WAKE UP PEOPLE!

by m ( 188 Comments › )
Filed under Dhimmitude, Islamic hypocrisy, Islamic Invasion, Islamic Supremacism, Islamists, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Sharia (Islamic Law) at June 17th, 2010 - 4:30 pm

Andrew McCarthy takes on the mistaken idea our “leaders” keep perpetuating that somehow “islamic extremists” are not following their “peaceful religion” as it was intended by mo. They should read their holey (intentional) book sometime.

We’ve tried “radical Islam,” “extremist Islam,” “fundamentalist Islam,” and “sharia Islam.” Inevitably, political correctness gave us “political Islam.” Now, ironically, under the guise of correcting an even worse case of political correctness, comes what we might call “Bon Jovi Islam.” Its proponent, Sen. Joe Lieberman, is halfway there and livin’ on a prayer.

Sen. Lieberman’s Wall Street Journal essay “Who’s the Enemy in the War on Terror?” gets it halfway right. He is justifiably dismayed over the Obama administration’s whitewashing of the Islamist part of Islamist terror. The president, he elaborates, “rightly reaffirms that America remains a nation at war,” but self-defeatingly “refuses to identify our enemy.” For Lieberman, the administration’s preferred claim that we are at war with “violent extremism,” is absurd. Our foe, in truth, is a particular, identifiable component of the Muslim world.

All exactly right . . . except that Lieberman proceeds to do the very thing he accuses Obama of doing: miniaturizing the threat. The enemy, he pronounces, is “violent Islamist extremism.” He diagnoses its cause to be “a terrorist political ideology” that “exploits” what most Muslims, according to Lieberman, understand to be “the enormous difference between their faith” and this ideology’s tenets.

[...]

Read it all: Bon Jovi Islam

I can’t understand why they INSIST that these people are (as Robert Spencer likes to call them) misunderstanders of islam. Jihadis understand islam very well. The taliban has it down pat. Whole islamic governments tout sharia as the truth, the light, the … way… It’s in the koran.

Verse 2:216
Yusuf Ali:
Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But God knoweth, and ye know not.

Zohurul Hoque:
Fighting has been prescribed for you, but it is of dislike to you. And it may be that you dislike something while it is good for you; and it may be that you love something while it is bad for you. And Allah knows while you do not know.

T. J. Irving:
Fighting is also prescribed for you even though it may seem detestable to you. It may be that you detest something which is good for you; while perhaps you love something even though it is bad for you. God knows, while you do not know.”

T.U. Hilali-M. Khan:
Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.

M. Pickthall:
Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not.

M.H. Shakir:
Fighting is enjoined on you, and is an object of dislike to you; and it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you, and it may be that you love a thing while it is evil for you, and Allah knows, while you do not know.

I’m not saying that every single muslim in the world is a jihadi, but too many support them with silence. They support them by claiming any critic of islam is just a bigot without a reason to think islam is anything but a wonderful, progressive religion instead of the backwards, medieval, repressive religion it has been proven to be.

Tags: Andrew McCarthy

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 17th, 2010 at 4:30 pm and is filed under Dhimmitude, Islamic hypocrisy, Islamic Invasion, Islamic Supremacism, Islamists, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Sharia (Islamic Law). You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

188 Responses to “WAKE UP PEOPLE!”
( jump to bottom )

citizen_q

1 | June 17, 2010 4:39 pm

According to ayaotolla assaholea khomeanie and the turkey PM erdogan, and I am sure others, islam is islam.
citizen_q

2 | June 17, 2010 4:47 pm

We also need to change the nomenclature of the debate. “War on terror” focuses on a tactic rather then the enemy. The war is the global jihad being waged on many fronts, demographic, economic, and political, to name some, against us.
Rodan

3 | June 17, 2010 4:49 pm

This is a great book!
FurryOldGuyJeans

4 | June 17, 2010 4:52 pm

Rodan wrote:

This is a great book!

All ZIONIST JUICE Lies!

- CAIR Spokesman
FurryOldGuyJeans

5 | June 17, 2010 4:53 pm

citizen_q wrote:

We also need to change the nomenclature of the debate. “War on terror” focuses on a tactic rather then the enemy. The war is the global jihad being waged on many fronts, demographic, economic, and political, to name some, against us.

Our latter-day political elites have found it easier to declare war on a concept than on the enemy. Barry doesn’t want to even battle an idea, unless it is America.
Piglet-U93

6 | June 17, 2010 4:54 pm

For many, in their last moment, Islam will remain peaceful even as they declare, ‘why are you doing this?’ as their head is sawed off with a dull blade to shouts of “allah akbar”.
FurryOldGuyJeans

7 | June 17, 2010 4:55 pm

Yet the Left insists it is only evil Christians that want to convert the unbelievers by force, or kill them.
citizen_q

8 | June 17, 2010 4:58 pm

An excerpt from an excellant article by Raymond Ibrahim
(Sorry for the length and formatting, but I have to leave)

