Why can't he relocate to the US? If he gets false papers saying he's a Muslim he should get in without a hitch.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at January 24, 2007 8:05 PM

Well who could blame this teacher? one only has to look at how many teachers have been killed in Thailand by poor Persecuted Muslims and it's easy to see that the world is not quite ready to confront and condemn Islam's Terror tactics ,or protect free speech, and human rights for all, not just *eyes roll* . cause as we all know Only Muslims suffer injustice and suffer at the hands of others. isn't that right Naseem, Maryam?

It not a French teachers duty to die , in order for us to wake up .

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at January 24, 2007 8:08 PM

There is also an excellent piece on the Redeker affair in this month's Commentary magazine:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/cm/main/viewArticle.aip?id=10813

Posted by: Dum Dhimmi Dum Dum Dum at January 24, 2007 8:11 PM

Edit :

Well who could blame this teacher? one only has to look at how many teachers have been killed in Thailand by poor Persecuted Muslims and it's easy to see that the world is not quite ready to confront and condemn Islam's Terror tactics ,or protect free speech, and human rights for all, not just *eyes roll* " POOR HUMILIATED MUSLIMS", cause as we all know Only Muslims suffer injustice and suffer at the hands of others. isn't that right Naseem, Maryam?

It not a French teachers duty to die , in order for us to wake up

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at January 24, 2007 8:15 PM

Yes, that's true, but I think we are lucky that people like Robert Spencer still produce the material needed to understand the reality of such matters as radical Islam and Islam itself; from whom which, those of the likes of Robert Spencer, resist the constant tirade of violence and bigotry that is placed upon them, are greatly appreciated in a world like today--at least by someone like me.

Posted by: Ashtonian at January 24, 2007 8:19 PM

Professor Spencer!

Keep up the good work. You are a very courageous individual as are all who are involved in the unmasking of Islam's true nature. I have three of your works, one of which I have read. Well done. Finish your next work quickly and keep going. Well documented texts are essential to this struggle. I am looking forward to a good exegesis of the Quran vis a vis the Holy Bible.

I come by Jihad Watch daily. Here is one of the few places that I can get a very, very current update on this struggle. As I deeply fear, a very large butcher's bill will have to be paid by the West, if victory is to be ours. I do pray that I am wrong.

Additionally, I feel that the strongest adversary of Islam in the West are fundamentalist Christians and so would urge all to try and persuade your pastors to join in. If you do not have a pastor, get one!

Posted by: Crusader at January 24, 2007 8:58 PM

Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, Who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father: to Whom be glory forever and ever.

Quelle dommage. Another person forced to live in fear of his personal and familial safety because he dared to voice an opinion.

The hue and the cry from the "moderate" Muslims over the injustice of this threat was so deafening that I don't believe anyone heard it at all, did they?

I'm prepared to be corrected....but not holding my breath.

Posted by: Stand fast in the liberty at January 24, 2007 9:29 PM

Who will hire him in this country?

I have a suggestion. Ruth Simmons, President of Brown, who received her doctorate in French, and who gives the impression of being a no-nonsense thinker, should hire him. To teach French, and possibly to be her adviser on what is wrong with American higher education. For an intelligent lycee teacher is well-placed to understand at once what is wrong.

And if she can't or won't, the first act of the next President of Harvard, if the right candidate is chosen, should be to hire Robert Redeker. Figure out afterwards what he can do, but hire him now.

Or if that is not possible, then why not one of those amply-endowed think tanks in Washington -- possibly the same one that now gives haven to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, so that from that secure forum Redeker can speak around the country on the islamization of Western Europe, and what it means for the future of the West.

Do something, somebody.

