"The difference between what the Nazis said about the Jews and what people today are saying about radical Muslims is true…"

Five Feet of Fury has a gorgeous response to the bullshit taqiya the “moderates” sling at the West (Siddiqui is a well known Israel basher at the Star and his reply is the standard one he gives to those who object to his columns.)

Kathy you have my admiration. Read it all here.

The difference between what the Nazis said about the Jews and what people today are saying about radical Muslims is…

What we’re saying about radical Muslims is true.

To pretend otherwise is to perform the intellectual equivalent of hiding Nazis in your attic during World War II.

Whereas The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a proven hoax (something millions of your fellow Muslims seem too stupid to figure out or too stubborn to admit), the many declarations of radical Muslims of their intent to take over the world are all too true — they uttered those words themselves; have been doing so before your favourite punching bag, George Bush, was even born; and have been captured doing so on video.

Please present me with similar statements by Jews — let alone Baha’i (that’s the correct spelling btw).

You can’t, can you?

(And an aside to Mr. Farber, assuming he really said what you claim he did — should the unlikely day dawn when Baha’i fly stolen planes into buildings and incinerate 3000 people alive, or mutilate the genitals of millions of women, or slice up their little boys as part of “religious festivals”, or take over a school and rape pre-pubescent girls in front of their classmates, then shoot them in the back as they try to run away, then plenty of us will be more than willing to hate them for it, and we won’t be silenced either, especially not by an out of touch, would-be bully like Mr. Farber.)

Millions of us want to know: why do so many Muslims do things like that, Mr. Siddiqui?

*  Free Speech on Trial/By Jacob Laksin
And why don’t more of your fellow Muslims condemn them, loudly, publicly and without the usual “buts” about Israel’s or America’s mostly imaginary equivalence? Now that would be a column worth writing.

You work from a false assumption, Mr. Siddiqui: that hate is bad.

Sometimes hatred is justified, even a duty.

* USA: 88% Say Free Speech is Good, But Only 53% Oppose Ban on Hate Speech

If people hate Muslims, blame the likes of admitted terrorism supporter Mohammed Elmasry and his three law students dupes, who brought Maclean’s to court, and, among other things,condemned Mark Steyn’s use of “sarcasm” and “subtle intellectual arguments.”

It’s a sad commentary when even the so-called educated members of your “community” — three law school graduates — can’t appreciate basic English literary devices that date back to Chaucer.

But then again, Muslims don’t care much for books, do they?

Except for the Koran, which contains more hate speech than every issue of Maclean’s published in the last hundred years put together.

(Now THAT would be an interesting case for the Human Rights Commission. I’m a free speech absolutist, but I’d love to see how a case calling the Koran “hate speech” would play out, what with all its calls to violence against “apes and pigs” , i.e. Christians and Jews.)

PS: you foolishly cited professor John “Who?” Miller’s tedious, cliche ridden screed against Steyn. Speaking of “riddled with errors”: did you know that the great journalism professor Miller accused Steyn of not “arguing in food [sic] faith”? (Have someone else in the newsroom explain his mistake to you…)

As well, the best critic Miller could find to slag Steyn is Johann Hari, a reporter who has previously written glowing essays about his casual homosexual encounters with neo-Nazis.

Here’s what really going on here, Mr. Siddiqui: (go here and READ IT ALL).

UPDATE: Defend the bloggers. Go here.

Ezra has it all here.