I may have missed something, honestly, because I haven’t been following this story for a while now, but I see that yet another accused Marine has been found innocent.
Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
Support Dean’s World
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 19 comments }
There’s no way he’s going to say he’s sorry and make amends. He’s planted his feet in the ground long ago. After the first few Marines had their charges droped the head of a Republican Youth group asked Murtha to admit he was wrong and apologize.. he refused.Â
Funny thing is, Obama fully backed Murtha on his convictions. But you never hear about that do you!
Don’t get mad at me but, that is a stupid question but MUST be asked. We already know the answer. He is a shallow-minded fat bastard.
Gonna pimp a new video we made while we are talking about traitors.
The video makes a fairly good point, but it blows it badly by the cheap shot at Islam. Some war hawks are apparently too stupid to acknowledge that some of our most important allies in the War on Terror, and practically everyone we’re fighting to protect in Iraq, are Muslims. Shitting on their religion is not exactly intelligent or honorable behavior on their part.
I understand the sentiment. However, it is misguided. There are Muslims that reject Islam but still call themselves Muslim. Islam teaches that this cannot be accepted.
It is kind of hard to "shit" on their religion when their religion IS "shit" to start with.
I have been a student of Islam since 1971 and have served my nation fighting Islam since 76 right up to 04.
Oy vey. No, the only person misguided here is you.
I’ve only been studying Islam for about 20 years, so I guess you’ve got a little more time than me. But it’s pretty clear that you’re poorly informed. If what you said were true, then we should leave Afghanistan and Iraq with all speed and simply declare war on the faith. That’s ridiculous. The tenets of that faith are far more complex than you’re suggesting, and history does not support the view that you’re putting forth.
What folks like you represent is, to me, what the John Birch society represented during the Cold War: radicals who were more an embarrassment and a hindrance to that necessary fight than a help to it.
Faithful, praying, Koran-reading, Mosque-attending Muslims are our most important allies in the War On Terror. Anyone who doesn’t acknowledge this forthrightly is at least as much of a traitor as the likes of John Murtha.
Not hardly but OK. Your opinion is yours to have.
Snooper,
I think that’s an exagerated generalization. That would be like saying all Christians are murderous thugs because of what some misguided Africans are doing in the name of Christ. Sure there are more Muslims terrorizing the world than African thugs, but it’s the same principle.Â
Anyway Dean, let’s just hope most Muslims don’t listen to guys like Snooper. I’m sure our Muslim allies are skilled at letting these sorts of insults roll off them like water on a ducks back.  However, I’m sure to a few Snoopers words will make hair stand up on their neck like angry tomcats! Â
John: I’m sorry to say that quite a few American Muslims I know turned against the Right (most Muslims in America used to vote Republican, but not anymore) and turned against the War On Terror specifically because of people like Snooper. I most especially cringe about this when I come across Muslims who have served or are serving in our armed forces, especially when the Snoopers of the world bring up the rare instances when an American service member turns traitor and happens to be a Muslim (which, amongst the thousands serving, has happened once or twice).
I find that folks like Snooper fall into three categories:
1) Atheists who just have a hard-on to brand all religions as irrational, and just think they’re brave to paint Islam as "particularly bad."
2) Fundamentalist Christians who tend to find Islam as theologically disturbing as most Jews find Christianity theologically disturbing.
3) People who’ve been around the world and been to places like Saudi Arabia, which have a version of Islam that is historically unusual and recent, and which is indisputably wicked and oppressive in multiple areas.
What they’re all almost obsessed with is cherry-picking through the Koran to find nasty and violent bits, and/or finding this or that questionable story on the background of Muhammed. When you point out that you can do exactly this same thing to the Bible and to Christian history–which, as a Christian, I acknowledge freely that you can do very easiliy–they either roll their eyes like it doesn’t matter or, even worse, bloviate that doing so is to "attack Christianity" (the irony of which utterly escapes them).