Posted by: Hugh at January 24, 2007 9:35 PM

This is the article that pissed off the Muslims

Robert Redeker: English translation
Posté le Jeudi 28 septembre 2006
What should the free world do while facing Islamist intimidation?
The reactions caused by Benedict XVI’s analysis of Islam and violence highlight the underhanded maneuver carried out by Islam to stifle what the West values more than anything, and which does not exist in any Moslem country: freedom of thought and expression.
Islam tries to impose its rules on Europe : opening of public swimming pools at certain hours reserved exclusively for women, ban on caricaturing this religion, demands for special diets for Muslim children in school cafeterias, struggle to impose the veil at school, accusations of Islamophobia against free spirits.
How can one explain the ban on the wearing thongs on Paris-Beaches* this summer? The reasoning put forth was bizarre: women wearing thongs would risk “disturbing the peace”. Did this mean that bands of frustrated youths would become violent while being offended by displays of beauty? Or were the authorities scared of Islamist demonstrations by virtue squads near Paris-Beaches?
However, the authorization of the veil on the street is more disturbing to public peace than wearing a thong, because it invites complaints against upholding the oppression of women .This ban represents an Islamization of sensibilities in France, a more or less conscious submission to the dictates of Islam. At the very least it is the result of the insidious Muslim pressure on the minds: even those who protested the introduction of a “Jean Paul II Square” in Paris would not be opposed to the construction of mosques. Islam is trying to force Europe to yield to its vision of humanity.
As in the past with Communism, the West finds itself under ideological watch. Islam presents itself, like defunct Communism, as an alternative to the Western world. In the way of Communism before it, Islam, to conquer spirits, plays on a sensitive string. It prides itself on a legitimacy which troubles Western conscience, which is attentive to others: it claims to be the voice of the oppressed of the planet. Yesterday, the voice of the poor supposedly came from Moscow, today it originates in Mecca! Again, today, western intellectuals incarnate the eye of the Koran, as they have incarnated the eye of Moscow. They now excommunicate people because of Islamophobia, as they did before because of anti-communism.
This opening to others, specific to the West, is a secularization of Christianity that can be summarized thus: the other person must come before myself. [note: altruism] The Westerner, heir to Christianity, is he that exposes his soul bare. He runs the risk of being seen as weak. With the same ardor as Communism, Islam treats generosity, broadmindedness, tolerance, gentleness, freedom of women and of manners, democratic values, as marks of decadence. They are weaknesses that it seeks to exploit, by means of useful idiots, self-righteous consciences drowning in nice feelings, in order to impose the Koranic order on the Western world itself.
The Koran is a book of unparalleled violence. Maxime Rodinson states, in Encyclopedia Universalis, some truths that in France are as significant as they are taboo. On one hand: “Mohammed revealed in Medina unsuspected qualities as political leader and military chief (…) He resorted to private war, by then a prevalent custom in Arabia (….) Mohammed soon sent small groups of partisans to attack the Meccan caravans, thus punishing his unbelieving compatriots and simultaneously acquiring the booty of a wealthy man.”
There is more: “Mohammed profited from this success by eradicating the Jewish tribe which resided in Medina, the Quarayza, whom he accused of suspect behavior.” And: “After the death of Khadija, he married a widow, a good housewife, called Sawda, and in addition to the little Aisha, barely ten years old. His erotic predilections, held in check for a long time, led him to ten simultaneous marriages .”
A merciless war chief, plunderer, slaughterer of Jews and a polygamist, such is the man revealed through the Koran.
Of course, the Catholic church is not above reproach. Its history is strewn with dark pages, for which it has officially repented. The Inquisition, the hounding of witches, the execution of the philosophers Giordano Bruno and Vanini, those wrong-thinking Epicureans, in the 18th century the execution of the knight of La Barre for impiety, do not plead in the church’s favor. But what differentiates Christianity from Islam is obvious: it is always possible to go back to true evangelical values, the peaceful character of Jesus as opposed to the deviations of the Church.
None of the faults of the Church have their roots in the Gospel. Jesus is non-violent. Going back to Jesus is akin to forswear the excesses of the Church. Going back to Mahomet, to the contrary, reinforces hate and violence. Jesus is a master of love; Mahomet is a master of hatred.
The stoning of Satan, each year in Mecca, is not only an obsolete superstition. It not only sets the stage for a hysterical crowd flirting with barbarity. Its import is anthropological. Here is a rite, which each Muslim is invited to submit to, that emphasizes violence as a sacred duty in the very heart of the believer.
This stoning, accompanied each year by the accidental trampling to death of some of the believers, sometimes up to several hundreds, is a rite that feeds archaic violence.
Instead of getting rid of this archaic violence, and thus imitating Judaism and Christianity (Judaism starts when it abandons human sacrifice, and enters civilization; Christianity transforms sacrifice through the Eucharist), Islam builds a nest for this violence, where it will incubate. Whereas Judaism and Christianity are religions whose rites spurn violence, by delegitimizing it, Islam is a religion that exalts violence and hatred in its everyday rites and sacred book.
Hatred and violence dwell in the book with which every Muslim is brought up, the Koran. As in the Cold War, where violence and intimidation were the methods used by an ideology hell bent on hegemony, so today Islam tries to put its leaden mantel all over the world. Benedict XVI’s cruel experience is testimony to this. Nowadays, the West has to be called the “free world” in comparison to the Muslim world; likewise, the enemies of the “free world”, the zealous bureaucrats of the Koran’s vision, swarm in the very center of the free World.

