Stay in the know! Sign up to get Fauquier County news updates delivered to your inbox.
Advertise on Fauquier Now!
Do you support the $2.2-trillion coronavirus stimulus package? Vote!
Free classifieds! Members can also post calendar events, news, opinions and more ... all for free! Register now!
Login · Forgot Your Password?
June 21, 2019 · OPINION

“Love for our Muslim brothers and sisters”

Photo/Scott Christian
Protestors at the Warrenton Forum presentation, “The Rise of the Princelings,” on Thursday night at the Warrenton Community Center.
By Scott Christian

Fifty local protesters Thursday night attended a program that was open to the public and sponsored by a group called the Warrenton Forum.

The various signs held by the protesters in the Warrenton Community Center decried hate speech and promoted acceptance and “love for our Muslim brothers and sisters.”

The Warrenton’s Forum’s speaker Clare Lopez, vice president for research and analysis at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C., gave a presentation on “The Rise of the Princelings,” which was about second- and third-generation Muslim Brotherhood families who are now entering politics, especially in Virginia.  

Following a 40-minute presentation, Ms. Lopez took questions from the audience, fewer than 10 of whom were not there in protest. 

People said that Ms. Lopez had presented no evidence that Muslim politicians have done anything other than carry out their constitutional duties as elected officials. Moreover, a number of people questioned the motives of Ms. Lopez, stating that she was making baseless conspiracy theories that all Muslims want to convert America to Sharia Law.

Georgetown University's “Bridge Initiative” states that “Clare Lopez promotes falsified claims about Muslims in America,” and the Southern Poverty Law Center considers CSP an “anti-Muslim hate group.”

One member of the audience cited an Anti-Defamation League report that stated, “Every single extremist killing [in 2018], from Pittsburgh to Parkland, had a link to right-wing extremism.”

The writer is a co-founder of the Northern Piedmont Chapter of Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy.
Member comments
To comment, please log in or register.
Westerly · July 15, 2019 at 7:24 pm
The Souther Poverty Law Center, cited as an arbiter, is widely regarded as a corrupt, arbitrary far- left hate group itself. Devastating exposes of the once legit org have appeared in publications across the political spectrum.
Westerly · July 15, 2019 at 4:43 pm

Just remind me which Judeo-Christian country has not experienced profound disturbances after large-scale Muslim immigration.

Rep Omar, the Rep from Somalia exemplifies what you can expect, giving the lie to the false and dishonest characterization of Muslims in government as a beneficial or benign force. We have been treated to a steady and unrelenting stream of virulent antisemitism, she has trashed the millions of Americans who gave their lives to provide a safe haven for her from her medieval cesspool homeland by stating that 'immigrants love the country more than those born here.' She has touted socialism, a disease that would impoverish the US as it has done for oountless other countries. Her fellow Somalians' arrogance and ingratitude are legion-- witness Minnesota Muslim cab drivers who refuse to transport dogs or passengers with wine. With a million immigrants on waiting lists eager to enter the US and embrace our values, many Muslims—with their inimical views on freedom of speech, women, and so much else-- rightfully belong at the bottom of the list. Perhaps vastly enhanced screening can improve the situation, but that is not on the horizon.
DonkeyFarmer · July 12, 2019 at 1:24 am
Just mention Muslims and here comes Rusty Wheel....
Tony Bentley · July 2, 2019 at 8:23 pm
Jeffersonian American - Every heard of paragraphs?
DonkeyFarmer · June 29, 2019 at 9:21 pm
You have anything to add to the conversation Rusty or you just appear to insult then run?
Rusty Wheel · June 29, 2019 at 9:07 pm
... the gang's all here, with traverse returned as donkeyfarmer to high5 and harass with twins virtus and jeffersonian american ... just mention muslims and they is on the job ... welcome back from hibernation, boys ...
Jim Griffin · June 29, 2019 at 12:32 pm
This isn't the only place I write or the only issues on which I express myself. My views are often seen as too conservative by others in my field.

