all-encompassingly

we still remember mitch hedberg

A severed foot is the ultimate stocking stuffer.

Oct 21st 2003

“hi, i’m nihad awad, and i’m a massive tool”

nihad awad is a gargantuan, unredeemable tool. here’s why:

(CNN) — Lt. Gen. William Boykin, a top Pentagon intelligence official, apologized for remarks he made about Muslims, including saying that radical Muslims hate the United States “because we’re a Christian nation, because our foundation and roots are Judeo-Christian and the enemy is a guy named Satan.”

In a statement issued late Friday, Boykin said, “For those who have been offended by my statements, I offer a sincere apology.”

awad the tool

CNN anchor Soledad O’Brien spoke with Nihad Awad, director of the Council on American-Islamic relations, and asked him for his reaction.

AWAD: First of all, let me clarify one point. [Boykin] also said Muslims worship idols, and that shows me a very serious sign of ignorance in a very important position within the Pentagon.

ignorance at the pentagon? you’re KIDDING! but the truth is, he didn’t say you worship idols. he said–of a muslim fighter who told him allah would protect him–“I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol.” that is pretty much a meaningless comment. if you’ve ever played on a sports team that’s prayed together for victory in a particular game, you know what i’m talking about. (both sides are praying for victory, but god may have already made up his mind about who will win.)

AWAD: Of course, his apology should be appreciated, but the question is do we want a person with extremist views in this important position, who’s in charge of filtering intelligence that will be used in decision-making in life-and-death situations on the war on terrorism, and what kind of message are we sending to the Muslim world, which is already skeptical about our motives and intentions with the Muslim world, in the war in Iraq, and even, of course, in the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

first, note that he called the general’s views “extremist.” please. when you stop strapping bombs to your children maybe you’ll have the right to call a christian an “extremist.”

second, they are attacking civilized people left and right. stop trying to correct us when we mistakenly say “they worship idols” and spend your time trying to stop them from KILLING US.

third, he apologized. what more do you want? don’t muslims believe in forgiveness? or do they, and nihad awad is part of a “radical muslim splinter group” that doesn’t represent “true islam?”

AWAD: So, if he continues to be there, I think it sends a very negative message to the Muslim world, and we’re trying as Americans to win the hearts and minds of the world and Arabs and Muslims and we’re now shooting ourselves in the foot if he stays where he is.

O’BRIEN: So you’re saying that in spite of the apology, he should be removed from his position?

AWAD: It’s not the apology but the views. How would I trust someone who looks at Islam and at Muslims as idol worshippers, and allow me to put one point of education here because it is very important: Islam is a monotheistic religion.

God in Islam is the same god as in Christianity and as in Judaism. … the word in the bible in Arabic says Allah, so we worship the same god. With this level of ignorance that exists within a high official who is conducting the war on terrorism, I don’t trust his judgment to make life and death decisions. [source]

so, let me get this straight. boykin is a dangerous extremist who should step down, while yasser arafat, the palestinian leader who feigns compromise with the civilized world–then goes on inciting his people with hateful anti-peace garbage–receives no criticism of awad?

a lexis-nexis search of the previous five years finds only three documents containing both “nihad awad” and “arafat.” none of those contain criticisms of arafat. rather, awad criticizes the US in every one. he even defended arafat against charges last summer that he should step down, “it’s up to the palestinians themselves to choose their leaders in a free and independent political process.” good thing arafat’s not a partisan religious extremist! this way, awad is okay with endorsing him.

awad, unbiased arbiter, speaking at an international A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition event.  click here to see brain terminal's coverage of one of this organization's 'peaceful' events.

concerning america’s support of israel, awad said, “It is truly disturbing to see american elected officials falling over themselves in an unseemly attempt to pledge allegiance to a foreign government and its domestic lobby.” he stopped himself just short of saying, “jews rule the world.” he had to wait for someone ELSE from the “religion of peace” to make that pacifying statement.

so what about the malaysian prime minister? he wasn’t lucky enough to make his recent comments while off-duty, in front of people whose closest involvement with politics will be watching the evening news (as in boykin’s case). he made his comments in front of the organization of the islamic conference, an official meeting of policy makers, as far as i can tell. boykin was just attempting to console people who are trying to figure out why they’re getting bombed by towel-donning cave-dwellers. so, who needs to be reprimanded?