The Articulation of Taqiyya

Qur’anic verse 3:28 is often seen as the primary verse that sanctions deception towards non-Muslims: “Let believers [Muslims] not take infidels [non-Muslims] for friends and allies instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with God—unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions.“[7]
Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari (d. 923), author of a standard and authoritative Qur’an commentary, explains verse 3:28 as follows:
If you [Muslims] are under their [non-Muslims'] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them with your tongue while harboring inner animosity for them … [know that] God has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels rather than other believers—except when infidels are above them [in authority]. Should that be the case, let them act friendly towards them while preserving their religion.[8]
Regarding Qur’an 3:28, Ibn Kathir (d. 1373), another prime authority on the Qur’an, writes, “Whoever at any time or place fears … evil [from non-Muslims] may protect himself through outward show.” As proof of this, he quotes Muhammad’s close companion Abu Darda, who said, “Let us grin in the face of some people while our hearts curse them.” Another companion, simply known as Al-Hasan, said, “Doing taqiyya is acceptable till the Day of Judgment [i.e., in perpetuity].”[9]
Other prominent scholars, such as Abu ‘Abdullah al-Qurtubi (1214-73) and Muhyi ‘d-Din ibn al-Arabi (1165-1240), have extended taqiyya to cover deeds. In other words, Muslims can behave like infidels and worse—for example, by bowing down and worshiping idols and crosses, offering false testimony, and even exposing the weaknesses of their fellow Muslims to the infidel enemy—anything short of actually killing a Muslim: “Taqiyya, even if committed without duress, does not lead to a state of infidelity—even if it leads to sin deserving of hellfire.“[10]
Deceit in Muhammad’s Military Exploits
Muhammad—whose example as the “most perfect human” is to be followed in every detail—took an expedient view on lying. It is well known, for instance, that he permitted lying in three situations: to reconcile two or more quarreling parties, to placate one’s wife, and in war.[11] According to one Arabic legal manual devoted to jihad as defined by the four schools of law, “The ulema agree that deception during warfare is legitimate … deception is a form of art in war.”[12] Moreover, according to Mukaram, this deception is classified as taqiyya: “Taqiyya in order to dupe the enemy is permissible.”[13]
Several ulema believe deceit is integral to the waging of war: Ibn al-’Arabi declares that “in the Hadith [sayings and actions of Muhammad], practicing deceit in war is well demonstrated. Indeed, its need is more stressed than the need for courage.” Ibn al-Munir (d. 1333) writes, “War is deceit, i.e., the most complete and perfect war waged by a holy warrior is a war of deception, not confrontation, due to the latter’s inherent danger, and the fact that one can attain victory through treachery without harm [to oneself].” And Ibn Hajar (d. 1448) counsels Muslims “to take great caution in war, while [publicly] lamenting and mourning in order to dupe the infidels.”[14]
This Muslim notion that war is deceit goes back to the Battle of the Trench (627), which pitted Muhammad and his followers against several non-Muslim tribes known as Al-Ahzab. One of the Ahzab, Na’im ibn Mas’ud, went to the Muslim camp and converted to Islam. When Muhammad discovered that the Ahzab were unaware of their co-tribalist’s conversion, he counseled Mas’ud to return and try to get the pagan forces to abandon the siege. It was then that Muhammad memorably declared, “For war is deceit.” Mas’ud returned to the Ahzab without their knowing that he had switched sides and intentionally began to give his former kin and allies bad advice. He also went to great lengths to instigate quarrels between the various tribes until, thoroughly distrusting each other, they disbanded, lifted the siege from the Muslims, and saved Islam from destruction in an embryonic period.[15] Most recently, 9/11 accomplices, such as Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, rationalized their conspiratorial role in their defendant response by evoking their prophet’s assertion that “war is deceit.”
A more compelling expression of the legitimacy of deceiving infidels is the following anecdote. A poet, Ka’b ibn Ashraf, offended Muhammad, prompting the latter to exclaim, “Who will kill this man who has hurt God and his prophet?” A young Muslim named Muhammad ibn Maslama volunteered on condition that in order to get close enough to Ka’b to assassinate him, he be allowed to lie to the poet. Muhammad agreed. Ibn Maslama traveled to Ka’b and began to denigrate Islam and Muhammad. He carried on in this way till his disaffection became so convincing that Ka’b took him into his confidence. Soon thereafter, Ibn Maslama appeared with another Muslim and, while Ka’b's guard was down, killed him.[16]
Muhammad said other things that cast deception in a positive light, such as “God has commanded me to equivocate among the people just as he has commanded me to establish [religious] obligations”; and “I have been sent with obfuscation”; and “whoever lives his life in dissimulation dies a martyr.”[17]
In short, the earliest historical records of Islam clearly attest to the prevalence of taqiyya as a form of Islamic warfare. Furthermore, early Muslims are often depicted as lying their way out of binds—usually by denying or insulting Islam or Muhammad—often to the approval of the latter, his only criterion being that their intentions (niya) be pure.[18] During wars with Christians, whenever the latter were in authority, the practice of taqiyya became even more integral. Mukaram states, “Taqiyya was used as a way to fend off danger from the Muslims, especially in critical times and when their borders were exposed to wars with the Byzantines and, afterwards, to the raids [crusades] of the Franks and others.”[19]
Taqiyya in Qur’anic Revelation
The Qur’an itself is further testimony to taqiyya. Since God is believed to be the revealer of these verses, he is by default seen as the ultimate perpetrator of deceit—which is not surprising since he is described in the Qur’an as the best makar, that is, the best deceiver or schemer (e.g., 3:54, 8:30, 10:21).
While other scriptures contain contradictions, the Qur’an is the only holy book whose commentators have evolved a doctrine to account for the very visible shifts which occur from one injunction to another. No careful reader will remain unaware of the many contradictory verses in the Qur’an, most specifically the way in which peaceful and tolerant verses lie almost side by side with violent and intolerant ones. The ulema were initially baffled as to which verses to codify into the Shari’a worldview—the one that states there is no coercion in religion (2:256), or the ones that command believers to fight all non-Muslims till they either convert, or at least submit, to Islam (8:39, 9:5, 9:29). To get out of this quandary, the commentators developed the doctrine of abrogation, which essentially maintains that verses revealed later in Muhammad’s career take precedence over earlier ones whenever there is a discrepancy. In order to document which verses abrogated which, a religious science devoted to the chronology of the Qur’an’s verses evolved (known as an-Nasikh wa’l Mansukh, the abrogater and the abrogated).
But why the contradiction in the first place? The standard view is that in the early years of Islam, since Muhammad and his community were far outnumbered by their infidel competitors while living next to them in Mecca, a message of peace and coexistence was in order. However, after the Muslims migrated to Medina in 622 and grew in military strength, verses inciting them to go on the offensive were slowly “revealed”—in principle, sent down from God—always commensurate with Islam’s growing capabilities. In juridical texts, these are categorized in stages: passivity vis-á-vis aggression; permission to fight back against aggressors; commands to fight aggressors; commands to fight all non-Muslims, whether the latter begin aggressions or not.[20] Growing Muslim might is the only variable that explains this progressive change in policy.
Other scholars put a gloss on this by arguing that over a twenty-two year period, the Qur’an was revealed piecemeal, from passive and spiritual verses to legal prescriptions and injunctions to spread the faith through jihad and conquest, simply to acclimate early Muslim converts to the duties of Islam, lest they be discouraged at the outset by the dramatic obligations that would appear in later verses.[21] Verses revealed towards the end of Muhammad’s career—such as, “Warfare is prescribed for you though you hate it”[22]—would have been out of place when warfare was actually out of the question.
However interpreted, the standard view on Qur’anic abrogation concerning war and peace verses is that when Muslims are weak and in a minority position, they should preach and behave according to the ethos of the Meccan verses (peace and tolerance); when strong, however, they should go on the offensive on the basis of what is commanded in the Medinan verses (war and conquest). The vicissitudes of Islamic history are a testimony to this dichotomy, best captured by the popular Muslim notion, based on a hadith, that, if possible, jihad should be performed by the hand (force), if not, then by the tongue (through preaching); and, if that is not possible, then with the heart or one’s intentions.[23]
War Is Eternal
That Islam legitimizes deceit during war is, of course, not all that astonishing; after all, as the Elizabethan writer John Lyly put it, “All’s fair in love and war.”[24] Other non-Muslim philosophers and strategists—such as Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, and Thomas Hobbes—justified deceit in warfare. Deception of the enemy during war is only common sense. The crucial difference in Islam, however, is that war against the infidel is a perpetual affair—until, in the words of the Qur’an, “all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to God.”[25] In his entry on jihad from the Encyclopaedia of Islam, Emile Tyan states: “The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily.”[26]
Moreover, going back to the doctrine of abrogation, Muslim scholars such as Ibn Salama (d. 1020) agree that Qur’an 9:5, known as ayat as-sayf or the sword verse, has abrogated some 124 of the more peaceful Meccan verses, including “every other verse in the Qur’an, which commands or implies anything less than a total offensive against the nonbelievers.”[27] In fact, all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence agree that “jihad is when Muslims wage war on infidels, after having called on them to embrace Islam or at least pay tribute [jizya] and live in submission, and the infidels refuse.”[28]
Obligatory jihad is best expressed by Islam’s dichotomized worldview that pits the realm of Islam against the realm of war. The first, dar al-Islam, is the “realm of submission,” the world where Shari’a governs; the second, dar al-Harb (the realm of war), is the non-Islamic world. A struggle continues until the realm of Islam subsumes the non-Islamic world—a perpetual affair that continues to the present day. The renowned Muslim historian and philosopher Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406) clearly articulates this division:
In the Muslim community, jihad is a religious duty because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the jihad was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense. But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.[29]
snork

9 | June 17, 2010 5:00 pm

citizen_q wrote:

According to ayaotolla assaholea khomeanie and the turkey PM erdogan, and I am sure others, islam is islam.

According to Ayatollah un-Mata Hari, the violent ones are tea partiers, and the rest are peaceful.
buzzsawmonkey

10 | June 17, 2010 5:01 pm

Hey, diddle diddle
The supine infidels
Aid encroachment by the crescent moon
If we’re multicultural
As we’re told we ought
Then we all will become Muslim soon
snork

11 | June 17, 2010 5:01 pm

FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:

Yet the Left insists it is only evil Christians that want to convert the unbelievers by force, or kill them.

And deny global warming.
chickadee

12 | June 17, 2010 5:05 pm

The quiet, supposed ‘moderate’ muzz are doing very little, if anything to show their screed is not a blood thirsty imperialist intolerant ideology. Their failure to act against their own radicals is very telling. What is also very telling is that there even has to be an adjective like ‘moderate,’ a disclaimer really, in front of the word islam.
FurryOldGuyJeans

13 | June 17, 2010 5:08 pm

@ snork:
What’s to deny? The globe gets warmer every day, and cooler every night.
mjazz

14 | June 17, 2010 5:09 pm

@ snork:
Yeah, how could that Tea Partier hit that guy in the fist with his face right in front of his daughter?
nil stooge

15 | June 17, 2010 5:10 pm

A lot of the problem with Islam seems to me to lie in the provenance of the Qur’an – i.e. it’s all directly from Mohammed, firsthand, unfiltered by others. It’s as if the entire New Testament were dictated directly by Jesus. It makes any sort of Islamic exegesis extremely problematic.
yenta-fada

16 | June 17, 2010 5:10 pm

Canadian court sentences father and brother of Aqsa Parvez to life in prison with chance of parole in 18 years. This is actually progress.
Barely reported on our commie CBC, the National Post has an op-ed:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Canada+should+expect+rise+honour+killings+expert+says/3163907/story.html

The mother’s appeal for her son and husband is disgusting.
Kirly

17 | June 17, 2010 5:12 pm

DOOMAGE!
mjazz

18 | June 17, 2010 5:13 pm

@ chickadee:
Good point. Moderate Christians. Moderate Buddhists. Moderate Nazis.
Moderate abortionists. The list is endless.
I’m a moderate flat-earther/
FurryOldGuyJeans

19 | June 17, 2010 5:14 pm

nil stooge wrote:

A lot of the problem with Islam seems to me to lie in the provenance of the Qur’an – i.e. it’s all directly from Mohammed, firsthand, unfiltered by others. It’s as if the entire New Testament were dictated directly by Jesus. It makes any sort of Islamic exegesis extremely problematic.

Yet the Koran is supplemented and extended by commentaries, as evidenced by @ citizen_q.
FurryOldGuyJeans

20 | June 17, 2010 5:15 pm

Kirly wrote:

DOOMAGE!

Is that an appetizer, or the main course?
mjazz

21 | June 17, 2010 5:15 pm

@ nil stooge:
allah changes his mind a lot too. Later revelations cancel out previous ones.
mjazz

22 | June 17, 2010 5:19 pm

@ yenta-fada:
The Religion of Peace has a photo of a once happy muslim/Canadian family this week.
The daughter “stayed out too late”.
yenta-fada

23 | June 17, 2010 5:19 pm

FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:

Kirly wrote:
DOOMAGE!
Is that an appetizer, or the main course?

It’s PEOPLE!
FurryOldGuyJeans

24 | June 17, 2010 5:21 pm

yenta-fada wrote:

FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:
Kirly wrote:
DOOMAGE!
Is that an appetizer, or the main course?
It’s PEOPLE!

“Well, it’s… *sniff* …it’s green.”
yenta-fada

25 | June 17, 2010 5:21 pm

mjazz wrote:

@ yenta-fada:
The Religion of Peace has a photo of a once happy muslim/Canadian family this week.
The daughter “stayed out too late”.

We have HIGH numbers of barbarians here. Our politicians have been seen carrying Hezbollah flags.
buzzsawmonkey

26 | June 17, 2010 5:22 pm

mjazz wrote:

The Religion of Peace has a photo of a once happy muslim/Canadian family this week.
The daughter “stayed out too late”.

I don’t stay out late
‘Cause if I go
My mom or dad will try and kill me, don’t you know
Ain’t misbehavin’
Doin’ what the imam says to do

—Fatwas Waller
snork

27 | June 17, 2010 5:23 pm

mjazz wrote:

@ chickadee:
Good point. Moderate Christians. Moderate Buddhists. Moderate Nazis.
Moderate abortionists. The list is endless.
I’m a moderate flat-earther/

My moderate ceiling cat just took a swipe at my moderate Flying Spaghetti Monster. His name must be Garfield. Do I get my moderate star on my moderate forehead now?
snork

28 | June 17, 2010 5:24 pm

FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:

“Well, it’s… *sniff* …it’s green.”

