HE ONLY HAS HIMSELF TO BLAME

Treasurer Peter Costello and NSW Premier Bob Carr both condemn woman-blaming wildman Sheik Faiz Mohamad. And Irfan Yusef writes:

Faiz has been described in some circles as a cleric. Yet Islam knows no priestly or clerical class. The word sheik literally means old man. In a religious context, sheiks are little more than religious lawyers, similar in status to rabbis in the Jewish tradition.

Faiz studied Islamic law in Saudi Arabia and is a follower of one of a number of fringe “salafi” groups. Salafi groups are regarded as heterodox, removing texts from their historical context and turning a religion whose name literally means peace into a violent political ideology. They are rejected by even the Saudi religious establishment.

I prefer the wisdom of Turkish sufis to the fires of hatred that al-Qaeda wannabes like to fuel.

Who doesn’t? Meanwhile, the organization Melbourne Muslims emails a press release:

Australian Muslims say they’re deeply concerned at the comments of a Sydney religious teacher who told a public meeting that a rape victim had no one to blame but herself.

The comments were attributed to Sheikh Faiz Muhammad, who teaches at the Global Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool in New South Wales, at a speech in Bankstown on March 18.

A number of Muslim organisations have responded by saying it is inappropriate and incorrect to suggest that if a woman does not dress appropriately then she is in some way responsible for what happens to her.

The responsibility for an evil act such as rape lies solely at the feet of the person who commits it. There is never an excuse for rape.

These organisations point out that Islam is a faith that encourages self restraint and discipline, and it specifically encourages both men and women to avert their gazes as part of this approach to modesty. It encourages each Muslim to avoid sin regardless of the temptation. Rape, being one of the most heinous of sins, can never be justified on the grounds of dress.

They also cautioned against tarring all Muslims with the same brush. Fearing reprisals against the Muslim community, and especially women who wear the veil and may be subject to verbal and physical harassment, they urge the media and the community to adopt a balanced approach to this issue and not use this as an opportunity to incite further hatred of Muslims. Several media commentators are to be commended for keeping a level head at a time when such issues could be sensationalised.

The Muslim organisations urge Sheikh Faiz to retract his statements on this issue. The current statement blemishes the good work he has done to help many young Australians get their lives back on track.

The following Muslim organisations condemn the notion that rape victims have any responsibility for the crimes committed against them:
al-Ghazzali Centre for Islamic Sciences & Human Development
Andalus Islamic Bookstore
Australian Society of Islamic Psychology (ASIP)
Australian Muslim Civil Rights Advocacy Network (AMCRAN)
Australian Muslim Public Affairs Council (AMPAC)
Muslim Village Network (formerly known as Islamic Sydney)
Islamic Women’s Welfare Association (IWWA)
Mission Of Hope (MoH)

Posted by Tim B. on 04/27/2005 at 09:10 PM
    1. You know, if this goes on, the voice of Mainstream Islamic Australians might actually start being listened to.

      Though really, we’ve been listening, it’s they who have either been whispering, or silent. No matter, they’re speaking up now, and that’s the important thing.

      Hear, Hear. More please, and faster.

      Posted by Zoe Brain on 04/27 at 09:32 PM • permalink

 

    1. a religion whose name literally means peace

      It doesn’t.
      Islam = submission (to the will of God)
      Muslim = one who submits (to the will of God)

      Posted by pog-ma-thon on 04/27 at 09:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hooray for Melbourne Muslims and the other groups.  I hope other Muslim groups will follow their lead.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 04/27 at 09:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. … and not use this as an opportunity to incite further hatred of Muslims.

      Who needs to say or do anything to incite hatred of Muslims?  Just let the Islamists and fundamental Muslims do what is their wont to do and report it as news.  That’s more than enough to incite the hatred of Muslims.

      Posted by wronwright on 04/27 at 10:29 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Fearing reprisals against the Muslim community”

      this statement came out in para 2 or 3 of every similar press release from the Muslim community after Sep 11, Bali and the Bankstown rape trials.

      Statements of support for the victims and there families notable in their absence -AS ALWAYS!!!

