The Cartoonist's Plot
Human Rights in Canada, attacked and defended. It is a link to videos showing a publisher being interrogated by the Canadian Human Rights Commission for publishing the "Mohammed Cartoons". They said inquisitions couldn't happen in North American. Certainly not in the 21st century. But they have. Whether or not Ezra Levant is declared "innocent" or "guilty" by the Canadian Human Rights Commission of publishing the "Mohammed Cartoons" is beside the point. What is at issue is whether or not a Canadian government agency has the competence to punish someone for what in saner times would be considered a routine exercise in free speech. It is the legitimacy of the Canadian Human Rights Commission that is on trial here. They themselves are in the dock and they have put themselves there.
The really insidious thing about inquisitions, such as the one undertaken by the Human Rights Commission, is the secretly shameful gratitude those that are spared feel that it is being done others. Not to us; we are safe. But somewhere in the subconscious we know that've only postponed the trial, not overcome it. But what of it? That problem can be left for tomorrow. Today it's enough to be glad this is happening to someone else.
posted by wretchardthecat at 1/12/2008 06:21:00 PM
74 Comments:
Some Guys have all the luck.
...and Vice Versa, I spose.
The pair hid their marriage – the sixth for Felix-Brown and the second (concurrent) marriage for bin Laden – initially.
ht - AlBob
The couple – who met while riding horses near Egypt's pyramids – are planning a 3,000 mile horse ride across North Africa from Cairo to Morocco to defy the terrorists operating in the area and to support "peace."
"I want him and his son, who is just three, to return to as normal a life as possible."
Innocuous-looking little nazi isn't she. That the face of the 21st century book burning, gas chamber tending, soul-killing, banal bureaucrat. I'm sure their lining up to sign on and the really scary thing is that they're probably librarians.
Isn't this the same Canadian 'Human Rights' tribunal before which no accused has ever been found not guilty in its entire 30-odd year history?
You have the right to plead guilty. You have no right to remain silent. You have no right to confront your accuser. You have no right to a jury of your peers. You have no right to a lawyer of your choosing. What you don't say may be used against. What you do say will be used against you. You have no right to appeal. You're screwed, sir.
Hmm, another example of how the US and Canada are different:
Peace, order and good government = we (the governing class) know better than you, and we will tell you what you need to do to stay out of trouble.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms = if we (the governing class) think we know better than you, we are in deep trouble.
Canada has a history of trying to sit out these scandals without broadcasting them within their tacky little country, so no one north of the border knows what's going on.
Can anyone with access to media within Canada tell us whether this story is being freely broadcast in Canada and being talkd about, or if, once again, we Americans are watching in bemused fascination while our neighbor to the north curles into an ever-tighter fetal position of secrecy?
Canada has a history of trying to sit out these scandals without broadcasting them within their tacky little country, so no one north of the border knows what's going on.
Mark Steyn and his publisher are reading the HRC the riot act. It's a courageous act because they are subject to the laws of Canada. And it's important that they win because, as Mark Steyn explains, US publishers are going to think twice about backing any book, printing any article, producing any show that can't be sold in Canada. Canada may not be a very large market in absolute terms, but few businessmen are going to produce a product which has no chance of being sold in Canada.
A loss in this "tacky little country" will be the first step towards the reduction of freedom everywhere in the North America and in Australia. We are fortunate to have stand-up guys fighting the HRC not just for Canadians but for all of us.
Human Rights Commisions brought to you by everybody's friend the United Nations and their various human rights treaties and conventions, which governments feel obliged to sign up to. Because if it comes out of the UN it must be good, Right?
Free Mark Steyn!
---
Mat found this great link to audio and transcript of
Aldous Huxley 1962 Speech at Berkley
which ties right in.
Quite a few institutions, not the least of which are TV and the Celebrity Culture are enablers for people to love their Servitude.
Most interesting are all the different ways he points out the normal distribution curve of suggestibility in Humans:
20% are hard wired to become highly useful idiots in the right environment.
Audio of the great man is highly recommended!
Just look at her body language. She was going to break her arms folding them against the assault of candor. Sounds like one's odds would have been better at Tuol Sleng - or at least no worse.
If it is true that no accused has ever been vindicated before HRC, what approach are Levant and Steyn following? With Harper in power is there appeal to a higher authority? Or do they have a strategy for working within HRC itself?
I wonder whether Hillary! wears one of their HRC pins (I bet they have commemorative pins). They sound perfect together.
How has Canada let itself get to such a state? This irrepressibly brings to mind Saudi Arabia's Committee for the Preservation of Vice and Prevention of Virtue - oh I have that wrong don't I.
Mark Steyn and his publisher are reading the HRC the riot act.
Yes, Wretchard, here in Los Angeles I can *see* that the riot act is being read. However, is it being reported INSIDE Canada, so that Canadian taxpayers also are aware of what's going on?
Haven't we been saying that who-ever controls the narrative wins? If the narrative is being controlled by the Human REsources Council (or Canada's version of CAIR) and normal Canadians don't know or understand what's happening, then the Muslims and their anti-freedom of speech platform will have won.
If there is a media blackout on in Canada, is there a healthy Canadian blogosphere to gallop to the rescue and disseminate this information -- at least to those Canucks with internet access?
I wonder, too, how much we really depend upon publishers any more, given that the music industry has pretty much gone belly-up because of the internet, AND because companies like Barnes & Noble refuse to carry certain titles, that people are more and more buying their books through Amazon by-passing bookstores.
It seems to me that a company like Amazon could very easily get into the scanning business and put titles on-line for sale, thereby by-passing hate-speech laws in France, England and Canada ... and Saudi Arabia.
Brother NahnCee
Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?
:) The sister is not a commie, that's for sure.
Naziee, Canada and Canadians are well aware of what is happening. It's been and is being covered by every type of media,including television, newspapers and blogs. There is a general disgust and outcry about the institution which is destroying our freedom of speech. It would not surprise me if we see these Commissions dismantled or at the very least their powers greatly reduced.
Also, if you have to ask this question how is it that you know enough to describe Canada as a tacky little country. Your ill informed assessment of our society and our history reflects rather badly on you, my dear.
Is it just me or has the term "Human Rights Commission" become an oxymoron?
How is it that nearly all of the "human rights" organizations are so deafening silent about the massive abuse of human rights known as shari'a law? All of them should be raising holy hell over Islam's routine violation of even the most basic individual freedoms.
Canada has a history?
Who knew?
I must have blinked when they taught that sentence in History of Western Civ.
LouiZiee
Looking @ Canada from the US of A, I see crowds booing during the US national anthem at hockey games and I read Wretchard's post re: the HRC hauling Mark Steyn in for the violation of freely quoting Islamic leaders in Europe. Let me "chew" on this for a sec . . . OK, Canada became a tacky little country by being a tacky little country. On the bright side no-one thinks that should be changed.
Here we have McCain-Feingold, under which a movie about Hillary is an ad, thus it loses whatever First Ammendment Protections it once had to the whims of the courts.
...because of McCain, Feingold, Bush, and the Supremes.
---
As Wretch pointed out before, one of Steyn's laments is that it does have a chilling effect on publishers, even tho the censorship wall is not yet tightly sealed.
There's no news blackout.
CBC hourly radio news had a piece on the Levant/HRC story yesterday.