Posted by: John Sobieski at January 24, 2007 10:35 PM

"At the very least it is the result of the insidious Muslim pressure on the minds: even those who protested the introduction of a “Jean Paul II Square” in Paris would not be opposed to the construction of mosques." -- Robert Redeker

That double standard on the part of non-Muslim Parisians is not the result of any pressure by Muslims. Not one bit. That double standard has had rich soil and has been watered dutifully every day and put out in the sun for years -- all Western soil, all Western water, all Western sun. Nothing to do with Islam.

PC is worse than Islam.

Posted by: remote_control at January 24, 2007 11:23 PM

Explanation of my dictum, "PC is worse than Islam".

Imagine some men have your daughter hostage and one of them is holding a knife up to her throat, and every indication suggests that they are madmen ready to kill her.

Imagine also a second group of men -- men who otherwise belong to your society of manners and morals -- who, nevertheless, for reasons of stupidity, naivete, or some garbled idealism, are preventing you from stopping the madmen from killing your daughter.

During the time of that terrible predicament, the front-burner problem switches from the madmen to the second group of men who are preventing you from stopping the madmen.

In that sense, PC is worse than Islam: it is preventing us from stopping Islam.

Posted by: remote_control at January 24, 2007 11:29 PM

I read the article above and have come across these ideas many times. Every free thinking person in Europe is reaching these conclusions.

However, nowadays the price of freedom is governement sponsered Islamic terror in the guise of PC Multi-culturalism.

I am afraid it's over for Europe, what the German Nazis could not achieve the Muslim Nazis will and or governments are the new Kapos.

Posted by: raz at January 25, 2007 2:14 AM

Once again the Muslims demonstrate they abhor the truth getting out to the Non Muslims...Muslims fight truth with death....They do indeed demonstrate this when they kill teachers, principals, priests, nuns,journalists, photographers, film makers,editors,and writers...

....The Muslims deeds speak louder than words ever could....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 25, 2007 7:46 AM

Anyone interested in the historical roots of French defeatism should read William Shirer's "The Collapse of the Third Republic". Shirer lived in Europe during the 1930s and during the war, and also wrote the masterful "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" with which any serious student of WWII is familiar.

"Third Republic" explains how France essentially committed suicide in the face of the Nazi challenge. Contrary to commonly held opinion, her military was not technologically or numerically weaker than the Nazis, and many innovative Nazi tactics were of French origin, yet her military was too sclerotic to put them into practice. When the attack came, the French high command refused to use radios, issued vague orders, and reacted sluggishly. Their doom was sealed by their own lack of confidence and incompetence. There was nothing inevitable about the fall of France; had she fought like she did in 1914 the Nazis would have been quickly destroyed, and the world saved its greatest nightmare ever.

There is a clear parallel between the French suicide of 1940 and our present predicament. France is in the process of repeating the feat of self-destruction, but this time she will in all likelihood not be able to rise. We should all be aware of the way she destroyed herself in the last century, because this time the result will be the same: a more powerful foe, a longer war, devastation of Europe, and risk of the total defeat of the West.

Posted by: Quijybo at January 25, 2007 8:28 AM

I believe when the French see's that anyone announcing they are Islamic and put them in prison, then they'll come to their senses that Islam is a threat against the world !

Posted by: Jeff at January 25, 2007 9:36 AM

WISE WORDS::

"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case; you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." Winston Churchill

Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 25, 2007 10:26 AM

On the bright side, or, perhaps on the slightly less dark side, as a researcher with the CNRS, he should be able to continue his writing without having to risk being shot in the classroom. That is, unless he agreed to shut up in return for continued employment. One could hardly blame him if he did agree to keep quiet, since the state has apparently abandoned him. La raison d'état.

Posted by: Minority of One at January 25, 2007 10:31 AM

SICK 33.26 Al-Habzab
And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (Before). And Allah has power over all things.

Of course France belongs to the muslims

http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2007/01/sick-3326.html

Posted by: shiva at January 25, 2007 12:25 PM