      Posted by BattlestarGallactica on 04/27 at 10:42 PM • permalink

 

    1. Heh, he compared Faiz Mohamad to a Jewish Rabbi; that must’ve sent the ol’ rape-excuser into a fit of rage, I bet.

      Posted by PW on 04/28 at 12:57 AM • permalink

 

    1. There is NO place here for a 7th century arabic religion. Why alai babas were ever allowed in, is beyond me.

      Posted by TT Tazman on 04/28 at 01:37 AM • permalink

 

    1. Battlestar: no shit.

      More taqiyya please, and faster.

      Apparently the Melbourne Muslims have let the mask slip on their site, they have a Qur’an with English translations. Some charming quotes from the so-called religion of peace:

      “8.12 . When thy Lord inspired the angels , ( saying : ) I am with you . So make those who believe stand firm . I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve . Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger .”

      “47.4 . Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve , then it is smiting of the necks until , when ye have routed them , then making fast of bonds ; and afterward either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens . That ( is the ordinance ) . And if Allah willed He could have punished them ( without you ) but ( thus it is ordained ) that He may try some of you by means of others . And those who are slain in the way of Allah , He rendereth not their actions vain .”

      More here, cross reference with The Melbourne Muslims’ version of the Qur’an.

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 01:37 AM • permalink

 

    1. Interestingly, how long did it take the MSM to pick up on this story? I heard a promo on the radio yesterday stating that Today Tonight were doing a story on it yesterday evening. When did we read it here? Two weeks ago?

      Posted by James Waterton on 04/28 at 01:49 AM • permalink

 

    1. Good to see that some moderate Muslims are vocal about this.  Took them long enough, though!  And I hope that they keep it up—this Sheik Rape-and-Pillage isn’t the only bad apple in the barrel, not by a long shot.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 04/28 at 01:58 AM • permalink

 

    1. Some more quotes that are actually on topic, here’s what Islam has to say about women:

      Qur’an 4.15 . “As for those of your women who are guilty of lewdness , call to witness four of you against them . And if they testify ( to the truth of the allegation ) then confine them to the houses until death take them or ( until ) Allah appoint for them a way ( through new legislation ) .”

      “Qur’an 24.31 . And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest , and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent , and to draw their veils over their bosoms , and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands fathers , or their sons or their husbands ‘ sons , or their brothers or their brothers ‘ sons or sisters sons , or their women , or their slaves , or male attendants who lack vigor , or children who know naught of women ‘ s nakedness . And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment . And turn unto Allah together , O believers , in order that ye may succeed .”

      Robert Spencer of Jihadwatch has some more to say on the matter of rape and non-Muslims here.

      “What does rape, then, have to do with these religious conflicts? Unfortunately, everything. The Islamic legal manual ‘Umdat al-Salik, which carries the endorsement of Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, stipulates: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.�? Why? So that they are free to become the concubines of their captors. The Qur’an permits Muslim men to have intercourse with their wives and their slave girls: “Forbidden to you are … married women, except those whom you own as slaves�? (Sura 4:23-24).

      After one successful battle, Muhammad tells his men, “Go and take any slave girl.�? He took one for himself also. After the notorious massacre of the Jewish Qurayzah tribe, he did it again. According to his earliest biographer, Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad “went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for [the men of Banu Qurayza] and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches.�? After killing “600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900,�? the Prophet of Islam took one of the widows he had just made, Rayhana bint Amr, as another concubine.”

      Apparently Sheik Faiz knew his stuff pretty well. Unlike Peter Costello, who is clearly bereft of the facts:

      “If such comments are made I consider them totally inappropriate, untrue and unhelpful,” Mr Costello told reporters.

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 02:01 AM • permalink

 

    1. Here in Victoria we’ve got a crime on the books, “incitement to racial hatred.” I wonder if it could be stretched to fit, or if we could have a new one, covering women…

      Posted by Kyle Schuant on 04/28 at 02:21 AM • permalink

 

    1. Kyle: Do you think there is a politician in Australia with the guts to apply it? It would imply that he’d have to lock up everyone in Australia who submits to the Qur’an.

      And even if it was just limited to verbal inciting, who is going to monitoring? If Muslims switch to Arabic, how many non-muslims here speak arabic?

      Hopefully that law will be struck from the books sometime soon, luckily it was booed off the stage when Nicola Roxon suggested it be made nationally.

