For these purposes it is even used the money that is given by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew for the reconstruction of destroyed holy shrines in Kosovo. Diocese of Raska and Prizren has worked starting from 2006. Squire Sanders Public Advocacy”. The two houses in U.S. lobbying – at first, “Venable”, and then successor agency “Squire Sanders Public Advocacy.”

http://bit.ly/bduCbh
bit*ly/df3kkf
—

James Jatras, did you know that the 800,000 Euros (over $1 million) was stolen money?
How did the money make it to USA and in your bank accounts without violating money laundering laws?
Did you it was stolen money?
Did they pay anything else in cash or apartments in Greece?

Do you feel guilty for taking money from poor people? Those soup kitchen is what they could count on. Would Jesus take $100,000 a month from poor people to lie?

Bishop Artemije the hateful prick was fired last week for the missing money. Just search for “Artemije replaced” and you will find apartments in Greece, new cars, fancy trips etc. Computers were seized and email is being checked according to Blic.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/32809_Mission_Statement_of_the_Day

Also let me know what you think….I like debate…bring it on….

I am not advocating mass murder (nor has anyone else I support), I am not advocating mass deportation, however I am in agreement with those who feel severe restrictions should be placed on Muslim immigration into the West, if not the complete doing away with Muslim immigration all together. That is not racism, that is not bigotry, but that is called survival. The United States did not allow flaming Communist into the country during the Cold War, and members of the Nazi party were not allowed into the USA during WWII, so why is it so hard to understand why we should restrict members of Islam from coming into this country today?

If I say “I hope Islam will be defeated one day”, is that “hate speech”? I hear atheist all the time hoping for the defeat of Christian dogma, yet I do not hear anyone say that is “hate speech”. I have heard people wishing for the death of all religions, yet no one calls that “hate speech”. It is not hate speech, or racist, to call for the death of an idea. That is what Islam is. It is an idea, a set of beliefs, a political ideology, and a value system. If I think that value system is disgusting, and wrong, do I not have a right to actively work to see it defeated, just as those who believe in Islam are actively working for the destruction of Western Civilization?. I want Islam defeated. I admit it. I do not feel ashamed in admitting it. Would an abolitionist feel shame in fighting for the destruction of slavery? The answer must be no.

This gets to the heart of why I think Charles Johnson is wrong. I get the feeling that Charles Johnson does not understand that Islam cannot coexist with Secular Democracy. That is why he was such a defender of the Iraq War. That is why he attacked Obama for stating, even if Obama is lying, that he wanted to bomb Pakistan. He really thinks Islam is not at fault, and that Islam is not like Nazism, or Communism, but that it is just a group of “radicals” who have perverted Islam. He still thinks of it as a personal faith.

If we do not restrict the immigration of Muslims, and at least restrict the teaching of Islam as a political system, we will have a civil war within my lifetime in Europe. One will have to change for the benefit of the other. One must admit it is wrong, and if both sides refuse to change, it will mean war. A real war, unlike that idiotic parade in Iraq that was called a war, means the killing of human beings so that one idea wins out over the other idea. History is filled with these things called “wars”. They are nasty things. In World War II, the United States bombed whole German cities in the name of defeating an idea, called Nazism. Many people died in those bombings, many of which were not members of the Nazi party, but still defended Nazism (for their own reasons) by resisting those who fought against Nazism. Does Charles Johnson (and his minions) think this was “mass murder”?

My point is, if push comes to shove, I will have no problem doing whatever it takes to preserve freedom and liberty. That is my line the sand. I am not advocating anything other than that. Those who stand with Islam are themselves defenders of tyranny. Charles Johnson is right for being against mass murder, but Charles Johnson also seems to defend the idea that Islam is not inherently tyrannical. Charles Johnson’s politically correct, and selfish, tirade against Geert Wilders is all the proof we need that he does not understand the meaning of freedom, or how dangerous Islam is. The Anti-Jihad movement, by defending brave people like Wilders, has merely told what time of day it is…it is high noon. Charles still thinks it is 5 A.M., and has pushed the snooze button.

So once again, if he thinks the Anti-Jihad movement is so evil, what the hell is his (and his minions) plan for defending the West against Islamic aggression? We are all waiting for an answer? I am sure it will be a hoot!

The simple fact is Charles Johnson, Guftafs, Kejda, and anyone else related with LGF, have not forward any kind of plan at all to protect the west from Islamic aggression. They can’t even tell you who the enemy is, or why Islam is dangerous. CJ was a big supporter of the Iraq war, because he accepted the idea that Western Liberal Secular Democracy and Islam can coexist. That of course has been proven to be a false notion. The Iraqi constitution is subservient to the Quran. Islam has been brutally re-imposed throughout most of Iraq, even if it might not appear to us Westerners that it has. All you need to do is see the plight of the Iraqi Christians, and other Non-Muslims in Iraq as proof.

I had a debate with Guftafs at Jihadwatch over this in the comment section. It is clear from that he does not understand the nature of the enemy. He does not have plan. More important, he does not have the will power to carry any kind of plan forward. I suspect the same is true with CJ. Kejda is too high in her ivory tower to descend to talk to mortals.

