bit hard to communicate with.
December 28, 2008 at 13:06
This retard has no problem distinguishing between non-partisan and non-political, which is very similar, but he has a hard time distinguishing between a blog contributor who could be anyone, i.e., Louise, and a member of the Muslims Against Sharia. In essence, this moron’s argument is: 1. Louise (Pam Geller, Ted Bellman) is a member of Muslims Against Sharia
2. Louise (Pam Geller, Ted Bellman) is not a Muslim
1+2= Muslims Against Sharia are fake Muslims.
Calling him a fu@#$ng retard may be considered obscene, but it doesn’t make it any less accurate.
December 28, 2008 at 16:02
Now, now, MAS. Please remember your “act”: you’re pretending to be someone who is diligently working to purify God’s message to mankind through your New and Improved Koran. I don’t think childish trolling and obscenity really contributes much to the pretence. Heh.
Seriously, try for a wiser, more spiritual tone. I know it doesn’t come naturally, and your fuse is a bit short, but honestly, if you want to actually deceive people into paying you money (still collecting via Paypal, I assume), that’ll work better.
Don’t thank me, please – you’ll just embarass me.
December 28, 2008 at 22:09
[…] GIVING HYPOCRISY A BAD NAME– Where were Egypt, Russia, OIC, EU, Britain, Sarkozy, US and Austria when Hamas was pounding […]
December 28, 2008 at 23:06
“diligently working to purify God’s message to mankind through your New and Improved Koran.”
Didn’t you get the memo that exposing degenerate f#$ks who run “non-partisan” blogs is the part of the mission?
December 28, 2008 at 23:08
“Innocent Civilian” Hamas Terrorists Killed by Israeli Airstrikes: http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/12/innocent-civilian-hamas-terrorists.html
December 29, 2008 at 07:38
So, Xanthippa – having witnessed the spirituality, thoughtfulness, maturity and eloquence of MAS first hand, do you still have any questions about their credibility?
December 29, 2008 at 15:00
It’s interesting that you insert the word “spirituality” in there, Bal. I wonder what you are attempting to imply by using that word? That because our friend Khalim has a snarky edge he cannot possibly be a Muslim? That would be consistent with most of your attempts at logic.
I have to say that, although I stand by my original objection to Khalim’s technique, he is 100% correct that fools like you are – well – what he says you are.
December 29, 2008 at 17:30
Yes, Xanthippa,
Does the fact that we call a retarded f$%k who makes s#$t up and passes it as facts what he is – a retarded f^&k – reflects on our credibility?
December 29, 2008 at 18:26
Please, forgive me – but I am a slow thinker. It takes me a while to make my mind up about ‘things’!
While ‘re-writing’ a ‘holy book’ is unusual, it is certainly not unheard of.
Let us think back to the Council of Nicea: 98% of the books and writings about Christ did not make it onto the Canonical New Testament. And, the Church Fathers are known to have intentionally removed sections of the New Testament as late as the 800s… The Jehova Witnesses use a highly edited version of the Bible as their holy book – so this type of action, while unusual, is not without precedent.
As to how I make my mind up on ‘things’?
I like to observe. Both what is on the site and how the people who are associated with it present themselves within and outside of that site. I will look for patterns of thought and behaviour…
So, all can say now is: interesting. My curiosity is piqued. I am eagerly observing!
December 29, 2008 at 22:08
“It’s interesting that you insert the word “spirituality” in there, Bal. I wonder what you are attempting to imply by using that word? That because our friend Khalim has a snarky edge he cannot possibly be a Muslim?”
Err… no, Louise. I am pointing out that in this communication, and in every other communication I’ve received from MAS, they’ve shown themselves to be addicted to adolescent vulgarity and the kind of tot-like exchange I used to see on Usenet. That’s fine. But the idea of foul mouth, immature trolls actually rewriting the word of God is risible.
But you actually know that, as we both know.
Xanthippa, I’m very familiar with the evolution of the Christian Bible. I am also aware that canonical revisions have been made with enormous deliberation by mandated scholars and clerics. Our friends MAS are not Muslim, and they have invited anyone to participate in the editing of the Koran online. Sorry, there is absolutely no parallel with Nicea.
December 29, 2008 at 22:18
Oh, gosh. Louise failed to publish my response to one of her points. Just an oversight, no doubt. So I’ll publish it here.
Louise agrees with the kind of anti-Muslim stuff that MAS likes to publish, so she doesn’t really care whether they’re lying about who they are. To quote Louise: “Where or not he is genuinely Muslim, I have no way of knowing and, besides, it is irrelevant. Go that?” (I assume she meant “got” that. Is that correct, Louise?)
In response, I asked her the following question.
Suppose she was approached by a group called “Christians for a Renewed Christianity”. They have a website, they solicit money, and they’re inviting people – anyone – to rewrite sections of the Bible that they feel don’t reflect true Christianity.
