Tuesday, August 24, 2010

DESPERATION BREEDS EXTREMISM

The usual lies from rightwing leaders and rightwing media have become even more extreme lately (as they often do when the Republicans see an opportunity for a "wedge issue" to distract voters from the reality of their failed policies). To see what they're up to all I have to do is write anything having to do with politics and this blog's personal "troll" will illustrate the day's message from the extreme right.

Over the past week or so, the phony controversy about the Islamic center in lower Manhattan (phony because there was no controversy—even on Fox News at first—until the extreme right created it by baiting the media which, inevitably it seems, took the hook), moved into the mainstream.

There are exceptions on the right, who have displayed some clarity in their thinking about "freedom of religion" being the main issue involved (either for practical political reasons or because they actually believe it), but there has also been a capitulation in most of the media to the right's perspective on it. So it instantly became "the Ground Zero Mosque Controversy" when it's not a mosque and it's not at Ground Zero and there was no controversy (the mayor, the citizens of New York, many of the 9/11 victims' family members and friends, etc. had no objection to it).

But many prominent Republican leaders (Palin, Gingrich, et.al.) and rightwing media types (Rush, O'Reilly, et. al.) encouraged, or in some cases at least allowed, their supporters to further the falsehoods not only about the proposed 51Park cultural center and its promoters, but to link those lies to rightwing lies about Obama being a Muslim, etc.

As I have written many times on this blog and most of us have been aware of for years (though many Democratic political leaders and strategists seem tone deaf to it except briefly during Obama's campaign) the right wing of the Republican Party has been utilizing wordsmiths to find the labels and terms that frame whatever position or argument their taking or making for the day in ways that associate the right with positions most people would take as justifiable.

So by calling a cultural center that will have a prayer room a "mosque" and then labeling it "The Victory Mosque" is in many ways a smart move by rightwing propagandists, because anyone without the education, intelligence, time or energy to follow the story in depth and from sources that are factual will naturally react negatively to the idea that followers of Islam, who have already been branded as the perpetrators of the worst attack on the USA in modern times, would call a "mosque" at (or even near) Ground Zero a "Victory Mosque"—even though, of course, they have done no such thing. That name comes from the right itself, which its followers won't mind because that's the way they've been brainwashed (or propagandized if you will) to see it anyway but others who may not be rightwing parrots and dittoheads might be sucked into seeing it that way too just by that clever branding.

Just as a lot of our fellow citizens have no idea that Islam has many versions, many branches, many sects and divisions and subdivisions, very much like "Christianity." For instance the Imam behind this cultural center is a Sufi, who practices a version of Islam that some Arab countries condemn and even persecute. It'd be like saying there's no difference between say a "charismatic Christian" who believes in talking in tongues and singing and dancing in praise of God with some more Puritan version of Christianity that forbids dancing and singing etc.

What is most despicable about all this fabricated controversy is that it plays on the natural anger and resentment of some of the 9/11 victims' families and friends who don't know enough about Islam or the version of Islam that led in part to 9/11. To manipulate the pain of these people for base political gain is classic rightwing maneuvering.

And there is no real viable left operating at any influential level in this country. Most Democrats either are centrist pragmatists like the president, or lean to the right like the so-called "Blue Dogs"—with the rare exception being someone who leans to the left. like Kucinich et. al. But they obviously have little or no influence on party policy (vid. how quickly the single-payer option was dismissed in the healthcare debate) and even less on the media (when's the last time Al Franken was on the evening news despite his celebrity and innovative ideas etc.).