by the way, the malaysian PM has refused to retract his statement (unlike boykin), and i’m yet to hear of a single muslim organization that has expressed so much as uneasiness over the PM’s words. in fact,

The audience at the summit gave Mahathir a standing ovation afterward, and none of the participants from 57 Islamic nations denounced the prime minister’s comments about the Jewish community. [source]

it all comes down to this: nihad awad is an idiot. he is putting the burden of tolerance and appeasement on us, the victims of rogue terrorism. he is another muslim asking the US to pander to the terrorists, all the while disavowing any connection to them. something tells me no one should be taking this man–or his organization–seriously.

this next transcript features awad condemning the arrest of the three men in florida in 2002 who joked about september 11th and said, “wait ’til they see september 13th.” notice he defends them by bringing up a crime perpetrated by an evil jew! my favorite part is o’brien’s response to that crap.

U.S. Muslim expert: We must check our prejudices
September 14, 2002

(CNN) — Three Muslim men driving on Florida’s Alligator Alley were pulled over and interrogated Friday after a woman told authorities she overheard them at a Georgia restaurant making suspicious comments. The men were released after an extensive and long search determined there was no threat. One of the men said the woman was “flat-out lying” about the comments she said she heard.

CNN anchor Miles O’Brien was joined Saturday by Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations in Washington, about the issues surrounding the detention of the men.

O’BRIEN: Tell me what the family members are telling you.

AWAD: Well, they’re concerned. From the beginning, I got a call around 11 o’clock yesterday, saying that they’re concerned about the way their sons are treated, the media attention that has been there all over the country and probably all over the world. They’re concerned about the reputation of their children and what will happen next and why they have been picked on just among so many people who just go to a restaurant and eat and just leave without any question, without any reports to the authorities.

O’BRIEN: What were they saying in that restaurant, Mr. Awad?

AWAD: Well, I have not spoken to any of those students and, again, let me just say this. It is very important for us to be alert and vigilant, but also we have to check sometimes our prejudices and, you know, stereotypes of others. The public and media attention was phenomenal yesterday [Friday].

And yesterday, also, I brought the point that just almost two weeks ago in the state of Florida, a Jewish doctor was busted by the local law enforcement authorities having more than 30 devices of explosives. Twenty of them were ready to go with a plan to bomb Islamic centers; a school, and a list of those; and a little plan, what he’s going to do next. And I have not seen any live coverage of that incident.

O’BRIEN: All right, in…

AWAD: I have not seen that public attention.

O’BRIEN: We’re showing a picture of the three men involved here [in the Florida case]. You’re talking about another case. May I suggest to you, sir, that as a news event, this one rated more coverage because of the very public nature of it all? It happened on Alligator Alley. They had to shut down the highway. The air space was closed down. This other case didn’t happen on a public byway, if you will. So I think there might be more to it than that. But let’s not debate the journalistic decisions here.

AWAD: Well, it was…

O’BRIEN: If these three men were, in fact, joking, shouldn’t they be arrested for felonious stupidity?

AWAD: It’s a stupid joke. It is bad. I wouldn’t do it and it does not reflect me or the Muslim community. And I think we have to check the resources, the sources, and just make sure that if this lady is credible, she did the right thing. The law enforcement authorities have done the right thing. And I think that the system was tested, the system is working, but also we have to see if our diversity is being tested at the same time.

O’BRIEN: Well, I mean what do you propose that a person should do if they hear a conversation such as the conversation this woman apparently heard?

AWAD: Oh, I…

O’BRIEN: Regardless of what the person’s race or religious background might be? Of course they should call the authorities, shouldn’t they?

AWAD: Oh, they, definitely. If I was in her position, I would do the same. But also I have to check what constitutes now a suspicious behavior or action…

O’BRIEN: I would say running through a toll booth is suspicious, isn’t it?