And it’s made out of GREEN JOBS!!!!!
Kirly

29 | June 17, 2010 5:24 pm

FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:

Kirly wrote:
DOOMAGE!
Is that an appetizer, or the main course?

it’s the whole pie right now.
FurryOldGuyJeans

30 | June 17, 2010 5:25 pm

yenta-fada wrote:

mjazz wrote:
@ yenta-fada:

The Religion of Peace has a photo of a once happy muslim/Canadian family this week.
The daughter “stayed out too late”.

We have HIGH numbers of barbarians here. Our politicians have been seen carrying Hezbollah flags.

1 barbarian is 5 too many.
yenta-fada

31 | June 17, 2010 5:26 pm

Here’s today’s official politician who hates Israel and makes public statements about it:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/Harper+compares+Davies+terrorist+groups/3163092/story.html

This isn’t some ugly reporter like Helen Thomas, this ugly politican has actual power.
yenta-fada

32 | June 17, 2010 5:27 pm

@ buzzsawmonkey:

‘Fatwas Waller’ lol. You ARE a treasure.
nil stooge

33 | June 17, 2010 5:28 pm

@ FurryOldGuyJeans:
True – the hadiths and sunnahs I think they’re called?

I’m not saying exegesis is impossible – just difficult.

Imagine the entire New Testament as the literal, exact words of Jesus, and imagine some average Christian trying to argue that “Jesus didn’t really mean exactly what He said there” – that’s my only point.

Seems a huge hurdle, and it (Islamic exegesis) hasn’t ever really happened, and probably for that reason.
coldwarrior

34 | June 17, 2010 5:28 pm

there is no such thing as a good muslim. if there were they would have already taken care of their terrorist problem. There is only one koran, therefore there are no moderate muslims, just as there are no brave muslims, just as there are no honorable muslims. they are all cowards that will use our good will and rights against us, seeking friendship and compromise with the muslims is seen as weakness by them, something to exploited. their book tells them to lie to the kaffir, its even better if the lie is in pursuit of the ummah wahida or in jihad against the non-believers; words from the mouth of a muslims are suspect at best.

islam is not a religion, it is an all-encompassing political ideology bent on imperialism and domination through whatever means at hand, violent or otherwise with no holds barred. no quarter should be given to any muslims, nor should any of them ever be trusted. i have read their koran several times, i understand them completely.

islam delenda est
FurryOldGuyJeans

35 | June 17, 2010 5:30 pm

@ Kirly:
Mmmmmm, pie.

*DROOL*

(goo-goo eyes)
nil stooge

36 | June 17, 2010 5:30 pm

@ mjazz:

True and it gets more violent as it goes along, chronolgoically. Though, it (the Qur’an) isn’t even arranged chronologically if I recall – it’s ordered on verse size I think.
yenta-fada

37 | June 17, 2010 5:34 pm

We do have Salim Mansur, the brave Canadian columnist who criticises Islam’s deviant practices. Also Tarek Fatah, an Amahdi,who writes against barbaric practices. I wouldn’t really call him a ‘moderate’ but he gets death threats from the Koranimals just the same. He doesn’t like being a second class Muslim. Again, he is not the norm.
Iron Fist

38 | June 17, 2010 5:34 pm

All I need to know about Islam I learned on 9-11 when, all over the world, Muslims (good Muslims, by their light) danced in the streets in joy about what had been done. Islam is evil, just as Nazism and Communism were/are evil. But Islam may be the worst of the three.
yenta-fada

39 | June 17, 2010 5:37 pm

Iron Fist wrote:

All I need to know about Islam I learned on 9-11 when, all over the world, Muslims (good Muslims, by their light) danced in the streets in joy about what had been done. Islam is evil, just as Nazism and Communism were/are evil. But Islam may be the worst of the three.

It’s hard to compare in absolute terms. The ends are the same, but the means differ. Still, it’s all about power, infantile sexuality, and debasing the better parts of our human nature.
yenta-fada

40 | June 17, 2010 5:39 pm

Tiny off topic. Gold closed at an all-time high of $1,248 per ounce. Silver is about $18.70 and vastly underpriced.
Bunk X

41 | June 17, 2010 5:39 pm

@ coldwarrior:
Sorry, bro, I can’t support you at all on that blanket statement.
snork

42 | June 17, 2010 5:40 pm

nil stooge wrote:

Imagine the entire New Testament as the literal, exact words of Jesus, and imagine some average Christian trying to argue that “Jesus didn’t really mean exactly what He said there” – that’s my only point.

You mean like that thing about the camel and the needle?

Leftists love to play the “Jesus sez” game.
doriangrey

43 | June 17, 2010 5:42 pm

coldwarrior wrote:

there is no such thing as a good muslim

The only good Muslim is a dead Muslim, and the US Military is awesome at making good Muslims…
doriangrey

44 | June 17, 2010 5:44 pm

Bunk X wrote:

@ coldwarrior:
Sorry, bro, I can’t support you at all on that blanket statement.

Sorry Bro, then you really havent been paying attention.
coldwarrior

45 | June 17, 2010 5:46 pm

Bunk X wrote:

@ coldwarrior:
Sorry, bro, I can’t support you at all on that blanket statement.

dont care, oppinions are what they are
nil stooge

46 | June 17, 2010 5:47 pm

@ snork:
Well even the red-letter stuff in the New Testament is all second-hand – right? So you’ve got a bit of wriggle room right there. I may be missing your point…
spinmore

47 | June 17, 2010 5:47 pm

@ Bunk X:
“Sorry Bro” . . . i keep that right along side of my “Yo Boss”
Piglet-U93

48 | June 17, 2010 5:49 pm

@ nil stooge:
Craig Winn did all of the work for you in the POD’s 1,300 pages of vomit inducing pedofile-mohammad spewiness.
spinmore

49 | June 17, 2010 5:50 pm

@ coldwarrior:
“don’t care” . . . i keep that with my “who gives a big rat’s ass”
Kirly

50 | June 17, 2010 5:50 pm

nil stooge wrote:

@ FurryOldGuyJeans:
True – the hadiths and sunnahs I think they’re called?
I’m not saying exegesis is impossible – just difficult.
Imagine the entire New Testament as the literal, exact words of Jesus, and imagine some average Christian trying to argue that “Jesus didn’t really mean exactly what He said there” – that’s my only point.
Seems a huge hurdle, and it (Islamic exegesis) hasn’t ever really happened, and probably for that reason.

indeed. the devil really did a number when he sent an “angel” to dictate the koran to mo, didn’t he? did his best to make sure it could never be changed. it’s pure evil.
Kirly

51 | June 17, 2010 5:51 pm

FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:

@ Kirly:
Mmmmmm, pie.
*DROOL*
(goo-goo eyes)

no! bad furry! that pie ain’t done cooling yet!
Bunk X

52 | June 17, 2010 5:51 pm

doriangrey wrote:

Bunk X wrote:
@ coldwarrior:
Sorry, bro, I can’t support you at all on that blanket statement.

Sorry Bro, then you really havent been paying attention.

You really believe that ALL Muslims are jihadists?
A majority of klan members are Baptists… does that mean all Baptists are racists? Of course not.
nil stooge

53 | June 17, 2010 5:53 pm

@ Piglet-U93:
No idea what you’re talking about, but I’m always glad to get someone else doing my work!
Piglet-U93

54 | June 17, 2010 5:54 pm

@ nil stooge:
Ordered by Chapter size (largest to smallest); some chapters belonging to both periods; the book itself is logically divided into two periods Meccan (reluctant peacefulness) followed chronologically by the Medina (imperative violence towards all things non-Muslim).
The Osprey

55 | June 17, 2010 5:55 pm

Holy shiite! All this creeping sharia is ruining my sunni disposition!
coldwarrior

56 | June 17, 2010 5:55 pm

@ Bunk X:

btw, great post this Am on gas prices.
FurryOldGuyJeans

57 | June 17, 2010 5:55 pm

snork wrote:

nil stooge wrote:
Imagine the entire New Testament as the literal, exact words of Jesus, and imagine some average Christian trying to argue that “Jesus didn’t really mean exactly what He said there” – that’s my only point.
You mean like that thing about the camel and the needle?
Leftists love to play the “Jesus sez” game.

And they act like they just had a conversation with him.
vagabond trader

58 | June 17, 2010 5:55 pm

Good muslims will be attending this
nil stooge

59 | June 17, 2010 5:56 pm

@ Kirly:

indeed. the devil really did a number when he sent an “angel” to dictate the koran to mo, didn’t he? did his best to make sure it could never be changed. it’s pure evil.

It seems to be a fatal flaw for sure; now to figure out – fatal for whom.
coldwarrior

60 | June 17, 2010 5:57 pm

Bunk X wrote:

You really believe that ALL Muslims are jihadists?
A majority of klan members are Baptists… does that mean all Baptists are racists? Of course not.

yes, i do. in large ways or small ways.

i do not see the great mythical rise up of the mythical moderate muslim to stop this violence and terror and fascism and 7th century treatment of women and non muslims.
Bunk X

61 | June 17, 2010 5:57 pm

coldwarrior wrote:

@ Bunk X:
btw, great post this Am on gas prices.

Thanx– I didn’t have time to update the numbers as Bunkessa’s high school gradumacation festivites took precedence.
chickadee

62 | June 17, 2010 5:59 pm

yenta-fada wrote:

Canadian court sentences father and brother of Aqsa Parvez to life in prison with chance of parole in 18 years. This is actually progress.
Barely reported on our commie CBC, the National Post has an op-ed:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Canada+should+expect+rise+honour+killings+expert+says/3163907/story.html

The mother’s appeal for her son and husband is disgusting.