Rex Murphy, The National's token conservative curmudgeon did an editorial that aired nationally last week.
While this story has spread fast through the blogosphere, it's just getting started in it's long climb to the top of the media froth.
The rights of Canadian citizens, and also those of the the European Union, are granted to them by their constitution. In the United States our Founding Fathers stated in the Declaration of Independence that our rights come from the Creator. Our irreversable right to free speech is not granted by the U.S. Constitution or by our government, it comes directly from God. Our Constitution and our government is in place only to secure our right to free speech and our other God-given rights. The so-called right to free speech in Canada and in Europe comes from a piece of paper, ours come to us from a higher authority, and have been decreed from the foundation of the world by Creator of the universe.
Canada has a history?
Who knew?
===============
No you, obviously. Precisely my point.
If you are referring to European origins, then try 1000 years of history. Got ya beat.
Let's hope Mr. Levant is not the last Canadian who feels this way about freedom of speech.
zero times 1000 still equals zero
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. - - - - - - Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.
It seems like history keeps repeating itself. I guess each generation has to learn the same lesson the hard way.
Islam has a vested interest in muzzling and punishing ANY criticism of it. We all know this to be true, and one wonders about those who do not know this. Where have they been in recent years? Living in a cave?
One is not even allowed to use Islamic scripture, hadith, and law in order to criticize Islam. As Robert Spencer and Andrew Bostom about that.
Mark Steyn's struggle against these idiot apparatchiks is courageous and stands on sound principles. I know even though he is now a U.S. citizen he still takes Canada seriously. He thinks what happens in that country matters, and so should we. Already, in Europe it is forbidden to write or say anything critical of Islam. Europeans are now being muzzled by their EUSSR apparatchiks in Brussels. And it has happened there PRECISELY because whatever is granted ON PAPER can also be rescinded on paper. I think we Americans have got it right: our liberties are secured by our Creator, not by a privy council, politiburo in Brussels, parliament, or even constitution. Mess with liberty, and you mess with God Almighty.
I remember many years ago, when I was in a Catholic boarding school for high school, on Sunday evenings one of the prayers at Vespers began thus: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."
"Islam has a vested interest in muzzling and punishing ANY criticism of it."
Before providing your next scholarly opinion on Islam, why don't you first learn the difference between Islam and Islamism?
"Islam has a vested interest in muzzling and punishing ANY criticism of it."
Before providing your next scholarly opinion on Islam, why don't you first learn the difference between Islam and Islamism?"
The above comment is actually typical of many we see over at JihadWatch.org on a regular basis from those who practice taqiyya and kitman. The absence of substantiation that I do not know about the doctrine of jihad, the Dhimma, and dozens of other Islamic innovations is revealing. It is presumed that I've never read the entire Qur'an. It is presumed that I don't know about the principle of abrogation, whereby those revelations from Allah during Muhammad's Meccan period are cancelled out by the revelations from the Medinan period.
We await statements from Muslim groups which repudiate the orthodox doctrine that the Qur'an is a divine dictation and that its very words are normative for all times, and cannot be interpreted, reinterpreted, or canceled out. We await some kind of repudiation of the doctrine that Muhammad is the perfect man and that all his deeds are to be imitated in all the believers. We await many statements that can be relied upon, and are not expressions of taqiyya and kitman.
And before all the members of this forum, I wish to add that my critic, accusing me of gross ignorance of Islam, is acting in bad faith by lobbing the ad hominen and hoping that it will suffice to paint me as an Islamophobe.
The mocking of those who suggest that critics of Islam are being muzzled in itself proves that the denial of our rights of freedom of speech and thought are under assault by the Muslim Brotherhood and their dhimmi allies.
"We await statements from Muslim groups which repudiate the orthodox doctrine that the Qur'an is a divine dictation and that its very words are normative for all times, and cannot be interpreted, reinterpreted, or canceled out."
Why don't you stop waiting and start reading our site before making a fool of yourself
muslims against sharia,
Can you comment on the fact that there is no religious freedom in any Islamic country? Our soldiers can only worship in secret, cannot bring Bibles or Missals into Iraq and Afghanistan. That Christians and Jews in Islamic countries are continually leaving, because of dhimmitude and the violence directed against them.
Those who leave Islam are considered apostates and can be killed for it.
The true Islam is the one that follows Qur'an, hadith, and sira faithfully in all details and demands. I do not deny that there are cultural Muslims (some call them "moderates")who do not practice Islam in its traditional and strict form. They too are considered apostates and can be killed.
You may want an Islam without Sharia. That's good, but eventually you will have to deal with what the Qur'an demands. And what it demands flows rather seamlessly into Sharia Law. In Islam there is no separation between church and state, as our Western traditions have evolved into. Government, Law, and religion all go together. Also, much of Islamic law derives from the hadiths, with hadiths Bukhari and Muslim being the most authoritative.
The only way that Islamic reformers can have any chance at all of being supported and protected is for us unbelievers to have our traditional rights to criticize Islam. I would prefer it be done respectfully, using the very scriptures of Islam and the words and deeds of Muhammad as the basis of that criticism, as Robert Spencer does. Naturally, there are going to be people are less careful in how they go about their criticism of Islam, but our culture and our Constitution express our liberties and a very different worldview and sense of life that people in Islamic countries are accustomed to. Get used to it. We are not going to take assaults on our freedoms lying down. You can either find a way to live with it and cooperate in it, or you can stay within the confines of your templates for how to live your lives.
“Can you comment on the fact that there is no religious freedom in any Islamic country?”
This statement is factually incorrect.
“Our soldiers can only worship in secret, cannot bring Bibles or Missals into Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Where do you get this? If there were Korean missionaries in Afghanistan, do you really believe the troops cannot bring Bibles?
“That Christians and Jews in Islamic countries are continually leaving, because of dhimmitude and the violence directed against them.”
That is true.
“The true Islam is the one that follows Qur'an, hadith, and sira faithfully in all details and demands.”
That’s your opinion. We, as Muslims disagree with you. You do not have be a fundamentalist to be a Muslim. Just as if you are fine with homosexuality or abortion it does not make you non-Christian.
“That's good, but eventually you will have to deal with what the Qur'an demands.”
Can you provide particular objections to our Koran? Are there any particular verses that you disagree with?
“In Islam there is no separation between church and state”
In fundamentalist Islam there is no separation between church and state, but we do not practice fundamentalist Islam.
“Also, much of Islamic law derives from the hadiths”
We do not consider Ahadith to have any authority.
“for us unbelievers to have our traditional rights to criticize Islam.”
We have no problem with you criticizing Islam on the merits, however a lot of the criticism does not go beyond "I hope all muslims go to hell with there virgins" or "If I had the power I would nuke you twats [supposedly Muslims] to oblivion, you don't even belong in our galaxy!" or "[We] need to eradicate Islam from the globe"
muslims against sharia: Before providing your next scholarly opinion on Islam, why don't you first learn the difference between Islam and Islamism?
There is no difference between Islam and Islamists. Both demand explicit ascendancy of Islam over the entire world. That right there is a deal-breaker. A global calpihate would result in the deaths of at least ONE BILLION PEOPLE.
Let's take a look at some of the numbers:
1.) Extermination of all Jews:
Some 13.5 MILLION people, world-wide would most likely die at the hands of their Muslim oppressors.