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 02:36 AM • permalink

 

    1. Dariuskan writes: “how long did it take the MSM to pick up on this story?”

      In this case, all credit to the MSM, firstly The Age’s Pamela Bone, who broke the story, and then to Miranda Devine, who pursued it in Sydney. Radio station 2GB later broadcast a tape, leading to a Network 10 report yesterday from which the Daily Telegraph and SMH drew their quotes.

      Posted by Tim B. on 04/28 at 02:36 AM • permalink

 

    1. taspundit, that’s bollocks, about the Qu’ran. Sure, there are quotes you can take from it that sound bad, but the same goes for the Gospels or the Torah. Paul told people that slaves should obey their masters, and the Torah says “he who breaks the sabbath, surely he shall be put to death.” But I don’t see Christians whipping their slaves, or Jews running around blowing people up while they’re watching the Saturday afternoon footy.

      Books say stuff, but people do different stuff.

      The law applies to stuff like some idiot getting up and saying publicly, “we should burn all the blackfellahs” or whatever. It’s pretty clear, there. The law’s still on the books for “incitement to riot,” and this idiot’s blabbing is the same thing. He wants Aussie women to be raped. So, lock the bastard up.

      No-one has to “monitor” anything in any language. Incitement to racial hatred, or similar, is just like any other crime – someone has to report it. “It’s against the law to committ assault.” “Oh no! Who’s going to monitor it!” Easy, if it happens, report it.

      Lock the bugger up. Is he a citizen yet? If not, send him home. He could go to, say, Jordan, where men who murder their female relatives for sex before marriage, etc, get a maximum of 18 months in jail. He’d fit in well there.

      Posted by Kyle Schuant on 04/28 at 02:43 AM • permalink

 

    1. Kyle: Did you bother to actually look at all the quotes on the Prophet of Doom site?

      1. It’s not as if it’s one or two cherry picked quotes. It’s representative of the whole book. Since you brought up Christianity, please name and number the verses that don’t easily match up with a typical liberal democracy. Bonus points if it was actually Christ that said the verse.

      One other thing you should remember is that the whole Qur’an is the word of god.

      2. You ignore the systematic nature of this. This is certainly not the first time that an Islamic cleric has advocated raping non-Muslim women. When was the last time your local priest told you to go have your way with a Jew or a woman in hijab?

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 02:56 AM • permalink

 

    1. Bugger the Prophet of Doom site. Try reading the entire Qu’ran. Basically, they go on and on about what a champion Mohammed was, and let’s have some charity. For every quote you give me about being nasty to women, I can give you two about charity.

      As to the Gospels, for instance, in 1Ti 2:11,12 we read words attributed to Paul, saying, “Women should listen and learn quietly and submissively. I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly.” We also fidn similar words in 1Co 14:35.

      Christ himself was quoted as saying, “I come bearing not peace, but a sword.”

      I could go on, but it would be tedious. A complete reading of any of the holy books makes them look not so bad; selective quoting of any of them makes them look vile and horrible.

      Bugger what their books say; look at what they do. That some swine are violent in the name of their faith is hardly confined to Islam. Murdered abortion doctors are testament to that. Fire-bombed synagogues or mosques also tell us that.

      The guy’s a scumbag. If a citizen, he should be tried, and imprisoned if found guilty. If not a citizen, he should be deported back to some place with similar values to his. His personal values don’t impugn Islam as a whole, any more than Hitler’s being a Catholic impugned Catholicism. A bit embarassing for them, but not really their fault.

      I mean, I’ve met old christian ladies, middle-aged christian blokes, and young jews, who say, “yeah, if women dress like that they’re asking for it and deserve what they get.” The religion’s got nothing to do with it, it’s just plain old stupidity and sexism. Just carrying on with Paul’s thoughts that women should be quiet and submissive and know their place.

      Posted by Kyle Schuant on 04/28 at 03:10 AM • permalink

 

    1. AEBrain and TRJ

      it sounds like finally the voice of reason?….maybe, maybe not!

      Listening to a Sydney based sheik who denounced the Australian born sheik; he said Faiz Mohamad was wahabist and maybe had 10/20% support (on his on line poll) Then he said maybe 40/60%, he was pretty vague.