Great news. This a strong stand against sharia. We can not let them get away with it here.
Agree abt. the mother. She has no concept of justice for her young daughter. What a horrid belief system that blocks a mother’s love. Or a father’s love. Where rubbish in a book written by a crazed maniac inspires parents to murder their ‘wayward’ daughters.
vagabond trader

63 | June 17, 2010 5:59 pm

@ nil stooge:

It seems to be a fatal flaw for sure; now to figure out – fatal for whom.

Fatal to whomever falls for the pretender and his counterfeit words.
FurryOldGuyJeans

64 | June 17, 2010 6:00 pm

@ Piglet-U93:
The ravings of a pedophile. Maybe I should write down what the inmates at Western State Hospital (the local state-run insane asylum) say and start a religion.

/ (do I really need to?)
Kirly

65 | June 17, 2010 6:00 pm

nil stooge wrote:

@ Kirly:
indeed. the devil really did a number when he sent an “angel” to dictate the koran to mo, didn’t he? did his best to make sure it could never be changed. it’s pure evil.
It seems to be a fatal flaw for sure; now to figure out – fatal for whom.

the intention was it would be fatal for those following it in that they would lose their souls and fatal for us in that we would be at great risk of losing our earthly lives. it’s a win-win for the evil one. he gets more souls and the earth, over which the Bible says he has dominion, has fewer believers in the One True God.
coldwarrior

66 | June 17, 2010 6:01 pm

Bunk X wrote:

You really believe that ALL Muslims are jihadists?
A majority of klan members are Baptists… does that mean all Baptists are racists? Of course not.

ooppps..and, some baptists protest the klan and try to stop them.
coldwarrior

67 | June 17, 2010 6:02 pm

Bunk X wrote:

coldwarrior wrote:
@ Bunk X:
btw, great post this Am on gas prices.

Thanx– I didn’t have time to update the numbers as Bunkessa’s high school gradumacation festivites took precedence.

excellence none the less, i didnt have time to send kudos this AM
snork

68 | June 17, 2010 6:02 pm

@ nil stooge:
No, I’m agreeing with you, and using a favorite example of the “Jesus was a socialist” crowd.
FurryOldGuyJeans

69 | June 17, 2010 6:03 pm

@ coldwarrior:
I see lots more Baptists (and other Christian sects) protesting the words and actions of the Klan than I have ever seen of “moderate” Muslims doing the same.
Piglet-U93

70 | June 17, 2010 6:04 pm

@ nil stooge:
I will make it clear http://www.prophetofdoom.net read the FREE downloadable book with same name. Unless of course you think reading is work then you can download the MP3 files and listen to the entire book. Unless you think listening is work at which point I submit I can’t help you.
father_of_10

71 | June 17, 2010 6:05 pm

Thisis the same crowd that said Tookie Williams was just misunderstood and the crips were not advocates of violence and oppression, but just a community organization striving for better neighborhoods. Yup, the EXACT same crowd.
Rodan

72 | June 17, 2010 6:05 pm

@ snork:

Or Chris Matthews claiming the Tea party is the Militia arm of the GOP.
snork

73 | June 17, 2010 6:06 pm

Kirly wrote:

indeed. the devil really did a number when he sent an “angel” to dictate the koran to mo, didn’t he?

[Runs through lolspeak dialecticizer]

Basement cat really honked up a hairball when he sent a kitteh dressed up as ceiling cat to meow the whole book to Moe Katz, dinnee?
huckfunn

74 | June 17, 2010 6:06 pm

coldwarrior wrote:

there is no such thing as a good muslim. if there were they would have already taken care of their terrorist problem. There is only one koran, therefore there are no moderate muslims, just as there are no brave muslims, just as there are no honorable muslims. they are all cowards that will use our good will and rights against us, seeking friendship and compromise with the muslims is seen as weakness by them, something to exploited. their book tells them to lie to the kaffir, its even better if the lie is in pursuit of the ummah wahida or in jihad against the non-believers; words from the mouth of a muslims are suspect at best.

islam is not a religion, it is an all-encompassing political ideology bent on imperialism and domination through whatever means at hand, violent or otherwise with no holds barred. no quarter should be given to any muslims, nor should any of them ever be trusted. i have read their koran several times, i understand them completely.

islam delenda est

You really need to put that into music. Some sort of cheerful ditty like the “It’s in the Koran” thing. I agree 100%. Muslims kill tens of thousands of mulsims every year and the “moderate” (snicker) muslims don’t say squat about it. If there was any truth to their “religion”, we would hear many more voices speaking out against the daily atrocities.
coldwarrior

75 | June 17, 2010 6:06 pm

FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:

@ coldwarrior:
I see lots more Baptists (and other Christian sects) protesting the words and actions of the Klan than I have ever seen of “moderate” Muslims doing the same.

i look at it this way, if the violence and terror perpetrated by the muzz in the 20th and 21st century was not enough to cause an internal revolution and ‘reformation’ then nothing will.

there are no moderate muslims
coldwarrior

76 | June 17, 2010 6:08 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

thx…we need to link to that.
Bunk X

77 | June 17, 2010 6:08 pm

coldwarrior wrote:

Bunk X wrote:
You really believe that ALL Muslims are jihadists?
A majority of klan members are Baptists… does that mean all Baptists are racists? Of course not.

yes, i do. in large ways or small ways.
i do not see the great mythical rise up of the mythical moderate muslim to stop this violence and terror and fascism and 7th century treatment of women and non muslims.

The Muslims I know don’t treat their wives like chattel, don’t force them to wear burquas, etc. How about the Muslims who are fighting alongside our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Rodan

78 | June 17, 2010 6:08 pm

@ FurryOldGuyJeans:

Exactly, that’s the difference! The majority of Baptists hate and reject the Klan. The Majority of Muzzies admire Hiballah, Hamas, Ahmadinejad, Taliban, The Muslim Brotherhood and AL-Qaeda
coldwarrior

79 | June 17, 2010 6:09 pm

@ huckfunn:

i have that and the bggcc award on speed dail
chickadee

80 | June 17, 2010 6:09 pm

mjazz wrote:

@ chickadee:
Good point. Moderate Christians. Moderate Buddhists. Moderate Nazis.
Moderate abortionists. The list is endless.
I’m a moderate flat-earther/

LOL,
zero of course thinks there are moderate terrorists.
huckfunn

81 | June 17, 2010 6:10 pm

Bunk X wrote:

How about the Muslims who are fighting alongside our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?

If I had one them in my outfit, I’d be constantly looking over my shoulder.
coldwarrior

82 | June 17, 2010 6:11 pm

Bunk X wrote:

The Muslims I know don’t treat their wives like chattel, don’t force them to wear burquas, etc. How about the Muslims who are fighting alongside our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?

again, what are they doing to reform their religion as a whole?

do they donate money to the mosques?

why are they still muzz?

i wont fall for small actions when large actions are needed.
yenta-fada

83 | June 17, 2010 6:13 pm

@ chickadee:

Even though the Canadian media barely covers these honor killings, the word is getting around that this isn’t just happening in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. At least, I would like to think that people are more aware. If we did not have a Conservative Prime Minister right now, the Liberals would sweep all of this under the rug. Harper is firm in his support of Israel and the Muslims can’t stand it. The socialist NDP party is having to STFU and STFD. They are waiting…..
Rodan

84 | June 17, 2010 6:13 pm

@ Bunk X:

How about the Muslims who are fighting alongside our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?

They are using our troops to settle scores with other Muzzies. Look at Iraq, the Shia have united and are forming a Pro Iranian regime in Iraq. In Afghanistan its Karzai is reaching out to the Taliban to cut a deal.

You have to read up on the islamic Concept of the Umma.

Also explain this.
Muzzies vs. Serbs
Muzzies vs. Russians
Muzzies vs. Israel
Muzzies vs. Lebanese Christians
Muzzies vs. Sudanese Christians
Muzzies vs. Ethiopians
Muzzies vs. Thais
Muzzies vs. Indians
Muzzies vs. Filipinos

See what they have in common.

Now the Muslims you know are probably Persians. They don’t even follow Islam once they leave Iran.
Kirly

85 | June 17, 2010 6:13 pm

snork wrote:

Kirly wrote:

indeed. the devil really did a number when he sent an “angel” to dictate the koran to mo, didn’t he?

[Runs through lolspeak dialecticizer]

Basement cat really honked up a hairball when he sent a kitteh dressed up as ceiling cat to meow the whole book to Moe Katz, dinnee?

as long as more people understand… it’s EVIL!
nil stooge

86 | June 17, 2010 6:13 pm

@ snork:

[...] a favorite example of the “Jesus was a socialist” crowd.

Seems like it’s the leftists that are most prone to literal, un-nuanced interpretations of the Bible, unlike the rest of their lives where they swim in an ocean of nuance and moral relativism.
coldwarrior

87 | June 17, 2010 6:15 pm

@ Rodan:

sitting back and acting western and not doing anything about the cancer that is islam is the same as acceptance of that cancer
Rodan

88 | June 17, 2010 6:15 pm

@ snork:

Liberation Theology.
Rodan

89 | June 17, 2010 6:16 pm

@ coldwarrior:

It also doesn’t explain why the Prime Minister of Turkey, Ahmadinejad and Hizballah are the most admired figures in the Islamic world.
Crusader Rabbit

90 | June 17, 2010 6:17 pm

I argue that it doesn’t matter what portion of muslims are committed jihadis. As long as the non-committed among them understand that the jihadis will kill them if they stray from jihadist doctrine they are not potential allies to western civilization but are fundamentally allies of the jihadis.