The right's superior use of language to frame its case (even when based on lies) continues to win the day in terms of mainstream media—"death panels" "death tax" etc.—and unfortunately is having once again an inordinate influence in perceptions about Islam. The idea that the Koran is somehow more violent than the Bible (it isn't) or that a literal interpretation of the Koran leads to the extreme versions of "Sharia" or Islamic laws (it doesn't, e.g. there's nothing in the Koran condoning stoning as a form of execution, though there is in the Bible) or that democracy and Islam aren't compatible any more than a literal interpretation of the Bible always leads to extreme versions of The Ten Commandments and isn't compatible with democracy (if we were to really obey the first commandment, for example, as a country then we would not allow any other religion than Christianity to be practiced here, or perhaps Judaism if you take the Old Testament as "the Jewish Bible").

It's true that 9/11 was concocted and carried out by extremists who claim to practice a version of Islam as their religion. But it is also true that most of the civilian deaths caused by our country's illegal invasion of Iraq were caused mostly by politicians and troops who claim to practice a version of Christianity as their religion. It's an endless cycle of violent reciprocity that serves no one except for political demagogues who can use it to generate enough fear and backlash to gain or keep them in power.

The way to thwart that is through using the truth, factual reality, to expose and uncover the lies. But it seems to be more and more of a challenge these days, as it has in other periods throughout history when knowledge of basic truths became a limited resource making the spreading of lies easier and more successful. Let's hope this isn't the New Dark Ages.

[PS: Here's a pretty good rant abiut all this.]

[PPS: Here's a good article on who the real extremists are.]

[PPPS: And this.]

53 comments:

JIm said...

Your interpetation of the Qu'ran and Sharia is flawed in the extreme. Because the Qu'ran is the actual word of Allah, it can not be changed or reinterpeted in a modern context. Thus Sharia and the Qu'ran, in it's original version, must be followed by Mulims. Because Sharia is a code of government and of Islamic "justice", Islam is as much a political movement as a religion.

Butch in Waukegan said...

This is so f*cking stupid. Do you actually know any Muslims?

The following took me 5 minutes on Google.

According to Gallup: One-Third of Americans Believe the Bible is Literally True

Therefore, according to Jim, 100 million Americans must follow the rules laid down in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, including:
• Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19)
• Don't cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)
• Any person who curseth his mother or father, must be killed. (Leviticus 20:9)  Have you ever done that?
• If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die. (Leviticus 20:10)
• If a man sleeps with his father's wife... both him and his father's wife is to be put to death. (Leviticus 20:11)
• If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death.  (Leviticus 20:14)
• If a man or woman has sex with an animal, both human and animal must be killed. (Leviticus 20:15-16). 
• If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be "cut off from their people" (Leviticus 20:18)
• Psychics, wizards, and so on are to be stoned to death.  (Leviticus 20:27)
• If a priest's daughter is a whore, she is to be burnt at the stake.  (Leviticus 21:9
• People who have flat noses, or is blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18)
• Anyone who dreams or prophesizes anything that is against God, or anyone who tries to turn you from God, is to be put to death. (Deuteronomy 13:5)
• If anyone, even your own family suggests worshipping another God, kill them. (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)
• If you find out a city worships a different god, destroy the city and kill all of it's inhabitants... even the animals. (Deuteronomy 13:12-15)
• Kill anyone with a different religion. (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)

There is no other way to say it: Your ideology has turned you into a moran.

Tom King said...

Thanks for these articulations on this subject Michael. I think the "superior" language you mention that the GOP has used to frame these issues happens because they are always framed in negativity, being the Party of No. It's much easier to sell negativity to the press than anything positive.

JIm said...

Being the party of know is valiant when fighting runaway socialism and big government intrusion into private life.

Anonymous said...

i wonder if jim ever took the time to read the qu'ran.
i was blown away by the qu'ran's version of the birth of jesus. it is even more fantastic than how it is depicted in matthew.

JIm said...

Anonymous,
After contemplating the beauty of the Nativity story, maybe you will be equally charmed by the stoning punishments.

"In accordance with hadith, stoning to death is the penalty for married men and women who commit adultery. In addition, there are several conditions related to the person who commits it that must be met. One of the difficult ones is that the punishment cannot be enforced unless there is a confession of the person, or four male eyewitnesses who each saw the act being committed. All of these must be met under the scrutiny of judicial authority[117] For unmarried men and women, the punishment prescribed in the Qur'an and hadith is 100 lashes."