      Sydney based sheik said that Faiz Mohamad was wrong because a good muslim man will not touch a non muslim woman, not shake her hand or look in the eye, so therefore rape is impossible.

      Ipso facto rape is OK as long as its a muslim woman?

      Sydney based sheik says there is no unity in the muslim community, sounds like every man for himself.

      These guys better get sorted.

      Posted by rog2 on 04/28 at 04:59 AM • permalink

 

    1. Watch out Kyle, you’ll get flamed by the flying monkeys if you keep talking reasonably.

      Tim Blair, If you keep posting articles promoting tolerance and inclusion, your poor regulars will all get confused and start chasing their tales.

      Good post though, thanks.

      Posted by Dave Heidelberg on 04/28 at 05:24 AM • permalink

 

    1. I meant “tails” Jeez.

      Posted by Dave Heidelberg on 04/28 at 05:25 AM • permalink

 

    1. I should add that the Syd Sheik did say that rape was like a theft, something that is taken that is not yours to take.

      Does he mean that rape is like stealing a donkey, or a car?

      Posted by rog2 on 04/28 at 05:26 AM • permalink

 

    1. Bugger the Prophet of Doom site. Try reading the entire Qu’ran.

      Every quote I have pasted so far from prophet of doom, I went to the Melbourne Muslim site, looked up the verse myself, and pasted it. Prophet of Doom is merely a pointer, the Qur’an itself is the source, and this is obviously a Melbourne Muslim approved translation. For the 4 verses I looked up, the meanings were very similar. From that sample, it seems obvious that PoD aren’t misquoting.

      How about backing up your assertions with some links, Kyle. Specifically,

      “For every quote you give me about being nasty to women, I can give you two about charity.”

      Yeah, and for every unfounded assertion you give me I can make two unfounded counterarguments. Links?

      In the Qur’an, there’s only about a page on the subject of women, unlike say, 8 pages or so apiece on the topics of jihad, war, terrorism, militancy, etc. You might be able to find some refs for charity, but if there are I doubt there is much regarding non-muslims. The one I found (Sura 4:36) looks great until you read the next Sura (4:37):

      (Nor) those who are niggardly or enjoin niggardliness on others, or hide the bounties which Allah hath bestowed on them; for We have prepared, for those who resist Faith, a punishment that steeps them in contempt;-

      Christ himself was quoted as saying, “I come bearing not peace, but a sword.�?

      I could go on, but it would be tedious.

      If you could go on, surely someone with an agenda has done a similar study versus the bible. You’ve got google, go find a page to back up your assertions. Should be easy.

      BTW you took that quote from Christ out of context. The point of those few verses is to say that Christ was here to set the cat amongst the pigeons, and that good Christians should proseletyze amongst everyone, even family members, and even if they resist.

      Bugger what their books say; look at what they do. That some swine are violent in the name of their faith is hardly confined to Islam. Murdered abortion doctors are testament to that. Fire-bombed synagogues or mosques also tell us that.

      How many abortion doctors have been murdered in the last 5 years?

      Hmmm, I might be forgetting how the Christians blew up a train, blew up a nightclub in Bali, and hijacked an airplane into the WTC killing 3000 people. Oh, and I forget how someone brutally stabbed Theo Van Gogh for making a movie critical of Christianity.

      Oh wait, my bad, all the perpetrators were Muslim. But that’s ok, a few thousand dead, a war of terror on the west, it’s the moral equivalent of a firebombed mosque or synagogue.

      You underrate the importance of the written word. It’s the common thread running through history. It’s vitally important, especially when you consider that most of what they do in a Madrassa is Qur’an study. You might realize that a good Muslim, by definition, takes everything in the Qur’an to heart, since it is the literal word of Allah. You can’t just pick and choose what you follow, particularly if there is verse upon verse compelling you to slaughter and terrorise infidels.

      Qur’an 47:33 “Believers, obey Allah, and obey the Messenger. Do not falter; become faint-hearted, or weak-kneed, crying for peace.�?

      If you look at what terrorists do, they quote the Qur’an left right and center. Read jihadwatch for a while – a month of it. Terrorists are getting their ideas from the book. Why do you think they cut off heads? Hmmm, might it have something to do with those quotes I posted earlier?