2.) Extermination of all homosexuals
I'm going to use what is called a "wildly exaggerated figure" for the sake of including the bisexual and transgender community plus other deviants who would all be put to death. Thusly, some 10% or 600 MILLION people would fall into this category. The remaining ones are much more difficult to quantify.
3.) Armed resistance to Muslim encroachment:
I think it's safe to say that nearly everyone here at The Belmont Club would perish fighting Muslim attempts to overrun America or their own home country. World wide, the numbers would most likely exceed that of the Jews. We'll place it at a meager 100 MILLION.
4.) Women denied access to medical care:
This is a huge number because under Islamic law women would only be able to be seen by female doctors—an exceedingly small fraction of this world's medical practitioners. I’ll use the figure for global female cancer deaths as an example of how reduced early intervention will escalate avoidable deaths, especially among women. That figure will be more than 3 MILLION per year.
5.) Execution of political prisoners:
Toss in another 10 MILLION.
6.) Execution of those who refuse to convert:
I’m going to use the world’s population of Catholics as a figure representing those who would adamantly refuse to convert or cooperate and be put to death. While the number would likely be much higher, this figure would approach over 1 BILLION.
We now have a total of 1.726 BILLION people who would die within the first year of Islam establishing its global caliphate. Millions more would die each year due to Islam’s heavy-handed shari’a law and its demands for capital punishment. Women would keep dying in droves due to the unavailability of female doctors. Emerging homosexuals would be killed as with many other deviants, be they political, religious or otherwise.
Do the math. The global caliphate would rise upon dead bodies numbering greater than this world’s entire Muslim population. My Iranian friend Ray agrees with me that the number who would perish would be closer to HALF this world’s population but that is far more speculative than the conservative numbers I’ve posted above.
So, the question remains:
HOW MUCH LONGER ARE WE TO PUT UP WITH AN IDEOLOGY WHOSE ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO BRING ABOUT THE DEATH OF MORE PEOPLE THAN ITS OWN FOLLOWERS?
This is a "tipping point". When potential fatalities number greater then the enemy's own headcount, some serious contemplation is demanded. Simply put, the tipping point is reached when living with Muslims is more trouble than living without Muslims. Islam rapidly is pushing the Western world to such a tipping point. Of course, as always, Islam would not have it any other way.
I’ve stated before that if Muslims cannot abandon their quest for a global caliphate, then I would just as soon see all of them perish rather than the larger numbers who would ultimately die by Islam’s brutal hand. The above numbers—approximate as they might be—do not lie.
Zenster, fascinating. I'd never looked at it that way. Most interesting.
I'm not shocked and amazed, however, that Muslim Against Sharia is telling us we should be believing him/her and not the evidence of our own eyes.
ANd that since we do believe what we see of Muslim behavior around the world then we must necessarily (1) stupid and (2) Islamophobic. I wonder if there's any way of breaking that victimhood mindset shown here once again, wherein everyone else is wrong, the one Muslim is right, and it's all our fault any way.
"The mocking of those who suggest that critics of Islam are being muzzled in itself proves that the denial of our rights of freedom of speech and thought are under assault by the Muslim Brotherhood and their dhimmi allies."
Fred.
Good to see you back, esp so, given that you know this subject better than the rest of us combined.
Thanks.
Doug,
Thank you. Been awhile since I was real active here, but I've been reading a lot too.
The difficult thing about "Muslims Against Sharia" is that we don't know if we could trust him/her. There is such an entrenched and widespread practice of taqiyya and kitman by Muslims who are living in non-Muslim lands that we dare not allow ourselves be duped.
Many on the Left cooperate with the jihad because they, like the devout jihadis, hate the West and the United States. Many on the Left cooperate with the jihad because they are - well, for lack of a better way to describe it - just plain ignorant of Islamic scripture and history, and so are indeed dupes. And there are many in the center and on the Right who have been dupes as well. There is plenty of sloth to go around, that accounts for why taqiyya and kitman are so successful.
I think that sincere people like "Muslims Against Sharia" only have a prayer in hell's chance if we defend and maintain a robust right to express our views about Islam. If we are silenced by our own people, let alone Muslims who exert control, how can we apply any intellectual pressure upon Muslims to DEEPLY AND SERIOUSLY EXAMINE the words of Allah in the Qur'an.
That is the one thing "Muslims Against Sharia" did not do here, and probably dares not do: deny that the Qur'an's words are Allah's: that they are timeless, uncreated, perfect, and may not be set aside. As long as that principle remains intact, the rest follows from it.
I would invite anyone who doubts the veracity of what I've written to go on over to JihadWatch.org and on any remotely applicable thread pose your doubts to Robert or Hugh. If you don't trust me, please trust them. Robert is so very deeply educated about these things that I have yet to see him bested in an honest inquiry.
What the Canadian Human Right Commission is doing exactly fits the behavior expected of a dhimmi from the Muslim masters. What's so frustrating about it, is the fact that they don't know it. If they did know it, and still persisted, then we could at least say that they were more than dupes: they would be willing collaborators of the enemy.
I'm wondering if Muslim Against Shariah represents a new page in the tactics of organizations like CAIR; i.e., to seek out web-sites like Belmont Club that appear to be thought leaders in the blogosphere and to attack and accuse both the site host and the commenters therein of racism and Islamophobia.
The poster's comments here aren't aimed so much at the topic of the Canadian Human Rights Commission as they are an attack on anyone who disagrees that all Muslims are innocents who are being picked on.
We know that AlQueda has listed posting on the internet as a tactic in their war against the West. Any time a Muslim appears and accuses everyone else of stupid ignorance, then that strikes me as being more of a tactic than an honest dialogue.
nahncee,
Also a good point - wondered that myself.
Triton
Nahncee: Zenster, fascinating. I'd never looked at it that way. Most interesting.
Thank you very much. Simple cost-benefit analysis instantly reveals Islam to be incredibly detrimental. It brings nothing of worth to the table. I challenge anybody here to name one single redeeming feature of Islam.
I have yet to see anyone suggest a worthwhile aspect of Islam that cannot be refuted with extremely simple logic. This is what makes me so increasingly intolerant of Islam. It is like an ill-mannered bully who crashes a polite party, hogs all the food, drinks all the best wine and then proceeds to start fistfights with the guests. There is no reason for this to be put up with for even a single minute.
Zenster,
“There is no difference between Islam and Islamists.”
Let me make it short and sweet. You are an ignorant ass.
Islam is a religion, a personal relationship between a person and God. Islamism is a political ideology, based on perversion of Islam. Try to enlighten yourself: http://www.reformislam.org/
Fred,
“The difficult thing about "Muslims Against Sharia" is that we don't know if we could trust him/her.”
Don’t go by what we say, go by what we do: http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/
“That is the one thing "Muslims Against Sharia" did not do here, and probably dares not do”
You must have not visited our site.
NahnCee,
“accuse both the site host and the commenters therein of racism and Islamophobia.”
You must be one of those morons who believes that Islam is a race.
“The poster's comments here aren't aimed so much at the topic of the Canadian Human Rights Commission as they are an attack on anyone who disagrees that all Muslims are innocents who are being picked on.”
How stupid are you? Our very first comment was a declaration of support for Ezra and denunciation of HRC. One of our main goals is “to educate non-Muslims about the differences between moderate Muslims and Islamists (a.k.a. Islamic Religious Fanatics, Radical Muslims, Muslim Fundamentalists, Islamic Extremists or Islamofascists)”.