Robert G. Zuckerman said...

All holy texts are laden with barbarianism. The Bible (old/new testament) chief among them. Again, Jim, you are being selectively, errantly prejudicial.

JIm said...

Robert,
To repeat for the enth time, the Qu'ran, according to Islamic teachings, was written by Allah and thus can not be changed by man. The Bible, according to Judeo Christian teachings, was inspired by God but written by man and thus can be changed and or reinterpeted.

Lally said...

Butch sent in a comment which for some reason has been removed, not by me nor as far as I can tell by him. The mysteries of the internet and Google. Perhaps it was too long or didn't fit their format. I copied some of it to use in another post but when it disappeared decided to use most of it here since he made some good points:

According to Gallup: One-Third of Americans Believe the Bible is Literally True

Therefore, according to Jim, 100 million Americans must follow the rules laid down in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, including:
• Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19)
• Don't cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)
• Any person who curseth his mother or father, must be killed. (Leviticus 20:9) Have you ever done that?
• If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die. (Leviticus 20:10)
• If a man sleeps with his father's wife... both him and his father's wife is to be put to death. (Leviticus 20:11)
• If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death. (Leviticus 20:14)
• If a man or woman has sex with an animal, both human and animal must be killed. (Leviticus 20:15-16).
• If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be "cut off from their people" (Leviticus 20:18)
• Psychics, wizards, and so on are to be stoned to death. (Leviticus 20:27)
• If a priest's daughter is a whore, she is to be burnt at the stake. (Leviticus 21:9
• People who have flat noses, or is blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18)
• Anyone who dreams or prophesizes anything that is against God, or anyone who tries to turn you from God, is to be put to death. (Deuteronomy 13:5)
• If anyone, even your own family suggests worshipping another God, kill them. (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)
• If you find out a city worships a different god, destroy the city and kill all of it's inhabitants... even the animals. (Deuteronomy 13:12-15)
• Kill anyone with a different religion. (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)

Butch in Waukegan said...

Thanks Mike. Whatever the reason I am glad the comment was lost. I was very angry and there were several sentences I am glad you excised.

My anger also caused me to pass over the main point of this whole debate. Answering the War Monger in Residence’s assertions about Islam is pointless. It is not about religion at all. It’s not about 911.

What the controversy is about:
• Using racism to create support for moranic politicians who have no solutions for all the problems we face, problems they helped create.
• Using racism to create support for 2 endless wars in the Middle East, and cheerlead for a 3rd one against Iran.

Debating religion with the WMR will get you no where. Like Bush, he doesn’t do nuance. And he certainly doesn’t care about the real harm his racist drivel incites.

JIm said...

Butch,
Even if a large number of Christians believe in a literal interpetation of the Bible, for the most part, few try to kill non believers and take over West including the US to turn it into a theocracy. Christianity has had it's periods of extremism but has been able to go through a Reformation. There are a 1.5 billion Muslims, with most accepting the Qu'ran and Shariah as Allah's words, including the stoning and the theocratic takeover of govenments and courts. Persecution of non Muslims, sexual offenders and apostates are an everyday occurence in Shariah dominate countries and regions.

Here are some interesting thoughts from the WND website addressing whether a good Muslim can be a good US citizen.

"Only a 'bad' Muslim can be a good American
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Buchanan, 
exactly. For Jewish and Christian Americans, there is no conflict between love of God and love of country as our country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. The same cannot be said for Muslim Americans. Can observant Muslims place the Constitution above Shariah law? In fact, only a "bad" Muslim can be a good American, forsaking Shariah for the Constitution."

Anonymous said...

soo
accordin to The Gallup Poll

as Gallop is dead so it couldn't be "according to gallup"


2/3 view The Bible as a fiction... a Fairy Tales
written by POLITICIANS hell-bent on controlling the masses!


sounds like The Majority
believes Might Makes Right?