Whether Islam is a true faith or not is not really relevant to the discussion; I take the same attitude on that that the Vatican does, which is, on a spiritual level there’s not much room for dialogue–Muhammed wasn’t a prophet, and the Koran isn’t really compatible with Christianity–but on a human level there is much in terms of shared values and goals that should be explored and embraced, because peace and understanding are central to the Christian message and belief system.
Or so I see it. There’s plenty of reading one can do on that, and plenty to discuss, but you can’t even start on it with people who think they already know all they need to know and have already branded the religion of our most important allies as dangerous and wicked.
Instead of cherrypicking the Qur’an & Hadith, turn directly to Book O.9 of Reliance of the Traveler, the chapter which reveals the Sharia law concerning Justice. Seek the answers to this short list of questions: what is Jihad, what does the Caliph do, why, how frequently does he do it? If you don’t have a copy, click the link above and use the Ctrl F key combination to search for O.9.Â
  If any doubts or questions remain, go to FOMI and read the wide variety of Fiqh, don’t overlook the quote from the Hedaya.
  Any residual skepticism should lead you to Bukhari’s Sahih collection of Hadith, Books 52, 53 & 59, and 1.8.387, 1.7.331, 4.53.386, Abu Dawud 14.2526 & 23.3455.Â
   http:quranbrowser.com displays up to ten parallel translations of the Qur’an. Carefully examine 8:39 & 9:29 with special emphasis of Rodwell & Sale’s translations of the latter ayeh.
   Who are we to interpret the Qur’an? We need the expertise of a qualified Qadi. Fortunately, http://qtafsir.com includes a tafsir search engine for Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir. Look up the ayat cited in the previous paragraph.
   The clincher for the terminally obtuse & recalcitrant: ROPMA includes an unordered list of the most egregious of Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir topics, linked to tafsir.com. [same text as qtafsir, but no search engine] The explicit wording of the titles should be sufficient.
Ite Murtha est.
Deo Gratias.
John: I’m sorry to say that quite a few American Muslims I know turned against the Right (most Muslims in America used to vote Republican, but not anymore) and turned against the War On Terror
specifically because of people like Snooper.Dean,
Not quite so sure it was Snooper, specifically.
As long as the ghost of the Ayatollah Khomeini overlays the world of Islam, the mullahs are running Iran with spokespersona like President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Jordanian prosecutors are still insulted by a goofy Danish cartoon which presumably is threatening Jordanian peace, it would advised that it might be ill-advised to promote your own entrenched fixed viewpoint.
It could be that Islam isn’t quite off the hook just yet, since a large sector of it has been hijacked by negative extremist elements and there is little positive evidence that those extremist elements are in decline.
They talked like that about Catholics for years and years, McKiernan, and some still do, but I don’t see you endorsing that point of view much.
…and as we can see by the comment from “Dajjal,” any idiot can cherry-pick through a vast and complex religion and find things to fit his point of view. It’s very much like reading literature from, say, a Jack Chick tract, or the loonies running the John Birch society.
Anyone who says there’s no such thing as Islamophobia, or that it’s a "nonsense word," only have to read the pseudoscholarly “reasoning” of people like this.
So which of the three I mention above is the “Dajjal” do you think: the militant atheist, or the perturbed Christian? I rather doubt he’s actually been to any Muslim countries, so that seems least likely.
Islamic law states: " The caliph (o-25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…" and that it must be done annually. . Pointing out that fact is not cherry picking.
  Instead of responding to facts, you engage in argumentum ad hominem. Allah is on record commanding Muslims to fight pagans until only Allah is worshiped. Allah is on record commanding Muslims to fight "people of the book" until they are subjugated and extorted. Moe is on record saying that he was commanded to fight with men until they testify that only Allah has the right to be worshiped. Moe is on record saying that our blood and property become sacred to Muslims when we become Muslims; that we protect ourselves from him by joining him. You can’t deal with these fatal facts.