Muslims Against Sharia isn't a he or a she -- it's an "our". In other words, it's a group of people hunched around a computer some place trying to beat us into submission by calling us stupid.
Imagine that.
Tell me, MAS -- you affiliated with CAIR by any chance?
muslims against sharia,
I did some exploring at the web site and found it interesting.
You should know something about my background. I used to be a Jesuit seminarian back in the mid-eighties, before deciding that the Jesuit vow of obedience was not for me, and thus I never went forward in studies for the priesthood. But, I did get an M.A. in Philosophy from Loyola of Chicago and when I was an undergraduate at the University of New Hampshire I did have some exposure to Islam. My roommate during my junior and senior years was a devout Iranian Shia. He hated Jews and barely tolerated us Christians. I had taken a course in comparative religions while at UNH, which included an overview of Islam. So, prior to the recent past seven years of my life, that was my exposure to Islam.
I am not a literalist Christian. While I consider the Bible to be inspired, I see it as a human work which uses human language and symbol attempting to describe the faith journey of Jews and Christians. In other words, unlike some Christians I do not see the Bible as literally God's word. It is, rather, God coming to us in fragments of our understanding. So, for Catholics like me using modern, critical analytical tools to mine the meaning in the texts is an ongoing and acceptable process. As a Catholic, my approach is humanistic - accepting the sciences, even recently renewing my reading of Thomas Aquinas and some traditional Catholic writings. So, my approach is eclectic. God's revelation is ONGOING through our prayerful, contemplative experience. It did not stop with the last canonical text of the New Testament. So, for Catholics like me, we are not limited to an ancient text. Yes, we are grounded in it, but not limited to it.
And so it is through that worldview of understanding that I would approach the Qur'an. I've read most of the Qur'an and found it an extremely difficult book to read. It does not read like our Bible, where there is a certain narrative structure. Most of what I found was offensive, violent, and arcane - more or less a claim that Allah sanctifies the brutality of Arabian culture and the whims of Muhammad. My understanding of God's qualities and agency is rather foreign to how Allah is perceived in the Qur'an.
I do not envy you your task. Like most of the participants of Robert's and Hugh's forum over at JihadWatch.org and DhimmiWatch, we would wish you well in your undertaking, but we would truly fear for your life, because what you are proposing to do would get you labeled as an apostate. I am quite familiar with what the traditionalists did to the Sufis and to the Mutazzilites in Islam. They were suppressed and killed. Averroes and Avicenna were sanctioned, suppressed, and their works declared heterodox.
My God, if Thomas Aquinas' work with Aristotle was finally vindicated by the Church within a century of his death, the fact that Muslim theologians who used Aristotle have never been revived and vindicated is telling.
I wish you well.
NahnCee,
“trying to beat us into submission by calling us stupid”
When I call you stupid, it’s not an insult, it’s a description
“Tell me, MAS -- you affiliated with CAIR by any chance?”
Check out our latest Distinguished Islamofascist Award and try to figure it out.
Fred,
“My roommate during my junior and senior years was a devout Iranian Shia. He hated Jews and barely tolerated us Christians.”
Yet, you spent a lot of time with this asshole. Why?
“Most of what I found was offensive, violent, and arcane”
Most? Aren’t you exaggerating a bit? This is our Koran: http://www.reformislam.org/koran.php, which contains MOST of the Koran you read before. Care to show us anything that is “offensive, violent, and arcane”?
“but we would truly fear for your life”
Thank you for your concern, but they cannot kill someone they can’t find.
“I wish you well.”
We appreciate your support.
MAS, has anyone ever told you that resorting to insults is the surest way of discrediting yourself? Nowhere did I descend into personalities or name-calling. You, however, have no problem with such childish and inappropriate behavior.
Your adherence to Islam makes it impossible to trust anything you say. Taqiyya damns Islam to destruction. Short of a polygraph test, nobody has any way to know if you are sincere or not.
So long as the Koran demands establishment of a global caliphate—as do the Islamists—there is absolutely no difference between followers of Islam and Islamists. If you advocate a different interpretation of the Koran, then you are a blasphemer and not a Muslim. Capiche? Your own doctrine screws you and the credibility of every single word you type or say. Try this on for size:
-----------------------------
By
Larry Houle
www.godofreason.com
intermedusa@yahoo.com
Muthuswamy cites research on the Koran, conducted by the Center for Political Islam, which illustrates the Islamic focus on conformist behavior and beliefs. According to the Center's analysis of the Koran, the Sira, and the Hadith, only 17% of the Islamic trilogy deals with the words of Allah. The remaining 83% refers to the words and deeds of Mohammed. Of all of the references to "hell" in the trilogy, 6% are for moral failings, while 94% are for the transgression of disagreeing with Mohammed. Statistical analysis of the trilogy revealed that 97% of references to "jihad" relate to war and a mere 3% to the concept of "inner struggle."
About 67% of the Koran of Mecca deals with punishing unbelievers for merely disagreeing with Mohammed. Over 50% of the Koran of Medina deals with hypocrites and jihad against unbelievers. Nearly 75% of the Sira deals with jihad. About 20% of the Hadith by Bukhari is about jihad. The majority of the doctrine is political and it is all violent.
In 4% of the cases, women were superior, in 91% of the cases they were inferior and in 5% they were equal. But there is a big catch. The only way that women are equal is after death on Judgment day, when men and women will be judged on how well they followed the Koran and the Sunna. And guess what? The only way to follow the Koran and the Sunna is to obey men. Equality means obeying men
Woman are superior by being a mother, who must obey her husband. So the perfect woman on Judgment day will be a mother, who obeyed all the men in her life. So really, the women are subordinate to men in 100% of all of the Koran, Hadith and the Sira.
[emphasis added]
-----------------------------
Not much of a reccommendation for Islam, now is it? Go ahead, try and reform your ideology and its war manual. Just make sure you don't let most of your fellow co-religionists know, other wise they might try to kill you. Isn't that a comforting thought? You who want so much for Islam are a target for the vast majority of your fellow travelers? Think about it sometime.
Zenster,
“has anyone ever told you that resorting to insults”
Is there a chance you’re confusing insults with descriptions?
“Your adherence to Islam makes it impossible to trust anything you say.”
Don’t go by what we say, go by what we do.
“According to the Center's analysis of the Koran, the Sira, and the Hadith, only 17% of the Islamic trilogy deals with the words of Allah.”
Considering the fact that there is a bout a million Ahadith out there, this statement makes absolutely no sense.
“About 67% of the Koran of Mecca deals with punishing unbelievers for merely disagreeing with Mohammed. Over 50% of the Koran of Medina deals with hypocrites and jihad against unbelievers.”
If you get a chance to read the Koran, you’ll realize that these numbers are pulled out of someone’s ass. Or better yet, read our Koran and tell us what exactly you would object to.
MAS: Is there a chance you’re confusing insults with descriptions?
Definitely not. It is very rare that I confuse social ineptitude with actual ability.
Get used to something. Despite what you may think, you are not a Muslim. You are a blasphemer that the vast majority of Muslims would kill if they could only get their hands upon you. How much hope do you think that gives the ordinary non-believer about you managing to change Islam? You're rejection of shari'a law alone would get you executed in nearly every Muslim majority nation on earth.