      As far as I’m concerned, I don’t owe Muslims jack shit, neither does the rest of Australia. From all the evidence I’ve seen, Muslims are not the sort of people Australians want in their country if it is to remain Australian in nature.

      One more thing: what religion are you? I’m actually not Christian btw, I’m agnostic/atheistic. I just use the Christians as an example because they seem to tolerate me pretty well. In fact, I was virulently anti-Christian as a youth.

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 05:28 AM • permalink

 

    1. rog2: Exactly. Live and let live, tolerance, inclusion, these are only philosophies that work if your opponent isn’t out to kill you. When he has repeatedly demonstrated his true nature, the only thing that prevents you from dealing with him is cowardice, ignorance or an ulterior motive.

      Let other European nations (such as Sweden, with a population that is at least 4% Muslim) figure out how to if integrating Muslims is even possible). They have crime rates double that of the USA, already! And they were once the shining example of the welfare state.

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 05:54 AM • permalink

 

    1. What passage were those Muslims quoting when they dropped a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing 200,000 people?

      And who can forget those evil Islamofacists who fire bombed Dresden, a city full of war wounded and refugees, killing about 30,000.

      Posted by Dave Heidelberg on 04/28 at 06:14 AM • permalink

 

    1. Yeah, those incidents happened in what? 2002? Refresh my memory.

      You are correct to worry about the consequences of pissing Americans off. It’s very foolish, especially when they are forced to make tradeoffs in terms of American versus foreign lives. It doesn’t take too many American lives before we start thinking nuclear, especially if your opponents don’t have nukes. The constitution isn’t much of a protection either, consider the Japanese internment in WW2.

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 06:28 AM • permalink

 

    1. Personally I consider the Americans overly tolerant as Mecca is not a 10 mile wide smoking sheet of molten glass on Sept 12th 2001.

      Instead they liberate 2 countries with Islamic populations.  Of course removing dictators enrages the dictator loving left!

      Posted by Rob Read on 04/28 at 06:54 AM • permalink

 

    1. Why don’t we all just admit that muslims as migrants are WAAAAYYY too much trouble and cut them out of the program.

      Whilst we’re at it, get out of the UN so we’re not bound by their bullshit refugee program. We can do our own. I’m happy to see more Asians, Africans, Europeans and North or South Americans. Muslims, deal me out.

      Posted by Mick Gill on 04/28 at 07:01 AM • permalink

 

    1. What passage were those Muslims quoting when they dropped a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing 200,000 people? 

      And who can forget those evil Islamofacists who fire bombed Dresden, a city full of war wounded and refugees, killing about 30,000.

      Jeez, Mushtaq, you can do better than this!  Digging up history from a war against bona fide fascists.  What, I should reply along the lines of “So, you didn’t want Hitler defeated, and were happy to Japan rampaging through Asia?”?  Puh-leez! This is an old leftie argument, debunked a thousand times.  If nothing else, those happened 60 years ago in a war almost everyone acknowledges as being just and reasonable.

      And no, I won’t accept examples from other wars from you.  If nothing else, you are more than a little biased on this subject.

      I think taspundit is somewhat off base by picking and chosing quotes from the Koran, but I understand his concerns….especially given the speech of Sheif Rape-A-Woman-Tonight.  Fortunately, we saw a response from the genuine (hint hint) moderate Muslim community, and the MSM.  Unfortunately, it’s only a start.

      Kyle is more correct in his analysis, in that, for some, religion is but an excuse to rape and kill.  And thanks in part to apologists like you, they think they have the right to do so, because America Is Evil (TM).

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 04/28 at 07:02 AM • permalink

 

    1. I think taspundit is somewhat off base by picking and chosing quotes from the Koran

      Yeah, how dare he cite evidence!

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 04/28 at 07:38 AM • permalink

 

    1. I’d hope that “The Real Jeff S” does not think me an apologist for rapists and killers, or that I’d say “America is Evil ™”.

      I simply mean to say that there’s nothing inherent in any religion, excepting only, say, the Thugees (who used to strangle people to worship Kali) that makes them murderers. The desire to kill comes first; the excuses come later.