Horse-Puckey!

I think that "the mases" get thir knowing from movies... like

"The Greatest Story Ever Told"

or
"Ben-Hur"

and EVERY BODY knows that God is Charlton Heston

and that Robert Powell was "Jesus of Nazareth"!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_of_Nazareth_%28movie%29

Robert G. Zuckerman said...

Jim, your citations are unfounded by anything having to do with real re ality. I, unlike you, have walked the streets of middle eastern countries, I have slept and eaten in Arab and Islamic hotels. The highest word, and how people greet each other in Islamic/Muslim culture is "Salaam" - "Peace." Until you walk the walk, stop trying to talk the talk. Speak of things you know, not things you hear. And while we're at it, let's get some Native Americans (our name for the people who were here for countless centuries before our ancestors came here and exploited, murdered, lied to and generally, incessantly

Robert G. Zuckerman said...

woops, censor excised my "f" word usage:

incessantly screwed over - let's get them in on this dialog.

Butch in Waukegan said...

Another example of Christian (I assume) adherence to the Constitution.

(This Islamic Center is 2,900 miles from Ground Zero. Howard Dean says there must be some way to compromise, out of respect for the community’s feelings.)

JIm said...

Robert and Butch,
Many liberals are complacent to the dangers of expanionist Sharia/Islam. In fact the preferred target of hatred of Liberals are Tea Partiers/Republicans/free enterprize advocates/Christians/a former Governor of Alaska and anyone that does not favor the expansion of big government, higher taxes and an erosion of individual choice.

The good news is, there are more of we conservatives than of you liberal/socialists.

Lally said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lally said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lally said...

I added some likes to articles that bear on the comments above to the end of my post, because I couldn't get them here on the comments thread in a way you could just click and be connected to the article.

JIm said...

Mike's Ps's

Markos forgets to mention that many of the Islamist want to kill us. The Christians, not so much.

Fox should have taken the ad.

AlamedaTom said...

Hey Lal...
Reading all the above comments brought to mind one of my favorite quotations. The fact that it rings so true after all these years is chilling and scary. The modern twist is that Fox news, the right-wing sound machine, and corporate greed have taken the place of the evil "leaders."

“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

~ Hermann Goering

Lally said...

I hear ya Tom. Even scarier is the surprising (or maybe not) number of quotes from Hitler and his clique that so often seem to echo (or vice versa actually) the right in our country.

Butch In Waukegan said...

Complimentary quote:

In order to bring a nation to support the burdens of maintaining great military establishments, it is necessary to create an emotional state akin to war psychology. There must be the portrayal of an external menace. This involves the development to a high degree of the nation-hero, nation-villain ideology and the arousing of the population to a sense of sacrifice. Once these exist, we have gone a long way on the path to war.


— John Foster Dulles


The people behind the mosque protests are the same people that brought us the 2 wars we're in now. Of course, like our resident War Monger, they will fight the Great Battle for Civilization from behind their keyboards, sending other people's kids to fight and die.

One thing I haven’t seen mentioned is how this war-on-muslims rhetoric puts US soldiers in peril. I am sure news about all these demonstrations and violent incidents (like the NYC cabbie stabber) are quickly filtering into Iraq and Afghanistan.

JIm said...

Butch,
You seem to forget that 70% of the American people oppose the Victory Mosque. That includes folks on the right, center and left. No one disputes their right to build the Victory mosque under Constitutional guarantees of religious liberty, but that does not preclude the opposition from employing multiple strategies to make sure it never happens. Actually, the odds of it ever being built are diminishing daily. As far as making soldiers more vulnerable, Osama has spoken glowing many times of the "Strong Horse" that is Islam and himself. For the US to have a Victory Mosque on Ground Zero Ground would show us as the ultimate broken down burro to the Muslim world.