As for tolerance, I am extremely open-minded. I would defend everyone's right to express themselves, even pseudonymously, but that doesn't mean I agree with the views or the decision to do so without identifying themselves. It is best to consider the source, attempt to understand its difference of perspective, the reasons why the POV is different.

Indeed, for two decades I've run a listserv focused on the digital delivery of art with a focus on music and its monetization. We've always permitted pseudonymous speech, but without question the list prizes clearly identified communication.

And, yes, I've suffered for contrarian views in my field, but ultimately I think it more important to communicate openly and stand accountable, just as I counsel my 15yo son to be a man of his word.

I think it Jeffersonian, ironically, especially when communicating on the topic of this discussion thread: Religion.

Jefferson and Madison wrote the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom (basis of the First Amendment) in 1779: “Well aware that Almighty God hath created the mind free.”

Patrick Henry and other Christians tried to substitute the words “Jesus Christ” for “Almighty God” in this opening passage but were overwhelmingly voted down.

This vote was interpreted by Jefferson to mean that Virginia’s representatives wanted the law “to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahomedan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.”

The resultant Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom: "no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."
DonkeyFarmer · June 29, 2019 at 12:15 pm
Jim you can use your real name because conservatives wont attack you because you are a liberal. Us conservatives have to worry about crazy liberals that will try to get us kicked out of school or fired from our jobs. Spit on in restaurants. Refused service. Attacked in the streets for wearing a MAGA hat. All because we dont agree with you. Im not going to get into a case by case argument with you over this either. And you are not going to shame me into it by calling me a Russian. You really should get over the whole Russian thing by the way. It's proven now the only one colluding with Russians was Hillary and the DNC. I'm glad you can conduct your business safely. It shows how tolerant your conservative neighbors are.
Jim Griffin · June 29, 2019 at 12:05 pm
Journalism is all about the 5 W's: Who what where when why how. Who is at the beginning.

It's the whole point: Consider the source. Stories, opinions, they all start with a byline. I've been a journalist for decades, writing for newspapers, magazines and more.

No one appreciates unnamed sources the same as they do those properly identified. In fact, they make people angry when accusations fly.

I give respect: I read each word carefully, consider the source and offer my own opinion in response. I adore disagreement and honest difference of opinion.

Your prefer the hood. Talk about creepy! Hoodies and hoods. Undisclosed conflicts of interest. One voice pretending to be different names. Etc.

When I do business, interacting with people around town, they often bring up the comments and say they deplore the pseudonymous comments, thinking them fake, duplicative and without factual basis. They know it's me, who I am and agree or disagree appreciate the expression of the opinion. They say so.

It's who I am. I adore creative expression and differences of opinion. They sharpen and teach, as do I.

It's what I do. I've made a living working with communication, media, entertainment, journalism. It will be a part of me forever. I teach it. I testify. People seek my opinion and experience with communication, especially digital. When I read my hometown news I add my thoughts.

Lincoln put it well: If two people share the same opinion, we don't need one of them.
DonkeyFarmer · June 29, 2019 at 11:51 am
The only reason Jim would want your real name is so that he can research you. Find out where you work or go to school or find out you own a business in town. What a creepy guy. Stop asking for my name. You're not getting it.
Jim Griffin · June 29, 2019 at 9:04 am
Worth a read:

The tactics of a Russian Troll Farm ... "The intent was to create an atmosphere of division and anger online."
Jim Griffin · June 29, 2019 at 8:59 am

There can be no personal attacks on pseudonyms. By their very nature they are not personal expressions.

Agitate? I simply express my opinion and cite the source of supporting facts, in this case the very objective government numbers on the origins of terrorism, Georgetown's operation and the very clear policy of this free publication in which we are graciously permitted the opportunity to express ourselves.

I've never hurt anyone nor ever threatened to do so. Presumably, we are all neighbors in a fine community. Seems you agree with some, disagree with others, as it should be.