Ever since Islam closed the door on ijtihad, it has become ingrown and infected with an intolerance for the least bit of examination or reconsideration. Given its extremely violent nature, I see absolutely no reason to expend untold millions of lives and billions of dollars trying to forcibly reform this ideological cesspool. Far better to begin dismantling all of Islam's apparatus in the Western world and giving immigrant Muslims a chance to repatriate to their countries of familial origin or enjoy spending the remainder of their lives in internment camps.
If you are so against shari'a law, why don't you initiate a successful drive to have it illegalized in the West. Were you to do that, I might even be proud to shake your hand. Until so-called moderate Muslims begin answering such important challenges, they should not hope for much respect.
"If you are so against shari'a law, why don't you initiate a successful drive to have it illegalized in the West."
Isn't that what we are trying to do?
"War is deceit." the Prophet
It is this declaration by The Perfect Man, combined with the refined doctrines/practices in Islam of taqiyya and kitman that cause me to give the benefit of of the doubt to my own justified fears of Islam.
Zenster is right, and I also stated it in an earlier comment: the things being suggested by MAS are, under Islamic orthodoxy, to be apostasy and blasphemy. I asked if MAS would affirm that the words of the Qur'an are NOT the words of Allah, conveyed by the angel Gabriel into the mind of Muhammad (at very convenient and timely moments, I might add, which only underscores the appearance of expedience).
I'm not saying positively that MAS is engaging in taqiyya and kitman. He may not be, but even so what he is proposing does not alleviate the high degree of caution we need to maintain, given how our own non-Muslim populations and leadership do not have the proper abilities to spot subterfuge. Note how easily Maj. Steven Coughlin was bounced from his counterterrorism position in the Pentagon by a Dhimmi administration.
As dangerous as our Islamic enemy is, our most dangerous enemies are internal traitors and buffoons.
My test for someone like MAS is whether or not s/he/they have ever turned in an uncle, father, brother, cousin to the authorities who is known to engage in terrorist activities or to be planning terrorist activities or ot be donating towards terrorist activities.
As long as they're protecting each other and not cooperating with Western police, then they're part of "the Other" which is trying to kill us, and I shall regard them as enemies.
Fred,
“the things being suggested by MAS are, under Islamic orthodoxy, to be apostasy and blasphemy.”
I assume you don’t really care what Christian fundamentalist think about abortion or homosexuality. So why should we care about the doctrines pushed by Islamic orthodoxy?
“I asked if MAS would affirm that the words of the Qur'an are NOT the words of Allah”
I believe our home page, http://www.reformislam.org/, has a reply to that.
NahnCee,
“My test for someone like MAS is whether or not s/he/they have ever turned in an uncle, father, brother, cousin to the authorities who is known to engage in terrorist activities or to be planning terrorist activities or ot be donating towards terrorist activities.”
Could you come up with a dumber test? First, contrary to the popular opinion, not every Muslim has a relative who is a terrorist/sympathizer. Second, if someone turned in a relative, what are the chances of that ever becoming public?
Second, if someone turned in a relative, what are the chances of that ever becoming public?
Normal people with nothing to hide (i.e., Real Americans) get on the witness stand and swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. In other words, they testify about the bad things they know about ... even if it is a close relative.
Of course, since you're Muslim and doubtless coming from a country with nothing but Shariah law and judges who like to lash rape victims, you wouldn't be familiar with the concept of being a witness or testifying in an open court of law.
Seems to me you're proving to be unfamiliar with a whole bunch of stuff, except how to scream "victimhood" and to call everyone else stupid. You're never gonna win whatever war you're fighting that way, Spanky.
NahnCee,
Don't you think you ARE stupid if you are confusing providing objective reasons with screaming "victimhood"?
MAS: Isn't that what we are trying to do?
[i.e. illegalizing shari'a law]
Ummmmm ... no. Nowhere at your website is there any actual policy put in place to actively bring this about. Flowery rhetoric is nice but direct action is all that really counts. This is especially so in the face of a violent, fascistic, theocratic tripe volcano such as Islam. Please review the various petition links at the bottom of this comment to get an idea of what constitutes truly "active measures".
From your own website:
Sharia
Sharia Law must be abolished, because it is incompatible with norms of modern society.
Nowhere on your website is there any mention of a petition to provide for such abolishment. Get with the program or be considered ornamental.
Outdated words & phrases
• Jihad: this word is often interpreted as Holy War against non-Muslims
Not "often interpreted", jihad means "Holy War against non-Muslims". Any interpretation of it as a "spiritual quest" is pure kitman that was fabricated only two centuries ago. Jihad has always meant Holy War and continues to do so today. Your site really needs to avoid mincing words.
On the surface, much of what appears at your website seems quite commendable. However, as Fred notes:
what he is proposing does not alleviate the high degree of caution we need to maintain, given how our own non-Muslim populations and leadership do not have the proper abilities to spot subterfuge.
Despite what may even be good intentions upon your organization's part, taqiyya damns Islam. There will never be any way of authentically determining if a Muslim is genuinely desirous of peaceful coexistence. If taqiyya isn't damning enough, the Islamic practice of hudna nails its coffin shut. Even a century or more of ostensibly peaceful coexistence could not necessarily be interpreted as a total rejection of jihad by Muslims. Such a lull could just as easily represent a reversion over to the slow jihad of demographic takeover in non-Muslim lands.
Such demographic takeover is already an openly declared intention and policy of Islam and—in light of that—even a century of peace could still be nothing more than a prolonged hudna. Once in the majority, what would prevent a dominant Muslim population from installing shari'a law?
Answer: NOTHING
Islam is a wholly compromised concept. Its internal sanctification of terrorism, deceit and perfidy make it the enemy of all mankind. Islam poisons the minds of its followers and kills those who do not obey it. There is no realistic hope of rehabilitating such a hateful, violent and treacherous entity. The risk of further betrayal is simply too great.
MAS, face it, at best your organization represents a whopping 0.000001% of the global Muslim population. The fact that—due to Islam's policy of death for blasphemers—you cannot even afford to have registered members speaks volumes as to the efficacy of your organization. It is essentially wishful thinking to consider your goal as anything more than hopeless.
There is a valid reason for the presumption of such futility. Nobody, not you, not anyone in the West nor even this world's Muslim population has the luxury of spending several decades defanging Islam's vicious and barbaric doctrine. Islamic madmen are already groping for the nuclear dagger. Unhindered, they will bring about catastrophe on an unimaginable scale. My own prediction continues to be that of a Muslim holocaust. The only sure way to prevent this is by dismantling Islam and eradicating its practice from the face of this earth.
At best Mecca and Medina could serve as architectural museum pieces. Any worship in those halls must end forever if mankind is to have any hope of living in peace. That is how drastic the situation is. Islam has spent a thousand years voluntarily bringing conditions to the state they are in and the West has absolutely no obligation to demonstrate the least speck of mercy in assuring its own survival.
As a Muslim, I must suppose that your efforts represent a noble—if not very realistic—effort at salvaging Islam. In no way does anything you say or do eliminate the need for all Westerners to regard your actions in the very most suspicious light. Your group could just as easily be a front dedicated to defusing any Western sense of urgency in dealing with the Islamic threat. The mere existence of taqiyya literally demands that you be regarded in that light. Again, that is precisely how taqiyya irrevocably damns Islam.