      Consider some of the mass deaths of recent decades:

      present-day, Sudanese Moslems massacring Sudanese Christians

      2001, New York, Mostly Saudi and Sunni Moslems killed 3,000 American civilians.

      1995, Srebenica, Serbian Christian Orthodox massacred 2,000 moslem men from 15 to 70.

      1994, Rwanda, Catholic Hutu and Tutsi killed 200,000 of one another, repeating a process that occurs every ten years or so in Rwanda and Burundi

      1983, Southern Lebanon, Lebanese Christian militia, with the knowledge of the Israeli Govt (our friend Sharon, specifically), massacred several hundred Palestinian civilian refugees

      And so on and so forth. Armenia (Orthodox Christian) and Azerbaijan (Sunni Moslem), Sunni Moslem and Hindu in Kashmir and India, Thai Buddhist against animist Karen, etc etc.

      No religion has a monopoly on butchery, or rape, or theft. You can selectively quote their holy books, or their holy men, or their soldiers (consider the American Colonel about to head into Fallujah telling his men, “Satan is in that town”)… but what it comes down to is, people do evil things to one another.

      We live in a peaceful country, and ought to be grateful for that, and use the full force of the law against those who would disrupt it – like that twat Faiz.

      Posted by Kyle Schuant on 04/28 at 07:44 AM • permalink

 

    1. Mick,

      I agree with you. In fact, we don’t even have to leave the UN. It’s a toothless tiger. Japan has been ignoring them for years, as have certain other ex-Iraqi dictators.

      http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/01/japan_defies_un.php

      As to who we should let in, it should be based on whether they are likely to work productively, assimilate, and don’t have a higher crime rate than the average Australian. If we don’t have figures of our own, use other countries as an example. If there are no other figures, let some other country take the risk.

      This is one of those areas where the genie is hard to put back in the bottle, and if you have a choice not to open the bottle in the first place, why do it?

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 07:46 AM • permalink

 

    1. Kyle Schuant, and for that matter, Taspundit:

      Please go read this article.

      Summary:
      1. You’ll find murderous thugs in all religions, regardless of what the holy book says.
      2. Most practioners though are just normal folks, often pretty good ones.
      3. Islam has a problem in that the number of (forex) Christian abortion-clinic-bombers is small, the number of Islamic jew-killing suicide bombers is relatively large.

      It’s a difference in degree, not of kind, but it’s a significant difference in degree that Muslims must sort out for themselves, or get stick for it from everyone else.

      The_Real_Jeffs has it right too.

      BTW Kyle, ta for bringing up the Thai Buddhist vs Animist Karen example. I’d missed that one.

      Posted by Zoe Brain on 04/28 at 08:20 AM • permalink

 

    1. Aebrain, interesting blog, I always like to broaden my reading. However, it’s not true that it’s “a difference in degree.” I’d think that the hundreds of thousands of dead of Rwanda (killed by Catholics), or the thousands of dead of Srebenica (killed by Christian Orthodox), if they could say anything, would disagree with you.

      We tend to ignore the deaths that occurred in those places, because it stayed “within the borders”, as it were; but dead are dead, and violence is violence. I don’t think it’s a particular comfort to Moslems burned in a mosque in India by Hindus that they’re burned by “fellow Indians” instead of, say, Pakistanis; nor is it a comfort to Hutu Catholics with their arms cut off by Tutsi Catholics that it’s a “fellow Rwandan,” or “fellow Catholic.”

      Islam’s “problem” is that they’re not only murdering fellow Moslems, they’re murdering people of other faiths, and in other countries. Whereas the Rwandans and Indians and Chinese, etc etc have kept it within their own countries. It was notable that when in Yugoslavia, it ceased to be one country, then we interfered.

      Catholicism nowadays is the guy next door beating his wife. Islam is the guy beating his wife, and who climbs over the fence into your backyard and beats up your wife, too. Now, there isn’t really a moral difference, a beaten wife is a beaten wife. But we naturally take it more personally when it’s our wife; if it’s his wife, well, we feel happy ignoring it.

      It’s still a beaten woman, though. I’m in favour of being the guy who climbs over the fence and beats up the guy who’s beating his wife, myself. That’s why, though our justifications for invading Iraq were blatant fabrications, I didn’t shed any tears over it.