This publication is clear: Comments have lower value (worth less) when you cannot take into account their source. No doubt your usual source (Jefferson) would have less value if left unnamed, right? Why use it if it doesn't add value?
Jim Griffin · June 29, 2019 at 8:49 am
Cyber bullying?

Please cite an example. Seriously.

This site asks for real names. I comply. I used a pseudonym myself until it asked for real names and thereafter I used mine.

As does Scott. And, yes, Thomas Paine's use of a pseudonym cost him credibility with some.

I do not in any way support terrorism of any kind, but examining its sources is important in placing blame.
Jeffersonian American · June 29, 2019 at 8:47 am
I appreciate and wish to add to the wise observations of Virtus and DonkeyFarmer below, each of who make sage points in the face of personal attacks and smears by social agitators who disagree with any person or any facts presented in the "Comments" section to prompt additional reader critical thinking on a given subject- particularly when the standard content published often features omission of facts, deliberate attempts at distortion and obfuscation of facts, and deliberate alterations of facts contained in the historic record anyone can research independently and find. I will add to the recurring serial agitator's attacks on-line below, "What's In A Name?" How do I know your real name is not Joe Slobotnik whenever you post your so-called "name?" Yes, I appreciate the guidelines- not rules- for posting; however, as others observe, we live in an increasingly dangerous cyberspace world and local community where those who disagree with facts presented can present a dangerous threat to one's personal family and property. As for my pseudonym to protect my privacy, it does reflect who I am and what my convictions are. To consider my written thoughts as "worthless" because of the name associated with them is preposterous. My comments are just as real and worthy of consideration as any others who post thoughtful comments whether they use a real name or pseudonym. Are the ideals espoused by Thomas Jefferson worthless? As a Jeffersonian American, I, along with many millions of others, deeply believe in those ideals outlined in Mr. Jefferson's Declaration of Independence, and those espoused by him for our Natural Law rights, limited government, decentralization, and a federative polity of independent, sovereign states in a voluntary union of states as the founders bequeathed to us. America was born in secession- the Natural Law rights and "Principles of 1776" which animated our desire for peaceful separation from the British Crown; and believe in those same "Principles of '76" which, 85 years later, animated the southern states of our American republic to peacefully, legally secede from the United States of America in 1860-61 to form an alternate voluntary union of states, the Confederate States of America, leaving the northern states intact and their federal government untrammeled as they wished. Sadly, Mr. Lincoln's War to Prevent Southern Independence by a brutal and bloody force of arms seemingly forever established that the rights of our Federal Government reigned supreme over the rights of the states and the individual (now controlling every aspect of our daily lives) and which turned our Jeffersonian ideals and our U.S. Constitution upside down. And yet, these Natural Law Rights are still waiting to be rediscovered by current or future generations of Americans across our continent- it is up to the American citizens to put an end to federal and other tyranny. And what was once considered "classical liberalism" thought and thinking in Thomas Jefferson's time today would be considered "conservatism." It was Thomas Jefferson who wisely observed in his own time, "I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." And I certainly never dismiss anyone's postings in the "Comments" section as being "worthless" or unworthy of public notice. It seems at least one on-line agitator routinely and frequently never follows his own admonishment to others: "Never assume the motives of others are, to them, less noble than yours are to you." And that's why I use the name Jeffersonian American. It accurately reflects who I am and those principles I believe in even more than just by using my real name. Good day to all and thank you for reading.
Virtus · June 29, 2019 at 6:56 am

Interesting to note that Scott does not provide the names of the ""People" who said..." or "..."People" questioned..." in his opinion piece. These "people" are members of the Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy (VIPP). Doesn't Scott know them? Following your logic are his statements "likely worthless?"

Regarding pseudonyms, I stand behind every word I write and use a pseudonym to protect my privacy. What's to stop the VIPP or others from setting up a protest in front of my house because I counter their opinion or stance?