So if Charles Johnson, and Guftafs, or Kejda (other than her support for a Greater Albania) has a better idea to defeat Islamic demographic and cultural conquest of Europe, that can work, plus takes into the account what Islam is, and why it is dangerous, than let us all know. There is nothing worst than a person who is critical of someone else’s plan, but have nothing to offer themselves for criticism.

The debate about VB, and other separatist, and right-wing groups in Europe ok, are they racist or are they not, and if they are, is it a good idea to make temporary alliances with them or not. All those are valid points, but I would be insane to accept someone who has no plan at all. That is what CJ, Kejda, and Guftafs offer…which is nothing.

One more thing, I have yet to see evidence that Mr. Spencer is a racist, or a fascist. He is not very computer and internet savvy. There is no doubt he is a little too trusting. Those are valid points, but that does make one a racist, as Charles Johnson claims. Charles Johnson, however, has proven himself to be very internet and computer literate, after all that is his expertise (as a programmer), however, he has proven to be a bully, afraid of debate, and uses the words racist, fascist, and bigot to describe anyone who disagrees with his utopian views of the world. He is not man to be trusted, and is loose cannon, that conservatives, moderates, or any movement and party, would never want on their side. With friends like CJ, who needs enemies…

BTW: I bet my friends this will be deleated, I hope it will cost me a dollar, his guess is Kejda will not because she accepts the concept of free speech and debate…right Kejda?

This sort of internecine feuding is all too common, and not infrequently involves Johnson. It is a trivial distraction.

Despite not having the faintest idea who you are or what you are talking about, I eagerly await receipt of a court action notice by your lawyer. In the meanwhile, I cordially invite you to bite me. If you could pass along to Spencer that I said his desperation is showing, I would be most grateful.

Very truly yours,

Kejda Gjermani

Fortunately for me, a friend permalinked both your long post and your reference, and both have been sent to my lawyer for legal action against you.

Your claim in linking my original comment to you warning you as a friend that Schwartz might be using you — and if anybody is a sock puppet, it’s you — was that it contained no legal threats. It contained no legal threats whatever.

Also, Robert Spenser had nothing to do with my post and knew nothing of it. Did Schwartz make that up? My guess is that he told you that so that YOU would print it and so that if anything went wrong with it — and it just has, what a stupid, naive dope you are — that it would be YOU who got sued for it, not him.

And so you will, Kedji. So you will.

I speak only for myself. I would suggest you do the same.

Now, for the record:

(1) I have always fully supported the Bosnian claims about Serb aggression. It is completely clear from all historical records that the Serbs started a war of ethnic cleansing. The mere fact that the Serbs would shell a defenseless Sarajevo for three years is more than enough proof of their intent.

(2) Srdja Trifkovic is, in my opinion, along with Kostunica, part and parcel of the Serb “protectors” of war criminals, by sin of omission if not commission, as one of them was picked up in less than a month after they fell from power. What Srdja Trifkovic tried to do to Mustafa Akyol after it was PROVED to him that Akyol’s quotation of a SCHWARTZ article remaining on FPM was the source of a slander of Trifkovic is beyond the pale. An American friend of Mustafa Akyol’s had to straighten it out with FPM management, and it took her a solid week. Schwartz left the article on the FPM website (and FPM didn’t realize it was there) and Akyol quoted it, leading to a VIABLE accusation of libel. Schwartz’s article had claimed Trifkovic was involved with Milosevic, when Trifkovic had denounced Milosevic as early as 1992. Trifkovic’s defense of Stakic indicts him on some very bad associations, but, in fact, he was not a part of the Milosevic group and publicly denounced them. Trifkovic is a person that I do not agree with AT ALL, but he has been slandered by Schwartz. It took FPM four months to scrub off their comment area the lies about both Trifkovic and Spencer, the lies passed about both of them to a third party, who had quoted them in good faith. Trifkovic may be a racist ideologue, but a fight must be fought with truth, not lies. It seems to me that former communists have always to deal with two things, not one: not just the ideology, which they say they have given up, only to gravitate toward yet other male-dominated totalitarian ideologist, religious or otherwise; but also the tendency to employ Useful Idiots who think they are doing good for humanity, only to find that they are being used to spread lies in a way that the liar never has to take responsibility for it.

(3) You may not Robert Spenser’s tone, but can you point to even one statement made by him about the Qur’an and the hadith and the operation of radical Islamists that is not correct? No, you can’t.

(4) I have just read everything on the Jihad Watch board relating to this discussion. My opinion is that Robert Spenser has done nothing to harass you, but has only responded to your harassment of him. Now you feel “harassed.” Oh, please. Grow up. When you let yourself be used for ad hominem attacks on another, don’t whine and pull some adolescent self-righteousness number that you are going “defend yourself.” There is no defense whatsoever for what you’ve done.