This remains the central issue. Even a delay of only a few years is long enough to tip the scales out of the West’s favor. A nuclear-armed Islam is simply too great a threat to be countenanced. Your organization’s activities, no matter how successful, will not bear fruit anywhere within the necessary timeline required to avoid a worst case scenario of terrorist nuclear attacks upon the West. It is this simple fact that obliges me—and many others, I’m sure—to simply abandon all hope of and Islamic reformation and, instead, agitate for its destruction.
Below are examples of halfway realistic efforts at legally combating Islam. My own opinion is that only large-scale military intervention can save Western civilization.
Congress Debate Qur`an
United Nations Investigate Koran
PS: I strongly urge you to drop the name calling. It is immature and counterproductive behavior that only damages your own cause. Everybody here is totally fed up with Muslim arrogance and stupidity. You are only reinforcing that perception.
“Nowhere on your website is there any mention of a petition to provide for such abolishment. Get with the program or be considered ornamental.”
And whom this petition would be addressed to?
“Not "often interpreted", jihad means "Holy War against non-Muslims".”
We appreciate your scholarly opinion based on your profound knowledge of Islam. However, there are some Muslims who may believe that Jihad is an inner-struggle. To find out exactly what proportion of Muslims believe that, we created a poll (http://www.reformislam.org/polls/ - go to the bottom of the page)
“taqiyya damns Islam.”
To a certain degree, yes. That’s why we prefer to be judged on what we do, not what we say. Organizations like CAIR claim to be moderates just as we do. What separates us from them is that they hide their ties to terrorism while we expose their ties to terrorism.
“MAS, face it, at best your organization represents a whopping 0.000001% of the global Muslim population.”
According to our polls, the numbers are slightly higher.
“Nobody, not you, not anyone in the West nor even this world's Muslim population has the luxury of spending several decades defanging Islam's vicious and barbaric doctrine.”
As soon as the West stops providing financial and political support to Islamic radicals, Jihadi movement will starve and will become as obscure as KKK.
“I strongly urge you to drop the name calling. It is immature and counterproductive behavior that only damages your own cause.”
How very civil of you. I guess name-calling is much worse that proposing genocide or forced conversion.
Geez, MAS, you bore me, Bob, and I swore I wasn't gonna poke any more sticks at you hunkered down inside your cage.
But you consistently overlook the obvious and make it SOOOOOO easy!
...proposing genocide or forced conversion.
You forgot sterilization. There've been rumors zipping around the Middle EAst for years now that the Israeli's have some sort of long-distance drug that will (1) poison Arafat leaving no traces, (2) kill anyone with Arab DNA, and/or (3) cause sterilization of those with Arab DNA. I think with your centuries of cousin-marriage and in-breeding you're well along the path to sterilization of the Arab breed all by yourself, but if you want to dither yourself into further paranoia, you might consider how the West could very easily poison your reproductive efforts with no one being the wiser.
Personally, I'd love to make a time-bomb dispenser out of air conditioners shipped into the Middle East, some kind of an inhalent birth control pill.
The thing you really need to take into consideration in your mental equations is this: as a human race, you need us. We most assuredly do not need you. For the moment we need oil that is controlled by Muslims, but that does not translate into needing the Koran, needing Sharia or needing a gazillion women-hating mono-browed knuckle-draggers.
Everything in your daily existance -- everything -- has been invented by the West and imported to make your lives livable. I would be very interested indeed if you could name one single thing besides oil that the Middle East has ever contributed to the cause of humanity in general (and the West had to show Arabs how to dig it out the ground and refine it because Arabs couldn't do that on their own). I'll give you algebra out of the kindness of my heart, but anything else?
BTW, I'm curious -- who consists of the plural "we" you keep using?
NahnCee,
“...proposing genocide or forced conversion.
You forgot sterilization.”
Your dementia must be kicking in again, so let me quote you:
“My own prediction continues to be that of a Muslim holocaust. The only sure way to prevent this is by dismantling Islam and eradicating its practice from the face of this earth.”
Or did I misinterpret what you meant, or took it out of context? Just as “kill them [infidels] wherever you find them” is misinterpreted or taken out of context?
I suggest you read your own statements before embarrassing yourself any further.
“BTW, I'm curious -- who consists of the plural "we" you keep using?”
“We” refers to Muslims Against Sharia, which has more than one member, therefore use of the plural.
MAS: And whom this petition would be addressed to?
To the same people the petitions I provided links for: Namely, the entire Internet world and those beyond. You may wish to get busy. The clock is ticking down and the odds are most definitely NOT in Islam's favor.
Or did I misinterpret what you meant, or took it out of context?
You most certainly did. Predicting a Muslim holocaust is not the same as advocating one. Got it? Islam's refusal to reform or peacefully coexist literally demands some sort of catastrophic outcome. While the West's destruction is not impossible, it is highly improbable.
Islam has a total of some two dozen IRBMs that reside in Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. America alone has enough ICBMs to turn every square inch of the MME (Muslim Middle East) into hot smoking glass. Yet, Islam just cannot bring itself to stop antagonizing the most well-armed enemy imaginable. Any way you do the math, Islam is going to be the loser.
Even without nuclear weapons, Islam is almost totally dependent upon Western countries for its food. Iran just eclipsed Japan as the world's biggest importer of wheat. All throughout the MME agricultural water resources are being diverted to municipal drinking supplies.
Water Poverty is endemic throughout the MME. The MENA (Middle East North Africa) region is the fastest growing importer of grain. Its current consumption requires crop irrigation that would consume the annual flow of the entire NILE RIVER. If Canada, America and Australia shut down all grain shipments to the MENA area, starvation would likely set in within WEEKS.
Islam is playing a dangerous game. The overwhelmingly vast prportion of that danger is to Muslims.
To make things perfectly clear, "dismantling Islam" does not equate to killing every Muslim on earth. Capiche?
As soon as the West stops providing financial and political support to Islamic radicals, Jihadi movement will starve and will become as obscure as KKK.
Stop trying to play the usual blame game that Muslims are so fond of. You've already had your ass handed to you on a plate over at Gate of Vienna concerning this. Islam was busy killing, raping and plundering neighbor countries centuries before oil was even discovered. Blaming the Western civilization that contributed so much expertise and wealth to dragging the MME kicking and screaming out of the stone age represents the height of ingratitude.
Zenster,
“While the West's destruction is not impossible, it is highly improbable.”
Your ignorance is truly limitless, isn’t it? A good-sized nuke detonated above a couple of hundred miles above the US would send most of the country back into Stone Age. Small pox pandemic would wipe out one-third of the population. If you think that’s improbable, you might consider having your head examined more often.
“Islam has a total of some two dozen IRBMs that reside in Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. America alone has enough ICBMs to turn every square inch of the MME (Muslim Middle East) into hot smoking glass. Yet, Islam just cannot bring itself to stop antagonizing the most well-armed enemy imaginable. Any way you do the math, Islam is going to be the loser.”
I’ll write off your inability to understand the difference between Islam and Islamism to your stupidity, but even a dumbass like you should realize that for nuclear exchange between Islamists (Iran) and Westerners is a win for the Islamists. They get to have that 72-year old virgin they dream about every night.
“Stop trying to play the usual blame game that Muslims are so fond of.”
Like a true moron, you keep denying the facts.