      Islam isn’t any shittier than other religions. It’s just that, at this moment in history, it’s spreading its shit around a bit more liberally than other religions. Not really sure what the everyday peaceful Moslem can do about that, though. What could the average Irishman do about the IRA in the 1970s and 1980s? Not much…

      Posted by Kyle Schuant on 04/28 at 08:39 AM • permalink

 

    1. And who can forget those evil Islamofacists who fire bombed Dresden, a city full of war wounded and refugees, killing about 30,000.

      If David is anything like 90% of those who mention Dresden, ban him now and let him go back to reading “The Destruction of Dresden” by that other David.

      Posted by Andjam on 04/28 at 08:51 AM • permalink

 

    1. Mr. Heidelberg has been banned from this blog.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 04/28 at 09:02 AM • permalink

 

    1. And you know what? I’m of half a mind to ban Kyle too. He is sounding more and more like one of Heidelberg’s little “friends.” For instance, the bringing up of entirely unrelated subject of other people of other religions killing other people in totally unrelated conflicts and situations TO THE CURRENT ONE, with the excuse of “oh, people are bad everywhere we have to be even-handed blha blha shit suck ass blah” when no one here has said anything even approaching anything like “Muslims are the worst killers evar evar evarrr! Stick to the fucking topic, Kyle. And that goes for anyone else who wants to bring up the Punic Wars or the War for Jenkins Ear or any other unrelated shit.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 04/28 at 09:09 AM • permalink

 

    1. ah the war of jenkins’ ear – that was such an entertaining little conflict – can we please have the peace of sheik rapealot’s well-kicked arse?

      Posted by KK on 04/28 at 09:41 AM • permalink

 

    1. Oh yeah, man, Soft Power! And Lentil Soup.
      What can us peaceful guys do, for goodness sakes?
      There are so many bad guys – how are we supposed to get tough with one and not another? Perhaps the UN can help us sort it out. David Heideldreg and that cute Ronny Holmes – now there’s a couple of caring chaps who know the answers.
      How about we all link hands in a big fairy circle and chant until we are illuminated by bliss beams?

      Posted by blogstrop on 04/28 at 10:01 AM • permalink

 

    1. Kyle — How many Evil Christian Abortion Murderers preach their poison from government-run churches?  How many synagogues are fire-bombed by Baptists?  Are those Episcopalians assaulting and stabbing Jewish kids in the streets of Europe, or shooting to death Dutch filmmakers and mutilating their bodies?  How many European leaders are being kept in jail cells to protect them from rabid Catholics?

      There is an entire sect of Islam, Wahabi, lavishly financed and global in reach, that is nothing but a brutal medieval throwback, that is devoted to the violent imposition of its will.  The only way there could be any sort of equivalency is if the Lutherans started hijacking airliners…

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 04/28 at 10:45 AM • permalink

 

    1. aebrain (since you mentioned me by name, and you think your blog post is germane to the discussion, I will respond to it. Warning: it’s long enough that I had to split it in two):

      I just read your article. In general, good, but there are a few things that you should clarify:

      1. “What’s really sad is that in some ways, Islam has gone backwards. Had anyone dropped in to 14th century Tehran, vs 14th century Rome, it’s unlikely they’d predict correctly who the more tolerant of the two would be in 2005.”

      Ref?

      2. “So for those who say the problem is inherent in Islam, I say the problem is no more inherent there than in Christianity pr Judaism. Of the three, Judaism is historically the best in practice, but the worst in theory.”

      Some refs for this? *Deep Breath*…No doubt I will probably get called a racist and all other names under the sun, but I would argue that in practice there is a lot of blood on Jewish hands. Jews were very well represented amongst the founders of communism in Russia and in the implementation of the Ukrainian holocaust. (As the victims of many pogroms in Ukrainian history, they were particularly well suited to exact some vengeance.) Up to 5 million from the Ukrainian holocaust alone, not counting other Communist gulags. All in all, not a bad effort for a little group of 23 million or so!
      See here.

      And I know it’s cool to bash the Palistinians (hey, I like it as much as anyone else!), but Israel certainly wasn’t a barren desert when Ben Gurion terrorised and ethnic cleansed his way to the establishment of an Israeli state.  (Which was once Jewish territory, then Canaanite territory IIRC, and probably someone else’s before the Canaanites got there. All of which needed some genocide to achieve.)