Just as it didn’t matter what proportion of the Axis’ populace were committed members of their nations’ ruling parties: the Allies were at war with all of them, not just one political party in each country.
yenta-fada

91 | June 17, 2010 6:18 pm

@ chickadee:

And the Canadian system supplies this charming family, and others like it, with free education, medical care, and quite often, welfare. Who let these losers into the country? We have enough taxi drivers already.
FurryOldGuyJeans

92 | June 17, 2010 6:18 pm

chickadee wrote:

mjazz wrote:
@ chickadee:

Good point. Moderate Christians. Moderate Buddhists. Moderate Nazis.
Moderate abortionists. The list is endless.
I’m a moderate flat-earther/

LOL,
zero of course thinks there are moderate terrorists.

And here I am, a militantly indifferent agnostic. A fat wii on you all!
Iron Fist

93 | June 17, 2010 6:19 pm

coldwarrior wrote:

there is no such thing as a good muslim. if there were they would have already taken care of their terrorist problem.

I agree almost 100%. A minor quibble is that, as Oscar Schindler proved that there coulkd be good Nazis, so too might good Mohammedans exist as rare examples of people who transcend their limitations. However, as a rule you are completely correct. And, just as no number of Oscar Shindlers could ever redeem Nazism, so too is Islam irredeemable. Islam delenda est
coldwarrior

94 | June 17, 2010 6:20 pm

@ Bunk X:

i actually wish i believed like bunkx, i really do.
nil stooge

95 | June 17, 2010 6:20 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

[...] at which point I submit I can’t help you.

I feel like you’re inferring some opinion of mine that needs correcting; my reading list is already absurdly long, maybe you could be a little clearer what I’d gain by reading that?

Meanwhile – here’s some for you (from my current queue):
Derbyshires’ “Unknown Quantity”
Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom”
Stewart’s “Mathematical Curiosities”
Dibdin’s “Ratking”
Nahin’s “Duelling Idiots“
Rodan

96 | June 17, 2010 6:20 pm

@ Iron Fist:

See my 84.
coldwarrior

97 | June 17, 2010 6:21 pm

@ Iron Fist:

he was also actively working to mess up the war machine by sending out sub standard munitions
yenta-fada

98 | June 17, 2010 6:21 pm

Rodan wrote:

@ Bunk X:
How about the Muslims who are fighting alongside our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?
They are using our troops to settle scores with other Muzzies. Look at Iraq, the Shia have united and are forming a Pro Iranian regime in Iraq. In Afghanistan its Karzai is reaching out to the Taliban to cut a deal.
You have to read up on the islamic Concept of the Umma.
Also explain this.
Muzzies vs. Serbs
Muzzies vs. Russians
Muzzies vs. Israel
Muzzies vs. Lebanese Christians
Muzzies vs. Sudanese Christians
Muzzies vs. Ethiopians
Muzzies vs. Thais
Muzzies vs. Indians
Muzzies vs. Filipinos
See what they have in common.
Now the Muslims you know are probably Persians. They don’t even follow Islam once they leave Iran.

Gee, how could have all of the world’s media fail to notice this? Must be the Joooooz who control it.
Iron Fist

99 | June 17, 2010 6:21 pm

@ Rodan:

You left one out. There is one more revered than all of those. That would be, of course, Adolf Hitler. Support for Islam is no different than support for Nazism.
huckfunn

100 | June 17, 2010 6:22 pm

@ coldwarrior:
@ Iron Fist:
Islam delenda est. I don’t have a single tattoo, yet. That will be my first. I think it will be festooned with pork chops with oak clusters.
Rodan

101 | June 17, 2010 6:23 pm

@ Iron Fist:

Oh yeah Hitler is greatly admired in Dar Al islam.
Kirly

102 | June 17, 2010 6:23 pm

FNC is showing the sec of state giving an interview with a foriegn journalist and saying that the justice department will be suing AZ over SB1070 but the justice department refuses to confirm or deny.

i’ve had it. these bastards better never cross my path or they will be verbally eviscerated like they’ve never seen.
yenta-fada

103 | June 17, 2010 6:25 pm

@ nil stooge:

I like Michael Dibdin a lot. Also Hayek, but too lazy to read it all. We are literally on the road to serfdom these days.
Kirly

104 | June 17, 2010 6:25 pm

oh, and the liar in chief has failed to send the border patrol which he promised
nil stooge

105 | June 17, 2010 6:26 pm

@ Iron Fist:

I don’t know, this sounds like the “no true Scotsman” fallacy turned on its head. E.g. if the Muslim is good then they’re not really a true Muslim. But to be fair, until the Islamic Reformation kicks in, that’s true to a certain extent, though not on a personal belief level IMO.
Bunk X

106 | June 17, 2010 6:26 pm

Rodan wrote:

@ FurryOldGuyJeans:
Exactly, that’s the difference! The majority of Baptists hate and reject the Klan. The Majority of Muzzies admire Hiballah, Hamas, Ahmadinejad, Taliban, The Muslim Brotherhood and AL-Qaeda

Majority does not mean ALL. That was my only reason for responding to CW’s statement earlier. A majority of Chinese support and admire communism, but not all.
Rodan

107 | June 17, 2010 6:26 pm

@ Kirly:

Hey I spoke to one of my Cousins from the Dominican Republic. He told me that the Media over there are portraying SB1070 as an internal American matter. The attitude is the US can allow or disallow anyone they want. Yje Dominican Authorities don’t tolerate the Haitians Illegals and if they are caught without papers, they are Immediately bused to the border and sent back. If they resist, they get shot.

I’m serious.
FurryOldGuyJeans

108 | June 17, 2010 6:27 pm

Kirly wrote:

FNC is showing the sec of state giving an interview with a foriegn journalist and saying that the justice department will be suing AZ over SB1070 but the justice department refuses to confirm or deny.
i’ve had it. these bastards better never cross my path or they will be verbally eviscerated like they’ve never seen.

Starts waving a sign, “Go, Kirly, Go!”
Rodan

109 | June 17, 2010 6:27 pm

@ Bunk X:

Majority does not mean ALL. That was my only reason for responding to CW’s statement earlier. A majority of Chinese support and admire communism, but not all.

Fair enough and I was NOT implying all. Look at the Iranian people and the Kurds, they are Pro American.
Rodan

110 | June 17, 2010 6:28 pm

@ yenta-fada:

Must be the Joooooz who control it.

They are doing bad job with the Media’s hatred of Israel. Nice control, huh!

:LOL:
Rodan

111 | June 17, 2010 6:29 pm

@ Bunk X:

I think China is more Fascist now than Communist. But that’s another subject!
Kirly

112 | June 17, 2010 6:29 pm

Kirly wrote:

FNC is showing the sec of state giving an interview with a foriegn journalist and saying that the justice department will be suing AZ over SB1070 but the justice department refuses to confirm or deny.
i’ve had it. these bastards better never cross my path or they will be verbally eviscerated like they’ve never seen.

here. evil bitch on video
http://www.therightscoop.com/hillary-clinton-yes-obama-is-filing-a-lawsuit-against-the-arizona-law
Iron Fist

113 | June 17, 2010 6:29 pm

@ Rodan:

I have no problem with people who leave Islam, especially people who were born into it but leave it when the oppertunity presents itself. My conflict is with an ideology, not any specific person. It is not just 9-11. We have 1400 years of the history of Mohammedanism all over the world to judge them by. A temporary peace is a hudna, while they gather their strength to strike. When victorious, the
ohammedans are brutal in a fashion to make even Lavrenti Beria cringe. The only thing they respect is merciless power, the only thing they love is death. So it has been for 1400 years. How can anyone sane consider making “peace” with such a foe?
Kirly

114 | June 17, 2010 6:30 pm

Rodan wrote:

@ Kirly:
Hey I spoke to one of my Cousins from the Dominican Republic. He told me that the Media over there are portraying SB1070 as an internal American matter. The attitude is the US can allow or disallow anyone they want. Yje Dominican Authorities don’t tolerate the Haitians Illegals and if they are caught without papers, they are Immediatlet bus to teh border and sent back. If they resist, they get shot.
I’m serious.

well, i’m glad to hear someone somewhere supports a nations right to enforce it’s borders!
chickadee

115 | June 17, 2010 6:30 pm

coldwarrior wrote:

FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:

@ coldwarrior:
I see lots more Baptists (and other Christian sects) protesting the words and actions of the Klan than I have ever seen of “moderate” Muslims doing the same.

i look at it this way, if the violence and terror perpetrated by the muzz in the 20th and 21st century was not enough to cause an internal revolution and ‘reformation’ then nothing will.

there are no moderate muslims

I agree. islam is on the warpath all over the world. Any muzz who isn’t speaking out against this aggression enables the head choppers to swing their blades. How could anyone stay in a ‘religion’ like that unless they agree with the screed, at least in theory? Especially in western countries where they could speak out without fear of reprisals. And if fear is the problem, then they are utterly useless for bringing change and will eventually succumb to the ropma.
The tight grip that islam has on the muzz makes them a dangerous bunch. No room for enlightened thinking.
nil stooge

116 | June 17, 2010 6:30 pm

@ yenta-fada:

I like Michael Dibdin a lot.

I had no idea there was a whole genre of Italian/Venetian detective fiction (e.g. Dibdin, Leon, etc) until an art history friend who loves Venice turned me on to it. I like it too, although my introduction to Dibdin was Back to Bologna which, until I finished it and confirmed it was a send up, was a bit confusing.
Bunk X

117 | June 17, 2010 6:30 pm

Rodan wrote:

Now the Muslims you know are probably Persians. They don’t even follow Islam once they leave Iran.

Actually they are. They are not radical islamists, but they are Muslims just the same.
Crusader Rabbit

118 | June 17, 2010 6:31 pm

nil stooge wrote:

@ Iron Fist:
I don’t know, this sounds like the “no true Scotsman” fallacy turned on its head. E.g. if the Muslim is good then they’re not really a true Muslim. But to be fair, until the Islamic Reformation kicks in, that’s true to a certain extent, though not on a personal belief level IMO.