Tom,
Scariest and most lethal movements of the last 100 years has been various forms of socialism and statism including Nazism,Facism, Communism and theocratic Islamic governments.

Butch in Waukegan said...

Most times when I read the comment section here I have the same question as Jon Stewart: Evil or Stupid?

Advocating wars that lead to things like this, or this, is just evil. Especially when you make sure your own kids won't have to fight.

On the other hand, expecting to be taken seriously when you consider Glenn Beck a great historian is ****ing stupid.

Tough call.

Anonymous said...

who do we bomb the shit out of next?

in the name of Jesus Christ our fucking mythical
savior?

New Mexico? Detroit?

what a crock of shit we've become!

JIm said...

Back in February, Iman Rauf claimed that Obama stole his material. Rush has been calling Obama the Iman in jest. Maybe, it should be more than in jest.

DAY OF INFAMY 2001

Ground Zero mosque imam: Obama took speech from me
Rauf claims his book forms heart of Cairo address to Muslim world

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 25, 2010 WND

JIm said...

Here is an update from the son of a leader of Hamas.

HOMELAND INSECURITY

'Son of Hamas' warns U.S. fatally falling for lies
'Peaceful' Muslims following Quran's dictate to establish 'global Islamic state'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 25, 2010
9:58 pm Eastern

"Yousef, who recently was granted asylum in the U.S. after the Department of Homeland Security tried to deport him, told WND in a telephone interview Americans must understand that the ultimate goal of the highly influential Brotherhood is not terrorism but to establish a global Islamic state over the entire world.

"If they can establish this in a peaceful manner, that's fine," he said. "But they are required by the Quran to establish this global Islamic state on the rubble of every civilization, every constitution, every government."

Butch in Waukegan said...

The needle is tilting towards “Evil”.

Re the cabbie stabber:

A college student who did volunteer work in Afghanistan was charged Wednesday with slashing a taxi driver's neck and face after the driver said he's Muslim.

A criminal complaint alleges Michael Enright uttered an Arabic greeting and told the driver, ”Consider this a checkpoint,” before the brutal bias attack occurred Tuesday night inside the yellow cab on Manhattan's East Side. Police say Enright was drunk at the time.
[my empashsis]

This a clear connection between our wars and the Islamophobia being pushed by these right wing thugs .

Is the War Monger in Residence sticking pins in a map of Denver staking out future check points? Wouldn’t surprise me.

JIm said...

Butch,
It seems the Muslim cabbie was against the building of the Victory Mosque and the attacker was a supporter of the Mosque who by the ways works for or is associated with a very liberal interfaith group. Facts are still be sorted out so neither of us has the full scoop yet.

We do not have any check points in Denver. However, we are about to get rid of a very liberal Democrat senator, who has just said we spent all this money and got nothing for it. Of course Senator Michael Bennet voted for all the Obama/Pelosi/Reid socialist big government garbage.

Butch in Waukegan said...

The needle flips back towards “Stupid”. Now you’re just making stuff up.

This is your theory: Enright supported the building of the mosque, so he stabbed the cabbie because the cabbie was against the mosque. Stupid is the best word to describe this “reasoning”.

What we know about the stabber, from the links I have provided.

• He asked the driver if he was a Muslim.
• He said “Consider this a checkpoint” before he stabbed them.
• He spent 6 weeks imbedded with US troops in Afghanistan.

This last point is important, considering a link I posted further up the thread. Some US troops consider it their duty to murder civilian Afghans.

By the way, though if true it is immaterial, where is your link showing the cabbie is against building the mosque. Or is this your usual blowing-it-out-your-*** buffoonery?

JIm said...

Butch,
Could be buffoonery, but either way I suspect we will know shortly. You seem to be loading up on the nasty pills.

JIm said...

Butch,

Buffonery, maybe not so much. The slasher's name is Enright. The story is below.