M-heh.
Argumentum Ad Hominem is a classic logical fallacy. Now, the interesting thing about logical fallacies that most people don’t understand is that they are often quite true, and quite accurate. Go ahead, look it up if you don’t believe me.
Essentially, it’s not that you’re spouting complete lies, but rather, the most effective form of lie: a half-truth. You do what Neo-Nazis do to Jewish literature and Jewish history. You do what some Christophobes do to Christians, too. There are numerous answers to the silliness you spout, but it requires you to make a good faith, honest effort to understand them. Clearly, you do not.
Thus, an argument ad hominem is the appropriate response: you are un-American, you are a traitor to the war against terror, and you are a fool no better than the likes of Fred Phelps or your average Neo-Nazi. You’re worse than a fool, you’re a hatemonger who hurts the war effort.
  The facts stand on their own merit; on their verifiability, not on my intelligence, rationality, integrity or honor.  Allah ordained fighting for Muslims, acknowledging that they might not like it, declaring it best for them in 2:216. 9:111 describes the relationship of Allah to Muslims as master: slaves. He purchased them with the promise of Paradise so that they kill and are killed fighting in his cause. 61:10…13 makes participation in Jihad the price of admission to Paradise; the bargain which protects a Muslim from eternity in Hell.
   Nothing you can write about me, true or false, can alter the accuracy of the relevant, verifiable facts I have presented. No matter how intensely you mock and revile me, you can’t alter the fact that 8:39 commands warfare against pagans until only Allah is worshiped  on a global scale. You can’t alter the fact that 9:29 commands warfare against Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians until they are subjugated and extorted. You can’t alter the fact that Moe confirmed those commands in ahadith, including  Bukhari 1.8.387, Bukhari 4.52.196,  &  Abu Dawud 14.2635.
   Nothing you write about me can change the fact that Islamic law based on 9:29 obligates the Caliph to attack the Kuffar at least once in every year, as I previously proved from Reliance of the  Traveler.  Nor can you erase the parallel rulings of Al Ghazali & Al-Shafi’i.
   When Jefferson and Adams asked Tripoli’s Ambassador to London by what right they attacked our shipping …
See how well that diplomatic answer meshes with  what  Al-Mughira said to the Persian General.
   You are unable to meet the challenge of the relevant, verifiable facts I have presented. You can’t disprove what is recorded in the Qur’an & Hadith. You can’t disprove what is recorded in Islamic jurisprudence. You are in the unenviable position of defending a barbarian war cult founded  1398 years ago for the purpose of enriching & empowering its founder through the professional practice of piracy.  Neither can you erase the historical record of barbarian conquest which assembled an empire stretching from the border of China to the border of France.
   Effective defense against Islam is impaired by those Dhimmis who make false apology for Islam and those elected leaders who refuse to acknowledge the identity and nature of the predatory institution which is waging war against us.
No one’s paying any attention to your cherry-picked, out-of-context quotes. No one who’s studied the subject with an open mind and heart, anyway.
None of those who take the time to talk to an actual Imam who’s part of the Western world, or any of the actual practicing, believing, proud Muslims who comment around here would give you the time of day. As well they shouldn’t. The "facts" you spew are factoids from a paranoid, ignorant, out-of-context point of view.
Go jack off to pseudoscholars like Robert Spencer. The only Muslims who think like you are people like Bin Laden. Congrats on validating their worldview, traitor.
Your inability to debate the facts is noted; your gratuitous insults accepted as a negative reflection of your own character.
Tee hee. "Debate" with someone who doesn’t come into a debate informed or honest is pointless. It’s like "debate" with a holocaust denialist, or someone who believes the Catholic church invented Islam (which some do) or that the moon landing was fake. There is nothing to "debate" you traitorous fool. Stab our allies in the back some more, I hope it makes you feel better with your "facts."
Comments on this entry are closed.