The “Reformation” you speak of is in progress. Just as the Protestant Reformation was a movement toward observance based on what is in the Christian scriptures, there is a movement in the world today to be more observant of muslim scriptures.

Trouble is the muslim scriptures call for deceit, war, murder, and enslavement.
Rodan

119 | June 17, 2010 6:31 pm

@ Iron Fist:

My conflict is with an ideology, not any specific person.

Exactly, before the Progressive Ideologies (Nazism and Communism), Islam was the biggest force for genocide in human history.
yenta-fada

120 | June 17, 2010 6:32 pm

Kirly wrote:

oh, and the liar in chief has failed to send the border patrol which he promised

Watching ‘the One’ the other night, I was thinking “He’s not even a GOOD liar.” Clinton was a better liar. Clinton has a brain.
coldwarrior

121 | June 17, 2010 6:32 pm

@ Bunk X:

then if they aint going to mosque on friday and following the rules, then they aint muzzies.
FurryOldGuyJeans

122 | June 17, 2010 6:33 pm

@ Kirly:
Mexico certainly believes in its right to control its borders.
Iron Fist

123 | June 17, 2010 6:34 pm

@ nil stooge:

How many good White Supremacists are there? Does the belief itself not to a large measure preclude their being considered “good”?
Rodan

124 | June 17, 2010 6:35 pm

@ Bunk X:

Well Persians wear Islam lightly as it was imposed on them by the Arabs. It’s more of a cultural thing. So they are not into the Militancy of it.

I dated a Persian, I know!

Hey see my 109, I think we are in agreement.
nil stooge

125 | June 17, 2010 6:35 pm

@ Crusader Rabbit:

Maybe I used the wrong word then – I was mentally tying ‘exegesis’ to ‘reformation’ – my bad I guess.
Crusader Rabbit

126 | June 17, 2010 6:35 pm

FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:

@ Kirly:
Mexico certainly believes in its right to control its borders.

President Caloriecounter of Mexico made it clear that he’s for his country being secure from illegal immigrants, but he maintains that when this country tries to be that’s an evil act.
Iron Fist

127 | June 17, 2010 6:36 pm

@ Crusader Rabbit:

The Mohammedan Reformation is called “Wahabbism”. It is the Ideology that I oppose distilled into its purest form.
Rodan

128 | June 17, 2010 6:38 pm

@ Kirly:

The US is very lenient when compared to other nations in regards to illegals.

Go to China illegally and see what happens.

Actually don’t!
yenta-fada

129 | June 17, 2010 6:40 pm

@ nil stooge:
“The Ratking” is an excellent choice. You know who else is interesting, Fred Vargas. Fred is a she who writes French mysteries. I enjoyed her quirky “The Three Evangelists” If you follow Hayek, the world makes a lot more sense. Not in a good way, but it beats the smoke and mirrors underlying current financial practices.
Bunk X

130 | June 17, 2010 6:41 pm

Rodan wrote:

@ Bunk X:
Majority does not mean ALL. That was my only reason for responding to CW’s statement earlier. A majority of Chinese support and admire communism, but not all.

Fair enough and I was NOT implying all. Look at the Iranian people and the Kurds, they are Pro American.

Coldwarrior was and is, and broad paintbrush generalizations are offensive to me, especially when I have personal knowledge otherwise. I’ll defend my Muslim friends just as I’ll defend my Jewish friends.

And I’m getting off this fucking thread before I drop an f-bomb.
nil stooge

131 | June 17, 2010 6:42 pm

@ Iron Fist:

I’m just saying it seems a bit of a tautology – that there’s an inverse relationship between the extent someone’s a ‘true’ white supremacist and how good they are.

Mostly I was just drawn to the low-hanging fruit of the “all”, “never”, “none”, etc absolutist constructs. A little ‘nuance’ isn’t always bad…
chickadee

132 | June 17, 2010 6:43 pm

huckfunn wrote:

Bunk X wrote:

How about the Muslims who are fighting alongside our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?

If I had one them in my outfit, I’d be constantly looking over my shoulder.

That’s the problem. Especially now with the Ft. Hood jihadi. Common sense tells you that your life could hang in the balance if you put your guard down around a muzz. To most people staying alive is more important that p.c. stupidity.
nil stooge

133 | June 17, 2010 6:46 pm

@ Bunk X:

And I’m getting off this fucking thread before I drop an f-bomb.

Nice bit of paralipsis.
snork

134 | June 17, 2010 6:46 pm

yenta-fada wrote:

Clinton was a better liar. Clinton has a brain.

In the glans.
nil stooge

135 | June 17, 2010 6:49 pm

@ yenta-fada:

[...] You know who else is interesting, Fred Vargas. Fred is a she who writes French mysteries. I enjoyed her quirky “The Three Evangelists [...]

Thanks, I’ll check her out.

You’re right – Hayek’s great.
Piglet-U93

136 | June 17, 2010 6:50 pm

@ nil stooge:
Your reading list is insignificant to the POD. Trust me. If you want to know what Islam is for sure and remove any and all doubts this book should be moved to the top of the list. Afterwards, the biggest benefit is – almost everything you see, hear or read regarding current world events will become crystal clear, for never again will the media be able to lie to you and get away with it. The book itself has 25 chapters. Try just reading the preface and the first chapter and see what happens.
huckfunn

137 | June 17, 2010 6:52 pm

Kirly wrote:

Kirly wrote:

FNC is showing the sec of state giving an interview with a foriegn journalist and saying that the justice department will be suing AZ over SB1070 but the justice department refuses to confirm or deny.
i’ve had it. these bastards better never cross my path or they will be verbally eviscerated like they’ve never seen.

here. evil bitch on video
http://www.therightscoop.com/hillary-clinton-yes-obama-is-filing-a-lawsuit-against-the-arizona-law

Not surprising at all. This regime is anti-American. It follows that they would be anti-Arizona (against SB1070) and anti-Louisiana (with a stroke of the pen erasing 1 out of 5 jobs statewide).
nil stooge

138 | June 17, 2010 6:54 pm

@ snork:

In the glans.

He’s “just so easily led when a little head does the thinking“.
Alberta Oil Peon

139 | June 17, 2010 6:55 pm

Bunk X wrote:

doriangrey wrote:
Bunk X wrote:
@ coldwarrior:
Sorry, bro, I can’t support you at all on that blanket statement.

Sorry Bro, then you really havent been paying attention.

You really believe that ALL Muslims are jihadists?
A majority of klan members are Baptists… does that mean all Baptists are racists? Of course not.

Not all muslims are jihadists, but all muslims have the potential of becoming jihadists if something snaps in their brain, or if they are overwhelmed by social or family pressure.

Sure there may be plenty of decent, civilized, and Westernized muslims out there. They were born into the religion, and just go along to get along. They don’t apostasize because it would sever their family ties, or get them killed, or both. I’d suggest we call these people “circumstantial muslims”, since they came to be that way not of their own choosing, but by accident of birth. They are unlikely to become jihadists in the near term, but if it ever comes to a shooting war between us and muslims in general, these circumstantial muslims may well side with the militants by reason of family ties. My big problem with the so-called “moderate muslims” is that they are just too damn silent about the atrocities committed by the jihadists, and about the latters’ insane beliefs. If they want my trust, they are going to have to speak and publicly identify themselves as moderates, and accept the risk of being targeted by the jihadists.
nil stooge

140 | June 17, 2010 6:56 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

What’s ‘POD’?
yenta-fada

141 | June 17, 2010 6:59 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

I will do as you suggest with the preface and first chapter.
nil stooge

142 | June 17, 2010 7:05 pm

@ nil stooge:

Okay I found 108 acronyms for POD – I’m gonna guess ‘prince of darkness’. Right?

I’ve read a couple of books by Spencer on Islam, I’m not sure what you think my misconceptions about it are, if you don’t want to consider my list for you maybe you could at least re-read my comments that gave you ‘insight’ into my ‘doubts’.

meanwhile, later y’all..
coldwarrior

143 | June 17, 2010 7:07 pm

@ Bunk X:

and thats why its called the blogmocarcy.

free flow of disagreements

and do see my 94
Piglet-U93

144 | June 17, 2010 7:12 pm

The Christian Reformation produced “good” because the printed bible was “taken” out of the hands of the elite and given to the “masses”, saved by grace, love one another, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, changed everything.
.
An Islamic reformation will produce even more EVIL because its scriptures are EVIL inside and out, forward and backward, up and down, from beginning to end. The only real potential misunderstanders of Islam are those who have NOT read the quran and ahadith texts and who do NOT go to a Mosque and do NOT practice their religion, etc.
.
Face it they are in an Islamic reformation and 9/11 is a small part of that reformation by the Muslim Brotherhood which began in the early 20th century.
Piglet-U93

145 | June 17, 2010 7:15 pm

@ nil stooge:
See comment 70.
Piglet-U93

146 | June 17, 2010 7:21 pm

@ yenta-fada:
If you happen to catch me here, after you have read it, please tell me what you think of Mr. Winn’s work.
yenta-fada

147 | June 17, 2010 7:38 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

Will do.
FurryOldGuyJeans

148 | June 17, 2010 7:41 pm

WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Shaddup! I can’t nap with all the shouting goin’ on.

*mumble, SNORE*
Piglet-U93

149 | June 17, 2010 7:44 pm

nil stooge wrote:

@ nil stooge:
Okay I found 108 acronyms for POD – I’m gonna guess ‘prince of darkness’. Right?
I’ve read a couple of books by Spencer on Islam, I’m not sure what you think my misconceptions about it are, if you don’t want to consider my list for you maybe you could at least re-read my comments that gave you ‘insight’ into my ‘doubts’.
meanwhile, later y’all..