Slashed Muslim taxi driver to visit NYC mayor
By TOM HAYS | Published: 1:15 PM 08/25/2010 | Updated: 1:17 PM 08/26/2010


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/25/police-ny-cabbie-is-asked-if-hes-muslim-stabbed/#ixzz0xjYotVOt
NEW YORK (AP) — Michael Enright once volunteered with a group that promotes interfaith tolerance and has supported a proposal for a mosque near ground zero — an experience distinctly at odds with what authorities say happened inside a city taxi.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/25/police-ny-cabbie-is-asked-if-hes-muslim-stabbed/#ixzz0xjYZ4thS

Butch in Waukegan said...

First of all, is anyone else reading this exchange? I really don’t want to carry on a debate with Jim unless the effort I put into this exposes his duplicity to others.

Take, for instance his rejoinder to calling him out for making up a cockamamie scenario where the stabber actually supports the mosque and the cabbie is against it.

He wrote: ”Buffonery, maybe not so much” and provides links to 2 articles. I assumed that they would have additional facts to back up Jim’s assertions. The articles were from the Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson’s rag. After I started reading something seemed familiar. I checked the byline and they were by the same reporter I linked to at HuffPo. He is obviously a beat reporter of a wire service.

In addition, Jim’s 2 articles had virtually the same information as the HuffPo, and, though they have different links, these 2 articles were identical, as far as I can tell.

HuffPo’s article did have some info that Jim’s (and Tucker’s) articles don’t. I have to assume this is intentional. This info is missing from the Daily Callers articles:

Chase [Enright’s employer] said Enright has been volunteering for the group for about a year on a project that involved veterans.

He did a video project that sent him to Afghanistan for about six weeks this spring to document the life of an average soldier, Chase said. He was embedded with a unit there.

Intersections has come out in support of the mosque project, but Chase said Enright wasn't involved in that.


So Jim’s idea of debating is:
1. Making up “facts” to refute articles he has not read.
2. Linking to articles he has not read.
3. Using copy-and-paste to waste everyone’s time.

The needle is furiously bouncing back and forth.

JIm said...

Butch,
If I am wrong I will admit it as I have done before at least once. The facts are unfolding and we shall see.

What remains is whether a Victory Mosque should be built. Good people of multiple political pursuasions believe it should not be built. Some but a much smaller group think it should be built. I do not believe anyone says they do not have the right, but if the Iman is to be believed, the Mosque is an effort to bring people together. It obviously is not working and is having the opposite effect. If the Iman is truthful in his intent, than the project should be dropped as the Carmelite Convent was moved from Auchwitz because of the sensitivities of the Jewish community.

Robert G. Zuckerman said...

Jim, your continually referring to this project as "Victory Mosque" reveals your prejudice and lack of objectivity in this matter.

JIm said...

Robert,
You are right on both counts. I am too aware of Islamic history and it's use of Mosques at the site of victories. I believe the political and religious intolerance of the Islam is danagerous to our freedoms. However, as an avid fan of the Constitution, we usually (Lincoln exception) must tolerate intollerant speech.

Robert G. Zuckerman said...

There are bad seeds in all religions and groups. Chritianity, Judaism, Islam. Doesn't mean they're all bad. In fact, IN FACT, most of them are good.

JIm said...

Robert,
I could accept that about Islam, if it were not for Shariah Law which every good Muslim must work to implement. The proposed Ground Zero Victory is shariah compliant. Here are a few excerpts for "Sharia for Dummies"

"Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf claims that the U.S. Constitution is Shariah compliant. Let us examine below a few laws of Shariah to see if Imam Rauf is truthful or a fraud:

Jihad, defined as "to war against non-Muslims to establish the religion," is the duty of every Muslim and Muslim head of state (caliph). Muslim caliphs who refuse jihad are in violation of Shariah and unfit to rule.


A caliph can hold office through seizure of power, meaning through force.


A caliph is exempt from being charged with serious crimes such as murder, adultery, robbery, theft, drinking and in some cases of rape."


http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=196041

Butch In Waukegan said...