      By the same token, I would not call Judaism the worst in theory, either (from the persepective of an unbeliever). Certainly not compared to Islam. As far as I know, there is no common theme in the Talmud that specifies how to go about converting goyim, making them pay jizya, or killing them.

      By codifying man’s essential genocidal nature in a religion that applies to large groups, Islam has spread like wildfire given the head start both Judaism and Christianity had. If I was Mohommad or even a Muslim this knowledge would give me a massive hardon, but I’m not. I happen to enjoy the freedom and technology that living in the West brings.

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 11:27 AM • permalink

 

    1. 3. “Pick the right subset, you can make Islam into almost anything you want, from BLOOD BLOOD BLOOD to pacifist mysticism.”

      As far as I’ve seen, most evidence points to BLOOD BLOOD BLOOD. You know software development, you should follow this logic as a fundamentalist (good Muslim) would:

      1. Qur’an is the word of Allah.
      Sura (chapter) 39:1 we read: “This Book is revealed by God, the Mighty, the Wise One.�? Sura 55:1 says, “It is the Merciful [God] who has taught the Koran�?

      2. A Muslim must obey Allah.
      Qur’an 47:33 “Believers, obey Allah, and obey the Messenger. Do not falter; become faint-hearted, or weak-kneed, crying for peace.�?

      3. You have no obligations to non-Muslims (which is why CAIR and MM can afford to say somewhat placating stuff in English – they don’t mean it.)

      Qur’an 9:3 “Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans”

      4. Convert non-Muslims, make them pay a tax and subjugate them (jizya, dhimmitude), or kill them (preferably by lopping off their heads). Covered extensively here, there are approx 350-400 lines from Qur’an on fighting, jihad, terrorism, war, martyrs/mercenaries and Muslim militants alone:
      http://www.prophetofdoom.us/quotes1.html#terrorism

      To pick a random infidel slaying quote from the Qur’an (word of Allah), this will suffice (and looking at the surrounding verses, certainly not out of context):
      008.038
      Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them).
      008.039
      And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do.

      In addition, there are 3000 quotes of a similar nature they have researched on Islam.
      It’s a little more than the solitary sword quote in Matthew 10…

      4. “And what about Matthew 10:34-36 ? So much for family values.”

      Which, if you read the whole chapter, is a little more innocuous. Basically Jesus wanted his diciples to act like Jevova’s witnesses do today – proseletyzing everyone, everywhere, including family. He didn’t say to kill anyone.

      Thus, the three verses you quote seem to me to be out of context. (No doubt you can construe something else to do your work if as a Christian you wish to commit genocide; however you need to do a bit more digging to make a good case of it. And I’m not even sure if there IS a defensible Christian case for genocide against unbelievers as there is in Islam.)
      Source here:

      These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. 7As you go, preach this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven is near.’ 8Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy,drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. 9Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; 10take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep.

      Which brings me to the more evil of your Torah quotes (from the perspective of a non-believer), Deuteronomy quote 17:2-5:

      5. “2If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant…

      etc, etc, this basically says that all Jews that turn pagan (transgressing the covenant) shall be stoned to death. Which is hardly a command to go killing the out-group ala Islam.

      If anyone’s made it this far, I think that Christianity is an interesting case. Read John Hartung’s Love Thy Neighbour. I really need to go and re-read the new Testament, but Hartung makes a good case that Christ set about with a goal of reforming Judaism. Chances are eventually his religion would have become a bloody religion of conquest much like Islam, but first he needed to unite the Jewish people. Unfortunately he pissed off the wrong people and got put on a cross before he had a united army to command. What then happened is that his religion got spread to the pagans, a religion that was relatively out-group friendly for the times.

      Posted by taspundit on 04/28 at 11:29 AM • permalink

 

  • Does he mean that rape is like stealing a donkey, or a car?

    Sounds rather like:
    “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.”

    Posted by Achillea on 04/28 at 02:41 PM • permalink

 

  • Thanks Taspundit – excellent comments.

    Posted by blogstrop on 04/28 at 08:39 PM • permalink