Then suppose you found out that “Christians for a Renewed Christianity” was actually a collection of folks who despise Christianity, and collect and post as much anti-Christian material as they can find.
Now, to Louise, that doesn’t matter. The REAL nature of MAS is irrelevant, as she puts it, because she happens to like and agree with their propaganda.
But see, to me, that reality does matter.
December 30, 2008 at 07:08
Contrary to popular opinion, Bal, I do not sit in front of my computer 24/7. I have published your “remark”. Impatience is not a virtue, as they say.
December 30, 2008 at 07:18
Oh, and Bal, I don’t suppose it’s possible for a hardened, old leftist such as yourself to learn the fine distinctions between Muslims and Islamists, is it. There are some people who wield a very wide brush, of which I not one, for whom accusations of bigotry is about the only tool they have in their arsenal.
December 30, 2008 at 07:38
“I have published your “remark”.”
Not as of 7:33 am, but maybe it’s delayed. I await your response with great interest.
‘I don’t suppose it’s possible for a hardened, old leftist such as yourself to learn the fine distinctions between Muslims and Islamists, is it.”
I’m very aware of the distinction, Louise. I have two Muslim employees and several Muslim friends, none of whom are Islamists. Why do you ask?
‘There are some people who wield a very wide brush, of which I not one…”
Cough. Excuse me.
“…for whom accusations of bigotry is about the only tool they have in their arsenal.”
No doubt. Don’t you just hate people like that? T
December 30, 2008 at 11:01
“Louise agrees with the kind of anti-Muslim stuff that MAS likes to publish”
A leftard who is too stupid to distinguish between anti-Muslim and anti-Islamist. Who would have thought! I guess you cannot expect every moron to realize that Islamists murder more Muslims than all the Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jews, and everybody else combined.
December 30, 2008 at 11:05
If the remark you are referring to is the same as the one you have posted here, then I’m afraid you must have sent it off to some other poor sot. No such comment has arrived.
December 30, 2008 at 11:13
Oops. I lied. It just arrived. My ISP saves messages and sends them on when several have accumulated or when a certain amount of time has elapsed. Unless I am working on my blog when it arrives, it’s only when a comment arrives in my inbox that I know about it.
Xanthippa says:
OK, so this is my obsessive-compulsive self, asserting itself, but:
If what you said was your honest opinion, then, even if the opinion is erroneous, stating it does not constitute lying…
December 30, 2008 at 11:28
I figured it was en route, Louise; you don’t strike me as a liar.
ReformIslam: huh? what on earth does that have to do with anything I’ve said?
December 30, 2008 at 17:17
“what on earth does that have to do with anything I’ve said?”
That was your quote of December 29, 2008 at 10:18 pm, you demented moron.
Xanthippa says:
While I do not like to intrude into conversations, I would respectfully request that you please tone down the name calling while commenting. Yes, we all do lose our temper – but we are adults and we ought to be able to engage in a debate without resorting to vitriolic language…please.
It is my experience that namecalling is seldom productive.
December 31, 2008 at 06:51
“That was your quote of December 29, 2008 at 10:18 pm, you demented moron.”
Sorry, dude, still doesn’t work. Summarized, my point was that credible revisions to holy books are undertaken by reverent, knowledgeable scholars of the religion in question. You aren’t that.
Your response doesn’t seem to connect with that thought.
Word to the wise, dude: if you can’t figure out a basic blog message, you’re going to have a heck of a time rewriting Allah’s word.
January 1, 2009 at 13:54
“Sorry, dude, still doesn’t work” not for you. You’re just too dumb to get it, which is not at all surprising.
“if you can’t figure out a basic blog message” You mean “Leftards rule! Anyone who disagrees is an idiot”? Yeah, that was hard.
“you’re going to have a heck of a time rewriting Allah’s word.” when someone needs your scholarly advice on Islam, I’m sure they would ask for it.
January 1, 2009 at 23:00
Very, very poor, MAS. Have you actually given up altogether on trying to convince people that you should be taken in good faith? If so, have you taken down the paypal donation point at your website?
January 2, 2009 at 12:58
There is no point in convincing retards like you of anything. You always place your opinions above facts, so why bother. More than 80% of our readers believe that we are who we say we are. Try to poll your readers to see how many believe your degenerate claim that your blog is non-partisan.
March 19, 2009 at 11:57
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
UNLICENSED WEBSITE SET UP AFTER 9/11 TO COLLECT “DONATIONS” STILL IN OPERATION AND TAKING CASH, “MUSLIMS AGASINT SHARIA” AND KHALIM MASSOUD
http://www.billwarnerpi.com/2009/03/unlicensed-website-set-up-after-911-to.html
March 20, 2009 at 11:57
Insane P.I. Bill Warner: http://insanepi.blogspot.com/
September 13, 2011 at 05:09
IЎЇm delighted that I have noticed this weblog. Finally anything not a junk, which we undergo incredibly frequently. The web site is lovingly serviced and saved as much as date. So it must be, thanks for sharing this with us.