AWAD: Oh, definitely. But also wearing a Kofi cap like this man was …

O’BRIEN: No, no, no, no. She didn’t say anything about the cap. She said they were talking about 9/11, wait until you see what happens on 9/13. A little later they run a toll both. Now, that’s suspicious activity, in my opinion. (Editor’s note: The man accused of running the toll booth denies the allegation)

AWAD: Definitely. But see, you know, the question is people have heard from her and they have heard from them. Now I think we have to have a serious investigation, who’s telling the truth. But also, again, we have to commend her if she was credible and also we have to check our own prejudices and stereotypes. And we cannot just judge the looks of people, the way they dress and their religion.

O’BRIEN: All right, but…

AWAD: … because we have incidents in the past.

O’BRIEN: Given the stakes here and given who the enemy is, can you conjure up any scenario where profiling is justified? I mean after all, there are millions of people in this country and there’s only so many security officials, law enforcement people. Isn’t racial profiling, within certain boundaries, appropriate?

AWAD: Well, remember after the Oklahoma City bombing? I have not seen white males being stopped while driving trucks passing by federal buildings. It is all to do and it should never have happened. But it does not happen today.

African-Americans can tell you a lot about racial profiling and Muslim and Arab-Americans can tell you abundant of stories now. Just yesterday I heard in our office that we are receiving so many reports from just couples who have been, for example, in Washington D.C., tourists taking pictures … of a monument and being surrounded by 12 agents asking them not to take pictures. And these are Americans like you and me. Why are they being suspected? Because of the way they dress.

O’BRIEN: All right, we’re just going to have to leave it at that, unfortunately. Obviously, that’s not going to settle it. Nihad Awad, we appreciate you joining us. Thanks for your time, sir.

[source]

further, i recommend the following articles on this issue:

ann coulter

marie @ PME

cal thomas qtd by james @ MWP

5 Responses to ““hi, i’m nihad awad, and i’m a massive tool””

  1. Like your troll warning, Travis…and I agree, Nihad Awad is a twit of the first degree!

  2. Just how does Boykin’s religion effect his ability to kill? Frankly a strong belief system is a pretty good thing in a man who uses force to defend this country.

    And when did Islam become ‘liberal’ as opposed to Christianity being ‘exclusive’. Last time I checked aspostasy was a beheading offence in Saudi Arabia…

    Though if the ACLU gets their way Christianity will become banned in the USA.

  3. Kind of funny how the “tool” didnt say anything to repute the Malaysian pM re: his remarks about how jews rulle the world. i guess its ok to hate jews and infidel americans but its not ok to lambast Allah and his muslim followers.

  4. For the life of me, I cannot see any differences among what the media calls “fundamental muslims” vs. “Wahabi muslims” vs. “moderate muslims.” They all spew the same hate-filled rhetoric. And, other than just being polite, I can’t see that Boykin really had anything to apologize for. BTW, I’ve got a question. Pigcheese?

  5. who is pigcheese? once upon a time my roommates and i used to stay up until 4am every night. on one of these nights we stumbled upon a website called NCMO.org. it was a version of a dating/matchmaker site, i guess. we wanted to browse the selection at said site, but had to create an account. thus, “pigcheese” was born. he got his profile pic from uglypeople.com, and his profile included a lot of immmature fat jokes.

    i should note that, though we got several inquiries, we never took the young ladies up on their offers. the site has since been taken down, but a new one has been in development for about a year at the old domain, ncmo.org.

    now i discriminately use “pigcheese@beef.net” when i’m afraid of getting spammed.

    as for the difference between muslims, muslims, and other muslims, ann coulter treated the subject quite well today,

    Islamic leaders in the United States instantly denounced Boykin’s unflattering characterization of bin Laden and Hussein as an attack on Islam. They haven’t been this huffy since describing bin Laden as “not a true Muslim” and Hussein as a “secularist.” If our enemies aren’t “true Muslims,” why are the “true Muslims” always so offended on their behalf?

    James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, has called for Boykin to be fired. After the 9/11 attacks, Zogby said: “Regardless of who is ultimately found to be responsible for these terrorist murders, no ethnic or religious community should be treated as suspect and collectively blamed.” But apparently they are collectively offended. They might want to think through the implications of that. If we have to apologize for the general, then maybe they should apologize for 9/11. [article]