The exegesis you desire regarding Islam’s “holy scriptures” that paints the clearest picture possible of what Islam IS and also answers other question – can Islam be reformed?, has already been done. The book is called The Prophet of Doom by Craig Winn. The NYT best seller in 2003 is no longer in print but can be bought on the internet for $120 and up but why paid for it when you can download the 1,300 page book in HTML or PDF form or even the MP3 files and listen to all 56 hours of it 4 FREE.
.
I have read Spencer, Trifkovic, Bostom, Ali, Sina, Yeor, Ishaq and I love them all and each has done a great job, but no one and I mean no one has done a beter job exposing Islam for what it really is then Craig Winn.

Ref: http://www.prophetofdoom.net
nil stooge

150 | June 17, 2010 8:35 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

The exegesis you desire regarding Islam’s “holy scriptures”[...]

The ‘exegesis I desire’ is one that’s not woodenly literalistic, one that allows a non-literal explanation of the anachronistic passages of the Qur’an, an exegesis that makes possible the elusive ‘moderate Muslim’ (and maybe even the equally elusive magnetic monopole and a Higgs boson to boot while we’re at it).

I understand the Qur’an as literally interpreted is a nasty piece of work. That – and the fact that it’s the precise, perfect transcription of the words of Islam’s version of Christianity’s Jesus – was my whole point.

I’m not sure what your point is other than we should all go read the PoD, which in an ideal world with an infinite amount of time I wouldn’t dispute.

Maybe ‘exegesis’ isn’t the right word for you?
doriangrey

151 | June 17, 2010 9:54 pm

Alberta Oil Peon wrote:

Not all muslims are jihadists, but all muslims have the potential of becoming jihadists if something snaps in their brain, or if they are overwhelmed by social or family pressure.

Actually once you understand Islam you understand that all Muslims are in fact Jihadists, it’s just that the term Jihadist doesnt exclusively refer to those who engage in violent activities.

According to Islamic theology jihad is the “struggle for Islamic justice” and it is the responsibility of every Muslim to engage in jihad. It’s absolutely not optional.

The struggle does not have to be violent, but they do have to be engaged in it. Where do you think those engaging in violent jihad are getting the money to wage violent jihad?
FurryOldGuyJeans

152 | June 17, 2010 9:59 pm

@ nil stooge:
Man, you are one offensively condescending prick. Time to put away the Roget’s.
waldensianspirit

153 | June 18, 2010 12:14 am

nil stooge wrote:

A lot of the problem with Islam seems to me to lie in the provenance of the Qur’an – i.e. it’s all directly from Mohammed, firsthand, unfiltered by others. It’s as if the entire New Testament were dictated directly by Jesus. It makes any sort of Islamic exegesis extremely problematic.

directly from Mohammed? Who knew.
nil stooge

154 | June 18, 2010 12:41 am

@ waldensianspirit:

directly from Mohammed? Who knew.

Directly from Allah, via Mohammed? Is that better? I don’t get your point. My point is that the entire Qur’an was dictated by Mohammed, unlike the New Testament which had many authors.
nil stooge

155 | June 18, 2010 12:51 am

@ FurryOldGuyJeans:

Man, you are one offensively condescending prick. Time to put away the Roget’s.

So you got a better word than ‘exegesis’ and just keeping it to yourself goo goo eyes? No one here cuts straight through the substance and gets right down to the content-free invective quite as well as you FOGJ – you’re definitely the alfalfa male around here.
waldensianspirit

156 | June 18, 2010 12:54 am

nil stooge wrote:

Directly from Allah, via Mohammed? Is that better? I don’t get your point. My point is that the entire Qur’an was dictated by Mohammed, unlike the New Testament which had many authors.

Dictated? Entirety? Why it keeps getting better
nil stooge

157 | June 18, 2010 12:56 am

@ waldensianspirit:
Dude, unlike some people here, if I’m wrong and you let me know I’ll say thanks. So what am I saying wrong here?
waldensianspirit

158 | June 18, 2010 1:01 am

@ nil stooge:
You’re saying the muslim line. Hook line sinker. The quran was put back together after he was dead and a lot from poor memorization. You’ve also been doing some sad equivocations to the Gospels and Jesus.
waldensianspirit

159 | June 18, 2010 1:02 am

also from allah? Ever hear of the satanic verses?
nil stooge

160 | June 18, 2010 1:12 am

@ waldensianspirit:

The Muslims believe the Qur’an is a perfect dictation from Mo. don’t they? That’s the salient point. I’m certainly not claiming it’s some sort of revealed cosmic wisdom. I think you’re missing the point, with all due respect.
nil stooge

161 | June 18, 2010 1:14 am

@ waldensianspirit:

also from allah? Ever hear of the satanic verses?

Man you are totally missing the point. Sorry for whatever sloppy writing of mine that’s contributed to it.

Yes I’ve heard of the satanic verses.
waldensianspirit

162 | June 18, 2010 1:27 am

@ nil stooge:
nil stooge wrote:

Directly from Allah, via Mohammed? Is that better? I don’t get your point. My point is that the entire Qur’an was dictated by Mohammed, unlike the New Testament which had many authors.

btw you have no point. So I’m not missing it.

The muslims tell you [and their enslaved followers] the quran is a perfect dictation from Mohammed but they know better.

http://prophetofdoom.net/Prophet_of_Doom_Appendix_Islams_Dark_Past.Islam
waldensianspirit

163 | June 18, 2010 1:29 am

And throwing in physics terms? I can only contribute that to drinking
nil stooge

164 | June 18, 2010 1:33 am

@ waldensianspirit:

btw you have no point. So I’m not missing it.

Ouch! Touche’.

The muslims tell you [and their enslaved followers] the quran is a perfect dictation from Mohammed but they know better.

Does the PoD prove they all know better, or is it just you making that assertion?
nil stooge

165 | June 18, 2010 1:35 am

@ waldensianspirit:

And throwing in physics terms? I can only contribute that to drinking

You watch Sherlock Holmes recently? Got something against magnetic monopoles or Higgs bosons? How do you feel about string theory?
waldensianspirit

166 | June 18, 2010 6:18 am

@ nil stooge:
The quran and hadiths prove it.
nil stooge

167 | June 18, 2010 8:05 am

@ waldensianspirit:

The quran and hadiths prove it.

So your position is that the Qur’an and hadiths are proof that all Muslims know better than to believe the Qur’an is the perfect dictation of Mohammed.

I’m not even sure what that means. It sounds recursive and reminds me of Russell’s “set of all sets not containing themselves” construct.

I still contend that you’ve mistaken me for a true believing advocate of Islam and are intent on debating the merits of the religion, and that’s not at all what I’ve been talking about.
waldensianspirit

168 | June 18, 2010 8:20 am

@ nil stooge:
you be wrong. I contend your equivocations are garbage. If you read a tiny bit you’d see quickly there is no recursion and the enemy lies. They know it. I know it. You don’t know it.
nil stooge

169 | June 18, 2010 9:02 am

@ waldensianspirit:

So you contend there’s no need for a non-literalistic exegesis of the Qur’an because secretly all Muslims know that it’s a false religion, and so my point – that it’s difficult for Muslim scholars to do an exegesis like that since the Qur’an is, as part of the religion, considered dictated perfectly by Mohammed (even though that superficial ‘belief’ is also in fact known to be false by all Muslims) – is moot. Can you do better than that representing what it is about what I’ve written that you disagree with?
waldensianspirit

170 | June 18, 2010 10:53 am

@ nil stooge:
Yes, I can do better. You forgot to mention your equivocations. Also there will never be a “non-literalistic exegesis” of the quran that gets you your eutopian world of Kumbaya.

Give me the non-literal for “Jesus was never crucified”
nil stooge

171 | June 18, 2010 11:22 am

@ waldensianspirit:

Yes, I can do better.

Fine, let’s hear it.

You forgot to mention your equivocations.

No idea what you’re talking about – maybe you can give an example? (At one point you use ‘equivocation’ where it seemed you meant ‘equivalence’?)

Also there will never be a “non-literalistic exegesis” of the quran that gets you your eutopian world of Kumbaya.

That was essentially my point, though I’m loathe to say ‘never’. Sheeesh.

Give me the non-literal for “Jesus was never crucified”

That again is precisely an example of the problem I was pointing out, all the more magnified since it – according to Islam – comes straight from Allah/Mohammed.
nil stooge

172 | June 18, 2010 11:50 am

There seems to be no point in continuing this discussion.

If in fact you do somehow (psychically?) know what people really believe, in contradistinction to what they actually say, then I’m hopelessly outgunned, no point in sticking around.

If, on the other hand, you merely think you know what other people really believe, preferring to argue against that vs. what they actually say, then again you don’t need me around for that exercise.

later WS -
nil stooge

173 | June 18, 2010 11:58 am

@ nil stooge:

PS – If you’re getting this

proved: “all Muslims secretly know their religion is false and also know the Qur’an is phony”

from the PoD document it’s a particularly un-compelling advertisement for bothering to read it, IMO. That’s an absurdly big proposition to try and bite off.
Piglet-U93

174 | June 18, 2010 1:47 pm

nil stooge wrote:

@ nil stooge:
PS – If you’re getting this
proved: “all Muslims secretly know their religion is false and also know the Qur’an is phony”
from the PoD document it’s a particularly un-compelling advertisement for bothering to read it, IMO. That’s an absurdly big proposition to try and bite off.

