My Favorite Dhimmis Are at it Again
The poor fools over at Islamophobia Watch are full of tales of Islamic misery and woe (none warranted) and I have attacked them before, but here is their take on the current British controversy. This site is rather fun to lampoon, I must admit, and I highly recommend visiting (if only for their "definition" of "islamophobia") as well as writing to them. I prefer to send them photos of victims of genocide in Asia Minor myself, but take your pick. Here's their take:
The Danish publisher Bookwright has circulated an appeal in response to Patrick Sookhdeo's interview in last week's Sunday Telegraph:
Sunday Telegraph article calls for the Qur'an to be Banned
An article by Alasdair Palmer in last week's Sunday Telegraph (19 Feb 2006) entitled "The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state" contains the following paragraph:
"... For example, there is a book, The Noble Koran: a New Rendering of its Meaning in English, which is openly available in Muslim bookshops. It calls for the killing of Jews and Christians, and it sets out a strategy for killing the infidels and for warfare against them. The Government has done nothing whatever to interfere with the sale of that book. Why not? Government ministers have promised to punish religious hatred, to criminalise the glorification of terrorism, yet they do nothing about this book, which blatantly does both."
You will probably know that the publication referred to is the Bewley translation of the Qur'an which is rapidly being recognised as one of the most accurate and readable translations. Not only does Palmer's interviewee advocate banning the sale of the Qur'an but describes its contents in such a way as to suggest it is nothing more than a handbook on terrorism. He falsely claims that it "calls for the killing of Jews and Christians".
The Qur'an does not call for Jews and Christians to be killed. This claim is a malicious lie. Furthermore the interviewee urges that the Qur'an itself be made illegal. It is outrageous that the Sunday Telegraph should promote such a viewpoint, particularly in the context of recent events. We cannot permit Allah's Book to be traduced in this way in the National Press and allow the Sunday Telegraph to promote such an abhorrent view of the Qur'an.
It is important to note that this article represents a new and more sinister development. Previously, we have had attacks on the person of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, the bearer of the revelation. This attack is on the revelation itself, and thus indicates a new and more dangerous front opened in the war on Islam. Certainly the minimum we can do is send an e-mail to the editor of the Sunday Telegraph expressing our outrage at this unprecedented open attack on the Qur'anic text.
The editor's e-mail address is:
Sarah Sands: sarah.sands@telegraph.co.uk
Please forward this mail to as many people as possible and urge them to write to the Sunday Telegraph.
*******************
Thanks for the contact info, little dhimmis! I'll be sure to send a mail right away!
Technorati Tags:
Islamophobia Watch
quran
Sunday Telegraph
Patrick Sookhdeo
islam
posted by Kiddo @ 6:11 PM
7 Comments:
They do try so hard to avoid the more classical definition of
phobia
A persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of a specific thing or situation that compels one to avoid it, despite the awareness and reassurance that it is not dangerous.
They know themselves that it is completely rational of infidels to avoid contact with islam.
I know. I pick on them all the time. I found the spam recipe in gmail while I was writing to them, in fact!
It is the same with the word"insugents" when everone knows they are "Terrorists" yet the Libs can justify the murder of women and children easier with the label of insurgent,making them seem like freedom fighters.
Hey, guys, read this carefully, and then decide whether there is another way to annoy them with the truth.
From the whiners at Islamophobia Watch:
"Previously, we have had attacks on the person of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, the bearer of the revelation. This attack is on the revelation itself, and thus indicates a new and more dangerous front opened in the war on Islam..."
Note in particular: "This attack is on the revelation itself. . ."
Gee, if I'd known it was THAT easy, I would have said something about it before.
Mohammed was a real man, but his "visions," while they were "real" in the sense that he had experiences which he interpreted as "visions," were not from Allah or delivered by Gabriel.
There have been lots of speculations as to where the infamous "visions" came from. Neurosis, psychosis, seizure disorders, demonic possession, trance states, simple con jobs - all these and more have been proposed as the source of the "visions."
My advanced training in medicine includes pediatric neurology. As a medical student, I worked in the sleep lab, and since then, I have more or less kept up with sleep medicine. This was to prove useful, and here's why. One day, while minding my own business and reading ibn Ishaq's accounts of Mohammed's experiences, I found myself saying, "Oh, my God! The man had SLEEP PARALYSIS!"
Full-blown sleep paralysis, experienced by about %5 of all patients suffering from this disorder, is a relatively recently discovered and studied phenonmenon, so it is not as widely known, say, as infectious disease. Sleep medicine itself only began to be taken serious in the mid-20th century, so it is no wonder that no one that I am aware of included "sleep paralysis" as a source of the "vision."
If you go to http://sixthcolumnagainstjihad.com/CUBED_P6.htm, you can read my entire inspired piece.
There is nothing in the Koran, ibn Ishaq, or the hadith that does not fit like like puzzle pieces into Mo's little experience, which is most assuredly not a "vision."
We have to remember the context of the times; everything happened NOT because of the law of causality, NOT because of the law of identity, but because some spirit or god wished it to. To this very day, Muslims possess the same, primitive view. When those poor bastards say "If Allah wills," they mean it.
Their view of what makes things happen is that Allah micromanages every single event every nanosecond of the day and night, 24/7, and we all better get the hell out of the way if Allah should ever be in a bad mood and not "will" all the ususal things to happen, because if he doesn't, they won't; fire will NOT make a cotton boll burn (that's a REAL EXAMPLE of the sort of "expectation" we have come to have, a "habit of belief," because Allah USUALLY "wills" a cotton boll to burn with fire...) etc.
We may be in luck.
They say, "This attack is on the revelation itself, and thus indicates a new and more dangerous front opened in the war on Islam..."
It just may be that if they truly consider an "attack" on the visions, the revelations, as more important even than ". . .attacks on the person of the Messenger of Allah..." then they have revealed an even greater Achilles' Heel.
BTW, you may recall that Mo also had a "night voyage" to Jerusalem, which forms the basis for Islam's claim to ownership of that city. Sleep paralysis also explains that.
Anyway, go boost the stats at sixthcolumn, and tell me what you think.
Nice point Cubed, very nice point.....this is a new weak spot for the charming ROPers (haha, I never realized that that would come out like The Ropers, remember that show?). I'll head there immediately, Cubed.
Ha! Now they have written about the Infidel Bloggers Alliance on their site! And it was NOT positive, let me tell you that! Good little dhimmis.
"This attack is on the revelation itself, and thus indicates a new and more dangerous front opened in the war on Islam.."
Yes, 'cubed' has a good point. Let’s emphasize that! We don’t disparage Muslims but the very message of Mohammad itself! It’s the revelations that we object to. Now what do we have? Revelation-phobia? Sura-phobia? Messenger-phobia?
I remember reading cube’s article and it does sound like he had a frightening disorder. Mo’s “old lady” convinced him that he wasn’t crazy but just hear the voice of Gabriel. She probably figured that would make him feel better and keep him out of trouble. Little did she know …
Post a Comment
<< Home