Did readers give Thomas Paine's writings less credence when he used a pseudonym? Are his words "likely worthless?"

Please note that Georgetown University is also funded by Islamics. See my below June 23 "Interfaith Communities in the crosshairs" link.

I and others will not be silenced by your cyber bullying. Nor will I forget 9/11 or the 72 jihadi attacks on US soil since 9/11. (See my 6/21 link below).
Jim Griffin · June 26, 2019 at 6:23 pm
This fine news outlet puts it well at the comment box: "For credibility, sign your real name; stand behind your comments. Readers will give less credence to anonymous posts."

Their publication, their advice, their rules. I simply follow them. You choose not to do so. Maybe the mules are growing on you.

BTW, yes, if you financially benefit from the advice you give or position you take, expect extra scrutiny. Totally appropriate.

Ater all, you think "mass shooter crazy people" are leftists. I think they come in all stripes and varieties, but if you check out the link I provided you'll find:

"According to a 2017 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, "of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far right wing violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73 percent) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27 percent). The total number of fatalities is about the same for far right wing violent extremists and radical Islamist violent extremists over the approximately 15-year period (106 and 94, respectively). However, 52 percent of the deaths attributable to radical Islamist violent extremists occurred in a single event—an attack on the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida in 2016."

"In 2018, most ideologically motivated murders were linked to right-wing extremism."

Thanks for raising the topic, Comrade. What's the weather in Moscow today?
DonkeyFarmer · June 26, 2019 at 6:12 pm
Why do you want our real names Jim? So you can look us up? Find out who we work for and attack our motives like you did with Adam?

Some leftists that can not tolerate opposing views devote their lives to destroying people they dont agree with. Trying to get them fired from their job or shut down their business simply because they dont agree with them. Just throw out the word racist or homophobe and destroy that person.

There are a lot of nutjobs on the internet. I don't want them knowing where i live or work.
Jim Griffin · June 25, 2019 at 3:21 pm
Why not use your real names? The writer of this opinion piece did so.

If you refuse to stand behind your words they are likely worthless. Calling someone else a hack from a pseudonymous perch is cowardice.

Politics are not determinant of terrorism, which comes from all manner of crazy people (as I observed on this thread previously):
DonkeyFarmer · June 25, 2019 at 12:40 am
Scott Christian you are a hack. Cherry picking nutcase audience comments. Promoting the narrative that mass shooter crazy people are right-wing. The truth is that they are leftists. The Pittsburg shooter hated Trump. The colorado shooter was a trans gender trump hater as well. Dont forget the bernie volunteer that tried to kill as many Republicans as he could at a baseball field. James Hodskinson. Try wearing a MAGA hat in DC and see what happens. They attack you. They even attack high school kids. They are violent intolerant crazy people. By the way Obama killed Muslims that were american citizens without any court order. He kept a kill list. It was called the "disposition matrix" He killed american citizens with drone strikes with no trial no conviction. #truth
Jeffersonian American · June 23, 2019 at 9:18 pm
I am familiar with the Center for Security Policy public programs and writings. I would like to know what the Interfaith Center for Public Policy and our local "Straight Outta Warrenton" Koffee Klatch Mob Alinsky Radicals specifically found to be hate speech from the fact-based materials presented by the Center for Security Policy public speaker in her community presentation? Why are documented facts being presented to our community labeled hate speech instead of free speech? Some other inconvenient questions might be: Have these radicals present ever read the Koran? How many of them would like to live under Shariah Law? How many of them are willing to answer that question while taking a lie-detector test? Thankfully, this "Opinion" writer took his own photograph of this community lecture and fed them to an anxiously awaiting, completely objective "news editor" that gladly published the "Opinion" piece attacking the factual presentation of the Center for Security Policy, labeling it as "hate speech." The event photograph does not lie. Were the smiling, smirking, non-Islamists protesting this lecture as photographed joined by large numbers of Islamic men, women and children at the public lecture event? Why is it that I see precious few persons representing the Islamic faith pictured at the event in the attached photograph? Are these very same Fauquier citizens of faith outraged that their public schools are subjecting Fauquier students to indoctrinations of the Islamic faith under the "GOALS 2015" initiative while denying these same public school students the right to freely exercise their Christian faith in their school? Why must Christianity be excluded from our local public schools- and does the Interfaith Center for Public Policy protest this kind of ban on free speech in our public schools? Read the Koran; and read the extensive factual materials from the Center for Security Policy on the Creeping Shariah threat now found in every county across America. These kinds of public community programs are not hate speech; they are free speech discussions that examine a wide variety of factual evidence and highly credible, primary sources. I encourage my fellow Fauquier Citizens to examine the factual evidence for themselves and to reach their own conclusions:

Another timely article from today's American Thinker describing conditions in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and that sound very strangely familiar to conditions here in Fauquier County and throughout Virginia:
Jim Griffin · June 23, 2019 at 7:11 am

When I was a student at Georgetown University, it was (and remains) abundantly clear "who funds Georgetown University to better understand Georgetown's motives."

Jesuits fund and control Georgetown University. It is avowedly Roman Catholic. See Wikipedia:

As regards your reference to VIPP, I suspect you refer to the Virginia Interfaith Center:

No VIPP personal experience, unlike Georgetown University, so I cannot speak to it from direct personal knowledge, nor can I address your hypothetical.
Virtus · June 23, 2019 at 6:10 am

RE motives, while the VIPP's motives may be noble to them, is spreading falsehoods about the speaker noble? Follow who funds Georgetown University to better understand Georgetown's motives.

To better understand VIPP's motives, does VIPP embrace the Koran including verse 9:5 and are the VIPP and its volunteers OK with being used to advance the Islamic Dawah:

If Islamists spoke on the state of Zionism in the US would VIPP protest this lecture?
Jim Griffin · June 21, 2019 at 6:18 pm

Every nation and people advances its interests and views of the world, including their dominant religions. Substitute other nations and cultures, reach the same conclusion, starting with Israel or Saudis or Americans or Brits or Russians or Chinese, and to no end.

Consider this principle for life: "Never assume the motives of others are, to them, less noble than yours are to you."

Catholic tribunals, Rabbinical Law, Sharia Law -- what's the difference? Let people govern themselves as they wish so long as they aren't dragging non-believers into their sphere of influence.

As regards terrorism in the US:

Crazy people justify terrorism with many excuses. Islamists are not atop the list.
Virtus · June 21, 2019 at 5:10 pm

You and I are entitled to our respective opinions and right to protest as long as our Constitutional right to freedom of speech is not weakened through the Islamic guise of labeling any spoken or written statement that questions the Koran and/or Islamic culture as "hate speech" or Islamophobia. The very Islamics you and your group love are entering politics to advance their agenda. And some of these politicians are advancing a Sharia agenda. (Ref. the book: "No Go Zones: How Sharia Law is Coming to a Neighborhood Near You," by Rasheem Kassam.

If Islamists are our friends and follow "the religion of peace," why have there been 72 jihadi attacks since 9/11/01 on US soil with 160 killed & 502 wounded?
Facebook comments
Enter your email address above to begin receiving
news updates from via email.
Wednesday, April 1
Statewide, health department reports 1,484 confirmed infections and first death in this five-county region
Wednesday, April 1
With $70,000 PATH grant, county government and Data Stream to establish four more public access points by week’s end
Tuesday, March 31
The Fauquier County Circuit Court clerk’s office recorded these real estate transfers March 19-25
More Fauquier news
© Copyright 2011-2018

50 Culpeper Street, Suite 3
Warrenton, Virginia 20187
Crime Log
Add Your News
The Big Picture
Ellen’s Kitchen
and Garden

Real Estate
For Sale
Legal Notices
Post an Ad
Terms of Service