“You've already had your ass handed to you on a plate over at Gate of Vienna concerning this.”
In your dreams.
“Islam was busy killing, raping and plundering neighbor countries centuries before oil was even discovered. Blaming the Western civilization that contributed so much expertise and wealth to dragging the MME kicking and screaming out of the stone age represents the height of ingratitude.”
Perhaps, but how does this excuse your stupidity?
MAS: A good-sized nuke detonated above a couple of hundred miles above the US would send most of the country back into Stone Age.
You over-estimate our country's sensitivity to EMP. While a lot of consumer electronics would be rendered useless, the vast majority of our military hardware would not. Neither would the bulk of America's civil infrastructure. I have personally worked on improving the reliability of integrated circuits in terms of their ability to withstand ESD and EMP, so your statements do not carry much weight with me.
What you fail to recognize is how the veiled threats that you make only inspire more people to willingly err on the side of caution when it comes to neutralizing Islamic regimes. Islam's continued pursuit of WMDs will increasingly be regarded as something akin to aggression. Their preference for asymmetrical warfare is what will drive this perception.
Nothing short of a massive multi-point nuclear attack using H-bombs is going to "send most of the country back into Stone Age". Any nation that launches such an assault will simply cease to exist. Even if not one single land based ICBM is launched from the CONUS, our submarine forces maintain the capacity to destroy more than one very large country and several, if not dozens of, smaller nations.
Small pox pandemic would wipe out one-third of the population.
Again, you severely underestimate America's technological capacity. First off, the ability to generate, transport and disseminate sufficiently large stocks of a potent viral compound then simultaneously release them without prior discovery or detection presumes upon some fantasically good luck. Secondly, civilian defense in America is sufficiently well-organized to the extent that affected areas would be quarantined quite rapidly. Finally, our pharmaceutical manufacturing capacity is nothing short of tremendous. MILLIONS of inocculations could be manufactured in a very short time. I think it is you who are more lacking in knowledge.
I’ll write off your inability to understand the difference between Islam and Islamism
Quite obviously, you just don't get it, do you? While, as you insist, their might be some actual difference between Islam and Islamism, for all practical purposes there simply isn't. You are trying to draw a distinction between Germans and Nazis in the middle of World War II. Muslims, by their very inaction have caused any similar distinction to vanish. This is not due to any lack of discernment by the West, it is a direct byproduct of Islamic doctrine and the failure of Muslims to free themselves from it.
for [a] nuclear exchange between Islamists (Iran) and Westerners is a win for the Islamists. They get to have that 72-year old virgin they dream about every night.
Your statement assumes that Islam's paradise actually exists. There is no way of substantiating any such notion. It is the very fact that Ayatollah Khomeini could even say something like:
We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.
— which makes it imperative to dismantle Islam. Its intractable hostility makes it the ideological equivalent of a rabid animal that must be put down before doing even greater harm. Everything you continue to post only reinforces this perception. So keep it up, you're not doing yourself any favors.
Finally, your absolute refusal to drop the insults and name calling make you the online equivalent of a loudmouth jerk. You're ill-mannered conduct only cements much of the opposition you encounter. I've done my best to bring this to your attention but you've proven entirely immune to the usefulness of civil exchange. Keep that in mind when you suddenly discover that people have stopped responding to your rude and discourteous tantrums. What's more, consider how poorly this reflects upon your sincerity whenever you want people to support your cause. Do you honestly think that your conduct has inspired me to direct a single person's attention to your website? All you have succeeded in doing is convincing me that your anti-shari'a campaign is one of pure taqiyya. Congratulations upon so deftly snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Your dementia must be kicking in again, so let me quote you:
“My own prediction continues to be that of a Muslim holocaust. The only sure way to prevent this is by dismantling Islam and eradicating its practice from the face of this earth.”
Or did I misinterpret what you meant, or took it out of context?
Since I never said what you've quoted, I have to conclude that your hallucinations are trumping my dementia. Either that, or you're quite a bit stupider than you think you are. For what it's worth, I'm plunking for option 2.
"You over-estimate our country's sensitivity to EMP. While a lot of consumer electronics would be rendered useless, the vast majority of our military hardware would not. Neither would the bulk of America's civil infrastructure. I have personally worked on improving the reliability of integrated circuits in terms of their ability to withstand ESD and EMP, so your statements do not carry much weight with me."
OK, you win. Jim Woolsey is an idiot.
"First off, the ability to generate, transport and disseminate sufficiently large stocks of a potent viral compound then simultaneously release them without prior discovery or detection presumes upon some fantasically good luck."
If you weren't that dumb, you could have realized that in highly mobile society, highly infectious disease with long incubation period requires 1 infected person to take a few flights to create a pandemic.
"They get to have that 72-year old virgin they dream about every night.
Your statement assumes that Islam's paradise actually exists."
1. If you weren't such a moron, you might have noticed sarcasm (unless, of course, you're into 72-year old virgins, which creates a whole new set of issues.)
2. We do believe in paradise. We don't think that it's any different from Christian paradise.
Keep it up with the insults. You're winning everyone over to your side in droves. If you are an example of what to expect from a moderate Muslim, it's little wonder that Muslims in general are so routinely detested wherever they go. You exhibit nearly all of the same negative traits that make regular Muslims so overwhelmingly unpopular amongst civilized people. Again, congratulations, it must take some real effort. Then again, you could just be a natural.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Zenster,
When a degenerate bigot claims to belong to civilized people it makes just as much sense as your other claims.
"We don't think that it's any different from Christian paradise."
It is stated in the Qur'an that only 70,000 human souls will be saved. Yahweh and the Father of Jesus is more generous, forgiving, merciful, and LOVING than Allah. In fact perhaps the first word that comes to mind in this Roman Catholic's panoply of names for God is LOVE. That name/quality is conspicuously missing from the names/qualities of Muhammad's al illah.
O.K. I know. That's not in your Standard Revised Version of the Qur'an. Fine with that, but you're going to have a hard sell of that version for most of the world's over one billion Muslims. But if your advanced sales' commitment should begin to impress me, I might take a second look at the feasibility and marketing analysis my mind has already undergone.
Seriously, MAS, heaven, as understood by Christians and Jews, is not an erotic paradise designed for male pleasure. Rather, we will have spiritual bodies whose pleasures are far above earthly ones, far more integrated and spiritually mature. One's immediate comfort and enjoyment is to be enveloped by the Divine Love, mercy, forgiveness, and healing of all the tragedy and sadness that befell on us and that we brought on others. Another thing we look forward to is the heavenly reunion with all the loved ones who have gone before us. Imagine all the grief and sadness at the loss of loved ones on the day they died - and the joy of being with them again?
All this is bequeathed to us - and it is not limited to Christians and Jews, but to all people whose deeds and whose hearts have been purified of selfishness and sin.
This is something Muslims do not understand: that the Lord God Creator of the universe would so love man and the created order that He would take the human condition upon Himself and enter into our tragedy and suffering to show us the way back. And would even endure death - and a horrible death it was.
This is why I could never convert to Islam. The Divine Love and the story of that Love has so set its hooks into the depths of my being that to forsake it and deny it would be like death to me. Juxtaposing Muhammad and his deeds of violence, murder, rape, pedophilia, theft, and lust for power on top of the life of Jesus of Nazareth would be like a total eclipse of the sun.