We can expect more of this kind of thing if the likes of Jim have their way.

(via GG)

Butch in Waukegan said...

[This is my 3rd time trying to post this comment. They were visable and later they disappeared. Apologies if earlier attempts reappear.]

This is not offered as a debating point for Jim. He is a man who wants war and will go so far as to make things up to push for it. Trying to turn him around is building a bridge to nowhere.

We have discussions, disagreements and debates because things are never black and white. Here is a sensible analysis of the word “jihad” and its various meanings.

(In thinking about this I was reminded of Bush 43’s flub in using the word “crusade” and the meaning different people assign to it.)

Robert G. Zuckerman said...

Jim, you cite/quote sources that are specious at best. This is the danger of the internet on all sides. Someone reads or hears something, it is printed on something with a logo, etc. and it is taken as fact. This is dangerous. Your doing this is dangerous, more dangerous, scary and tragic than the things you purport to fear. The Bible has numerous instances of barbaric instruction and dictum, and please don't come back with one is written by man and one is the direct word of G-d, etc.etc., Both books are also filled with traditional lifestyle and ethical guidelines that are VERY SIMILAR, with different (in some cases not so different)taxonomy/spelling etc.
You need to look into your heart and into the eyes of your fellow human beings of all hues for the true and real truth, not these web pages that also advertise semi automatic weapons.

Butch in Waukegan said...

[I have made multiple attempts to post this. Each time the comment is visible, but then disappears. It doesn’t violate any sensible screening standards, so I a puzzled. Apologies if they reappear.]

This is not offered as a debating point for Jim. He is a man who wants war and will go so far as to make things up to push for it. Trying to turn him around is building a bridge to nowhere.

We have discussions, disagreements and debates because things are never black and white. Here is a sensible analysis of the word “jihad” and its various meanings.

(In thinking about this I was reminded of Bush 43’s flub in using the word “crusade” and the meaning different people assign to it.)

Butch in Waukegan said...

[I have made multiple attempts to post this. Each time the comment is visible, but then disappears. It doesn’t violate any sensible screening standards, so I am puzzled. Apologies if they reappear.]

This is not offered as a debating point for Jim. He is a man who wants war and will go so far as to make things up to push for it. Trying to turn him around is building a bridge to nowhere.

We have discussions, disagreements and debates because things are never black and white. Here is a sensible analysis of the word “jihad” and its various meanings.

(In thinking about this I was reminded of Bush 43’s flub in using the word “crusade” and the meaning different people assign to it.)

Lally said...

Here's a comment from Butch in Waukegan which he was having trouble getting on this thread, hopefully it will come through with links intact but who knows:

[I have made multiple attempts to post this. Each time the comment is visible, but then disappears. It doesn’t violate any sensible screening standards, so I am puzzled. Apologies if they reappear.]

This is not offered as a debating point for Jim. He is a man who wants war and will go so far as to make things up to push for it. Trying to turn him around is building a bridge to nowhere.

We have discussions, disagreements and debates because things are never black and white. Here is a sensible analysis of the word “jihad” and its various meanings.

(In thinking about this I was reminded of Bush 43’s flub in using the word “crusade” and the meaning different people assign to it.)

Lally said...

Hmmm, Butch, it looks like the links got lost, so maybe one of them is what was keeping your comment from staying posted.

Butch in Waukegan said...

Thanks Mike.

I think the article is very enlightening, so here it goes again.

The link is pretty long, so maybe that’s the problem. I used a URL shortener for this link. It works in Preview.

And here is a copy and paste for the longer version:

http://www.ask.com/bar?q=jihad&page=1&qsrc=121&dm=all&ab=4&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.religioustolerance.org%2Fisl_jihad.htm&sg=7fptHBFqwBpAHQ%2F4Fnob2Y7Cmj6LswWVnpPcpdTNhUw%3D%0D%0A&tsp=1283092901813

Robert G. Zuckerman said...