(5) My own opinion is also that you found yourself somebody with a little notariety and think you will ride his coattails to some kind of notariety of your own. No, you won’t. You will only find that you have smeared your own name, possibly for life. You will have lied about people, and you will be responsible for that.

How easy it was for you to accuse me of being Robert Spenser’s sock puppet. Who told you to back off? Probably Schwartz, because Schwartz thinks that I am somebody I am not. But I do know the woman Schwartz probably THINKS I am, the one who is sitting on 7,000 emails that prove everything from his lies about Trifkovic and Spenser to his endless neurotic vendettas. It is a testament to how brilliant Schwartz is in some regards that he is able to get anything done while he tries to exterminate his “Enemies List” — Podhoretz, Spenser, Victor Davis Hansen, and a host of others. Schwartz thinks he is so smart, but then he gets taken in by somebody like Mustafa Ceric, whom he promotes for years, and who then betrays him, and who then the Saudis appoint to represent Balkan Islam at the Vatican last week. Yes, that was very bright indeed.

You will, as the others before you, think you are “defending a good person,” but you are simply being used to shovel lies he has no intention of taking responsibility for and every intention of making you responsible for — on the hope, by the way, that when you realize you’ve lied on his behalf you will be too embarrassed to admit to yourself that you’ve been used, take responsibility for passing on bad information, and publicly apologize to the people about whom she’d inadvertently lied — like Morgaan Sinclair had to do on the FPM and JihadWatch websites. It’s interesting that the night before she published her apology, Robert Spenser wrote to her to tell her she didn’t have to embarrass herself that way. He was worried that she would be jumped by 10,000 people angry about what had been done to him in the preceding two years. She did it anyway. When the time comes that you have to do it, I wonder if you’ll have anything LIKE the kind of integrity and moral courage it takes to do that.

Well, we’ll see. But my guess is you won’t.

Meanwhile, Sinclair refuses, at present, to take Schwartz’s piece off the gameboard, though she most certainly could. She still feels that he can still do some good against the Saudis and that he can help give Sufis a voice in the American Muslim landscape, and especially help them gain some traction in Congress and the White House, outspent and outgunned as they are by the Saudis, who have everybody “over a barrel” with regard to Muslim influence in the United States.

But it is unlikely that Schwartz, whose reputation is ruined in Washington from his endless cruelties, outbursts, and public rages, can effect anything. He spends more time trying to punish people who don’t agree with him that he spends working. Ask anybody who was around him at the NEA, and they’ll tell you all about it. How sick of him we all got!

And his firings from Voice of America, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy, the Jamestown Foundation — even the shock expressed by Washington Muslim groups over his treatment of non-Muslim critics at meetings in Washington where they pleaded, “Brother Suleiman, brother Suleiman… ” … trying to stop the screaming rages at public meetings that made so many of them turn from them — will not end until people who say they are his friends stop tolerating them in the name of “the cause.” Or some such nonsense. Schwartz has literally no idea how close he is to losing the remaining support he has among the neo-cons for whom he has been a sometimes brilliant help. Horowitz has already thrown him out. The Weekly Standard people are split about whether to keep him. And others on whom Schwartz depends for support are in possession of more information than Schwartz realizes.

You should be very careful that you know the law in regards to everything he tells you to do, or asks you to do. Especially be careful if he asked you to put anything in an email to “frighten so-and-so.” That is illegal. And if he were to ask you to do that, it would be THE SOLICITATION OF AT LEAST TWO FEDERAL CRIMES.

I have turned over the information to my lawyer about your false accusations. You falsely accused me of making a legal threat against you. You falsely accused me being a mouthpiece for Robert Spenser. And you did it on the internet, which makes it a violence both of conventional and internet-specific slander and libel laws.

Maybe Morgaan Sinclair is willing to give this another six months, but you will get no such quarter from me. And she won’t like it, but I will compel her testimony if I have to.

But all that said, I am mystified? Why would Schwartz allow MSA, about whom he has just written an article, to used his slander of Spenser against Spenser and Pipes most recently? Why do people who say they want a peaceful Sufism to replace the virulent radical Islam that threatens to destroy Islam itself engage in hate speech and libel and slander against those on the very side they CLAIM to be on?

Pipes, whom Schwartz supports and who given Schwartz much more of a benefit of a doubt than he has ever deserved, has overtly said that there is NO DIFFERENCE between his views on the Islamic underpinnings of violence and Spenser’s. In fact, so far as I can see, virtually everything on Spenser’s site is a QUOTATION of how the Muslim bad guys are using Koranic quotations to justify violence. There is a job to be done here, and it is probably trying to get the leaders of the eight madhhabs to offically recant violence, which they will not do. While they are at it, they can also recant gender apartheid, hudud punishments, declarations of takfir and blasphemy to silence opponents, and all doctrines of apostasy used to prevent conversations and basic religious freedom and freedom of speech.

That is the enemy. And if people like Schwartz don’t get off USING this issue to get into fights because they love being in fights with other males, then we will lose this fight to save the faith. In that way he has failed Islam, and by participating in it, so have you.