MAS: When a degenerate bigot claims to belong to civilized people it makes just as much sense as your other claims.
When a loudmouth punk drops by to play the race card and piss in the punchbowl it confirms more than one person's suspicions about typical Muslim arrogance. Grow up, get a clue and learn how to act in a civilized fashion. Your "Muslims Against Shari'a" bauble is of little worth so long as you antagonize everyone within spitting distance. Resorting to insults is the hallmark of an infantile mind which is incapable of extended reasoning or logic. You do very little in terms of setting an example of your oh so merciful and benevolent Allah. Instead, you desecrate every noble idea that your website sets forth as worthy. Your ungenerous attitude turns everything you stand for into taqiyya and kitman. Again, congratulations, it must not be easy to simultaneously violate so many conventional rules of good conduct.
Fred,
You are going by the wrong assumption that we believe that everything in the Koran is divine.
“you're going to have a hard sell of that version for most of the world's over one billion Muslims.”
So far, it hasn’t been a problem with reasonable Muslims who heard our arguments.
“This is something Muslims do not understand”
Most, but not all.
“This is why I could never convert to Islam.”
Nobody is asking you to. However, a lot more people in America convert from Christianity to Islam than the other way around, so there must be something to it.
Zenster,
“When a loudmouth punk drops by to play the race card”
Does your stupidity ever overwhelms you? You must think that Islam is a race, don’t you?
"However, a lot more people in America convert from Christianity to Islam than the other way around, so there must be something to it."
Put up the numbers to prove this. Also, keep in mind that a lot of "reverts" (as they are called)are women who married Muslim men and are required to become Muslim. Also, some of these "reverts" are from the prison population, and that's an area where al Qaeda has been working hard, since white and black, non-Arabs are highly desirable for the jihad. Additionally, there are so few converts from Islam to Christianity, worldwide, because of the severe sanctions imposed by Islam on apostates. Makes one think twice about it. There are converts from Islam to Christianity, and they are critical of Islam while having to change their names, relocate, and live under the radar to avoid the consequences of their apostasy. Christianity imposes no such sanctions upon "reverts."
The reason why Muslims do not understand the mystery of the Incarnation is because al illah is beyond human categories and beyond our reach. An uncaring god that is indifferent to our suffering and tragedy. It is considered blasphemous and a scandal - a violation of the idea of the greatness of this deity - to co-mingle with us and our condition. And yet I would say that putting an intellectual barrier to this event actually puts constraints on God's agency. Who is to say that the Creator CANNOT enter our condition to show us compassion and show us the way to salvation?
Kindness is more appealing than cruelty. This is why I have chosen to remain anchored in my Catholic Christian tradition. I am more impressed with love than I am with POWER. In the depths of the universe I see that only this humility and love can break the spell of the demonic, sadistic cruelty of Satan. The very things that others laugh at and mock, are the very things I am impressed with.
"Put up the numbers to prove this."
I was under impression I was conversing with an intelligent person and don't have to prove the obvious.
"women who married Muslim men and are required to become Muslim."
Last time I checked this still was a free country.
Your last post, MAS, was a snide mockery and anti-intellectual remark. And to cast aspersions on the quality of my mind validates the observations that zenster has made about the way you disrespect us kafirs.
Technically, an infidel woman who marries a Muslim man and changes her religion is making a free choice, insofar as she is willing to do what is necessary to fulfill her obligations to her husband.
I have just experienced a sense of deja-vu in the contemptuous attitude of your last post. From the past - many years ago during the early 1980's when a college student - a hauteur ever-so-subtlely conveyed by some Muslims I knew. Because I am a kafir.
You resent the fact that I asked a pointed question that begged for clarification and demonstration.
The dhimmi is not supposed to challenge a Muslim in any way. This I do know from a variety of sources. You are supposed to be my superior, intellectually and morally.
Something about my exposition of Christian soteriology and my attachment to the crucifixion of the Savior brought out that sneer of contempt. I am sentimental and weak. I just cannot accept a deity who feels nothing but contempt for my existence, and demands the submission of my mind and heart to a cosmology of violence and domination, rather than grace and fellowship.
I rather suspect that nothing I have written would be considered by the other posters on this thread as evidence of a defective, inferior mind and character. In fact, I think they would agree that I have taken the high road and exhibited great patience.
I applaud your patience, Fred. But really, when does it edge over into masochism?
The troll is irredeemable and to continue to engage it just reinforces its self-conceit that it makes a diddly damned difference one way or the other.
It is to be hoped that one fine day you or me or Zenster will meet Muslims Against Sharia in a dark alley alone somewhere, and then we can have the sort of discussion that only tigers seem to be able to inflict on brown people with delusions of grandeur.
Like my dear old momma used to say, "You want something to cry about? Here, I'll give you something to whine victimhood about!" (She didn't really say that last part, but you know what I mean.)
Fred,
“And to cast aspersions on the quality of my mind validates the observations that zenster has made about the way you disrespect us kafirs.”
Can you have a bigger chip on your shoulder? We both know that you know that C to I conversion numbers are larger than the opposite. Weren’t you just a tad bit disingenuous when you asked me to prove those numbers?
“obligations to her husband”? And we are the ones being called cavemen?
“I have just experienced a sense of deja-vu in the contemptuous attitude of your last post.”
I have great contempt for idiocy and bullshit. I don’t care what religion people chose to practice. My wife has not become Muslim after marrying me. I wouldn’t even consider asking her.
“You resent the fact that I asked a pointed question that begged for clarification and demonstration.”
You asked a bullshit question to which you knew the answer.
“You are supposed to be my superior, intellectually and morally.”
Seriously, get rid of that chip. And the stick that’s up your ass while you’re at it.
NahnCee,
“It is to be hoped that one fine day you or me or Zenster will meet Muslims Against Sharia in a dark alley alone somewhere, and then we can have the sort of discussion that only tigers seem to be able to inflict on brown people with delusions of grandeur.”
You must have a lot of balls to issue threats from behind the keyboard. Did you take some chicken shit classes?
MAS,
I retract not one thing I've written in my last post, because I am entitled to respond to mockery with erudite sarcasm that exposes your bad attitude. You have your own reasons why you have not compelled your wife to become a Muslim which I am not privy to. Surely you must be aware that this is rather exceptional behavior on the part of a Muslim. Entirely commendable on your part (there is no sarcasm here)and unusual. Surely you must be aware of this?
I am entitled to defend myself upon being called the names you've called me. Yet, a response to your last missive is beneath my dignity, and I see no further point to my participation in an exchange were increasingly I am abused.
You made the claim that there are more converts to Islam in North America than there are to Christianity. I asked you to substantiate that claim. You mocked the question, essentially calling me a moron for asking it. This whole exchange has degenerated to a level of incivility that is unacceptable to me.
Fred,
"why you have not compelled your wife to become a Muslim"
This is directly from my wife: 'Fred, you are a misogynist pig.' And I have to say, it is hard for me to disagree with her.
"Surely you must be aware that this is rather exceptional behavior on the part of a Muslim."
Maybe not usual, but definitely not exceptional. A moderate Muslim would never compel anyone to convert.
"increasingly I am abused."
Oh, grow up!
"I asked you to substantiate that claim."
Would you also ask me to substantiate the claim that 800,000+ dead Iraqi civilians is a bullshit number?
Post a Comment
<< Home