Jim,

I have been in many many many taxicabs in New York city that were driven by people (yes, PEOPLE) of the Islamic faith. I have spoken with them during the ride and a number of times it has been expressed by them that what happened on 9/11/2001 in no way represents Islam, the Qu'ran/Koran or anything having to do with being a true Muslim. When I walked the streets of Egypt and Jordan, I learned from working men, citizens, that the highest word in their language is "salaam" - peace - which is how they greet each other when they meet during the course of their days. You are entitled to your point of view, even though it is based on prejudice, fiction and fear, and I am entitled to tell you that you are absolutely wrong - wrong wrong wron.

JIm said...

Hi Guys and Girls,
Here is a little information about the generosity and openness of Islam from a Muslim site. I hope everyone in favor of the NYC Victory Mosque is comforted.

“Then the Prophet of Mercy would instruct him:
“Set out for battle for the sake of God and fight those who disbelieve in Him. Go into battle, but do not go to extremes, behave treacherously, mutilate their dead, or kill children. When you meet your enemies, the unbelievers, offer them three options, and accept any one of them to which they agree and cease the battle:
(a) Invite them to join Islam. If they agree, then accept this and cease the battle. Then invite them to move from their lands to the Land of the Immigrants (Medina), and inform them that if they do so, they will have the same privileges and obligations as the other migrants. If they refuse to migrate from their lands, inform them that they will have the same status as the nomadic Muslims: that they will be subject to the Law of God which applies to all Muslims, and that they do not have a share in wealth obtained from conquest, unless they participate in the jihad with the Muslims.
(b) If they refuse, then ask them to pay the jizyah,[2] and if they agree, then accept it from them and cease the battle.
(c) If they refuse all this, then seek God’s help and battle with them.’”[3]
These directives of the Prophet were in obedience to what God says in the Quran:”
http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/374/viewall/#_ftn2663

JIm said...

Michael,Butch,Robert,Liberals!!!

Where the hell are you? Are you loyal Americans first, or committed anti-Constitutional anti-Americans, pro Shariah Law enemies of America. Do you not have the ability to read what is put before your face? Are you so un-American that you would join a movement that wishes the destruction of America? Would you have joined with Nazism and Communism in the cold war. Would you have rooted for Kruszchev and Castro in 1962. Michael, did you root for Castro and Che in 1962??

Robert G. Zuckerman said...

The problem Jim, is that you and those like you get your information from stuff you read and hear that is out of context date and soundbites originated by heavily biased sources that you take as truth, as opposed to "us", who base our statements on things that actually happen in the real world. When you can see and admit this, you will have made progress and have earned the right to be take seriously. As of now, you have ensconsed yourself in the realm of being a one-note joke - a bad and sad one at that.

JIm said...

Robert,
The Qu'ranic quote was from a Islamic site which seems to be recruiting new converts. Here is another quote from the site, explaining what Muslims beleive about the Qu'ran and its ability to change or not over time.

JIm said...

Robert,
The quote seems to have gotten lost. Here is another one from the same website, islamreligion.com

"The Holy Quran
The Quran is different from other scriptures in the following respects
(1) The Quran is miraculous and inimitable. Nothing similar to it can be produced by human beings.

(2) After the Quran, no more scriptures will be revealed by God. Just as the Prophet Muhammad is the last prophet, the Quran is the last scripture.

(3) God has taken it upon Himself to protect the Quran from alteration, to safeguard it from corruption, and to preserve it from distortion. On the other hand, previous scriptures suffered alteration and distortion and do not remain in their originally revealed form.

(4) The Quran, for one, confirms early scriptures and, for another, is a trustworthy witness over them.

(5) The Quran abrogates them, meaning it cancels the rulings of the previous scriptures and renders them inapplicable. The Law of the old scriptures is no longer applicable; the previous rulings have been abrogated with the new Law of Islam."