Thousands of suicide bombers (if they could still speak) and captured terrorists (who demand halal food, prayer time, a compass that points to Mecca, a rug, etc.) would disagree with your assertion.
.
I don’t know what my problem may be, if any, but I am having the hardest time understanding your posts. The more you write the more confused I get.
nil stooge

175 | June 18, 2010 3:14 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

My only (tired) assertion has only ever been that a non-literalistic exegesis of the Qur’an, mitigating the violent stuff, is made even more difficult by the supposed divine, perfect provenance of the Qur’an (i.e. dictated perfectly by Mo.).

You, and particularly WS, seem to think I’m pro-Islam or something – I’m not clear.

It got particularly confusing trying to figure out exactly what WS’ problem with my simple assertion was.

At more than one point above WS asserts that all Muslims secretly know their faith is bogus, and secretly know that the Qur’an is an imperfect document.

That’s a ridiculous assertion, and if WS gets it from the PoD it’s a poor advertisement for the PoD. I don’t know where he gets it. Is it from the PoD?

What assertion of mine would the thousands of suicide bombers, etc, disagree with?

Sheesh people, this is not that tough, or controversial.
Piglet-U93

176 | June 18, 2010 5:03 pm

WS never made that statement as far as I can tell from rereading the posts, it was you, nil stooge, who first made that presumption at comment 169. WS only said “the enemy lies” and you made the error from that point. It’s apparent that you have a great deal of knowledge and an excellent command of the English language. With all that working for you the burden is upon you to make your argument and points clearer for the rest of “small people”.
.
BTW, 1) I don’t believe you are pro-Islam and 2) the POD book does NOT claim that Muslims do not believe their own religion and 3) I believe a few are trapped in it and keep silent so that they can keep their heads, after all it is statistically probable given that the ummah claims to have 1.4 billion followers of the pedophile prophet.
nil stooge

177 | June 18, 2010 5:30 pm

@ Piglet-U93:
Start with #162 if you want to rehash this crap. You certainly have a most charitable reading of what WS actually said and agreed to. And don’t put the “small people” words in my mouth thank you anyway. Everything I’ve been defending here has been of that nature. My initial and only assertion (see #175) is pretty damn trivial and hardly controversial and made only because some people don’t realize that Muslims consider the Qur’an as entirely, perfectly dictated by Mo. – analogous to a Bible with the New Testament all in red, and not just quotes of Jesus’ words but words written down by Jesus himself (and NO that’s not drawing a moral equivalence between Jesus and Mo., or Christianity and Islam). This to me explains somewhat why the elusive ‘moderate Muslim’ is so rare (and excuuuuuuuse me if I think of the Higgs boson when I hear the adjective ‘elusive’) and unfortunately unlikely to be found in great quantities any time soon.

WS – #162: The muslims tell you [and their enslaved followers] the quran is a perfect dictation from Mohammed but they know better.

NS – $164: Does the PoD prove they all know better, or is it just you making that assertion?

WS – #166: The quran and hadiths prove it.
nil stooge

178 | June 18, 2010 6:21 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

Here’s this wake-up-people thread with threaded comments.

You have to download the .HTML file from my website and open it in your browser – an unfortunate two-step process since Google sites doesn’t directly serve up web pages.

But, it’s easier to follow the conversations this way, in threaded form. FWIW.
waldensianspirit

179 | June 18, 2010 6:40 pm

The muslims know the quran is not straight dictation from mo to paper. Doesn’t bother them in the slightest or make them believe it is bogus. They have their anti Jew and anti-christ script and are pleased with that. They know kafirs are suckers though for taqqiya stating it was direct and divine. Piety is unfortunately awesome to so many humans that people give respect to pious appearances so muslims make a show of it. When actually the real foundation stone of islam is “Jesus was never crucified”. If this is pulled out from under, the whole scheme crumbles to the ground.

Where your equivocation goes horribly wrong is where you say stuff about what if Jesus was the direct author of the Gospels as if that would make it better Scripture or more inspired. This doesn’t hold water. Honesty and truth win out over lies. The Gospel writers did not lie. The quran authors lied and their followers continue the lie.

Btw, Christianity did not reform by “exegesis”; instead it restituted.
Piglet-U93

180 | June 18, 2010 8:20 pm

@ nil stooge:
Your #172

proved: “all Muslims secretly know their religion is false and also know the Qur’an is phony”

conclusion from WS #162

The muslims tell you [and their enslaved followers] the quran is a perfect dictation from Mohammed but they know better.

is not unlike turning lead to gold

WS #179 is right

Christianity did not reform by “exegesis”; instead it restituted.

The current version of Islam we see in action in the world today is identical to the initial 7th century instantiation except that it has 80 more sects whose differences are minimal with respect to the doctrine of “kill the unbelievers until the only religion is for Allah”.
nil stooge

181 | June 18, 2010 10:19 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

Your #172 conclusion from WS #162 is not unlike turning lead to gold.

My #169 was my honest attempt to spell out (after figuring out) WTH WS was saying that was somehow both oppositional and germane to my original assertion (see #175), since WS wouldn’t:

NS #169: So you contend there’s no need for a non-literalistic exegesis of the Qur’an because secretly all Muslims know that it’s a false religion, and so my point – that it’s difficult for Muslim scholars to do an exegesis like that since the Qur’an is, as part of the religion, considered dictated perfectly by Mohammed (even though that superficial ‘belief’ is also in fact known to be false by all Muslims) – is moot.

Can you do better than that representing what it is about what I’ve written that you disagree with?

WS in #170, to my reading, endorsed my #169 with the proviso that it should be extended by mentioning my ‘equivocations’:

WS #170: Yes, I can do better. You forgot to mention your equivocations. Also there will never be a “non-literalistic exegesis” of the quran that gets you your eutopian world of Kumbaya.

In #162 and again in #179 WS specifically endorses at least half of my #169, the half that says Muslims secretly believe the Qur’an is not a perfect reflection of Mohammed’s words.

This is what Wikipedia says:

Muslims maintain the present wording of the Qur’anic text corresponds exactly to that revealed to Muhammad himself:

Why don’t you just ask WS himself what he thinks about the other half of #169 rather than speculating? What do you think the Muslims think inre to the provenance/perfection of the Qur’an?
nil stooge

182 | June 18, 2010 10:23 pm

@ waldensianspirit:

Where your equivocation goes horribly wrong is where you say stuff about what if Jesus was the direct author of the Gospels as if that would make it better Scripture or more inspired.

I never said any such thing. What I did say was that it’d be harder for the average Christian to tease non-literal interpretations out of the New Testament if it were in fact entirely a perfect transcription of Jesus’ words. Maybe you disagree with what I did say – if so, so be it.

I also don’t understand your use of the word ‘equivocation’, but let’s assume that’s my bad.
waldensianspirit

183 | June 18, 2010 10:50 pm

Followers of Jesus don’t make the claim the Gospels are dictated by Jesus.
Followers of mohammed do make the claim [falsely] the quran is dictated by mohammed [and the Gospels were Jew distortions].

Your lousy efforts on comparing the realities and nonrealities of these two cases is an equivocation. Doesn’t work though because it pretends there was no lying going on [by the muslims]. It is highly misleading to those unaware of the taqqiya. Like many other people including muslims you can’t analyze islam without making up incomparable situations about Christ and Christ’s followers.

Try just talking about islam without mentioning Christ and Christ’s followers.
nil stooge

184 | June 18, 2010 11:00 pm

@ Piglet-U93:

[...] the burden is upon you to make your argument and points clearer for the rest of “small people”.

Okay, look at #183 and tell me how in the world I’m supposed to respond to that, after everything I’ve already written, other than “you just don’t get it”.
waldensianspirit

185 | June 19, 2010 6:32 am

Well I see you apparently can’t talk about islam without mentioning Christ and Christ’s followers. Yet I see we made progress at 175 with:

by the supposed divine, perfect provenance of the Qur’an (i.e. dictated perfectly by Mo.).

Before without the “supposed” is where my opposition began.
waldensianspirit

186 | June 19, 2010 6:36 am

The second error leading to my opposition was the assumption that because of the real authorship of the Gospels they need “exegesis” to reform when all that was ever needed was restitution.
waldensianspirit

187 | June 19, 2010 7:27 am

Ishaq:691 “For the sake of brevity, I am confining myself to the Prophet’s biography and omitting some of the things which Ishaq recorded in this book in which there is no mention of the Apostle and about which the Qur’an says nothing. I have omitted things which are disgraceful to discuss, matters which would distress certain people, and such reports as al-Bakkai [Bukhari?] told me he could not accept as trustworthy – all of these things I have omitted.”

Yet people feel dhimmied into parroting islamic talking points of direct dictation from an illiterate terrorist? A terrorist whose behavior was so bad they expunged portions from the hadiths and left the bad we see today?

Bukhari:V6B60N201 “Zaid bin Thabit, the Ansari said, ‘Abu Bakr sent for me after the (heavy) casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Muhammad’s Companions were killed). Umar was present with Bakr. “The people have suffered heavy casualties at Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be more casualties among those who can recite the Qur’an on other battlefields. A large part of the Qur’an may be lost unless you collect it.” I replied to Umar, “How can I do something which Allah’s Apostle has not done?” Umar kept on pressing, trying to persuade me to accept his proposal.’ Zaid bin Thabit added, ‘Umar was sitting with Abu Bakr and was speaking (to) me. “You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you of telling lies or of forgetfulness. You used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah’s Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur’an and collect it (in one manuscript).” By Allah, if Abu Bakr had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would have been easier for me than the collection of the Qur’an. I said to both of them, “How dare you do a thing which the Prophet has not done?”

All folklore and oral recitations and unrecorded.
waldensianspirit

188 | June 19, 2010 8:10 am

mohammed claims the quran was recited to him seven different ways. seven qurans in his head. So much for locking it from “exegesis” because of his “direct” inspiration.