Sometimes things happen that make you bang your head on a table laughing. This was one. Apparently there was a show on state television where a child was rewarded for behaving himself (perhaps learning to curse Jews in boisterous fashion) with a toy monkey. When asked what he called the monkey the boy replied; "Well, my father calls him Ahmedinejad".
My guess is there is a large stain in the dad's shorts right about now. It could be an extra offense because Iranian sponsored Hezbollah repeatedly refers to Jews as monkeys and swine. The TV show was promptly canceled.
The reason for cancellation?... the high "spiritual" and "financial" costs of airing the show. Indeed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/4972554/Iranian-TV-show-scrapped-after-child-calls-toy--monkey-Ahmadinejad-live-on-air.html
Friday, March 13, 2009
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Double Take, Iranian Solipsism
Not long ago I had dinner with a Muslim scholar for whom I have great respect despite our grossly divergent views. He said that the problem with the Iranian government is that it consistently overestimates the role of theology in American political and social life. He really hit the nail on the head as anyone who listened to Mahmoud Ahmedinejad's rambling Columbia speech would know. I'm-a-dinner-jacket rambled incessantly about the "prophets" and other ridiculous detritus thinking this would endear him to his audience and he could slip in the homosexual denialist opinions (the first homosexual denialist I have ever heard speak). Apparently they just don't exist in Iran.
Anyhow, this is simply a result of solipsism. The Iranians treat Islam as a foregone conclusion of all societies. They are of course first to demand Shariah be shielded from criticism at the UN, because, of course, this is a divine issue above thought or reproach. It is also evident in a comment I shall detail below from Ahmad Khatami in DEFENSE of the genocidal Sundanese regime of Omar al-Bashir. When queried, the Ayatollah gave a contemptible defense saying that instead of concerning themselves with the 300,000 dead Africans (killed by those professing the religion of peace) the International Criminal Court should judge the heads of the 'Zionist regime' (Israel) and "execute them because they are seditious on the land and are fighting against God and the Prophet."
I would like to take a moment and deal with this flat earth cretin who seems to think the world revolves around his mephitic theocracy. First of all this clumsy term "seditious on the land" refers to either the Islamic concept of fasad fi'l-ard (corruption in the land) or fitna (meaning a societal strife), either way it has absolutely no value for an international court made up of non-Muslims. This is like a Hassidic Rabbi asking the ICC to try the Chinese for eating pork, it makes no sense accept that it details an advanced state of delusion about one's own importance.
The Ayatollah (one could possibly site senility for his ramblings if it weren't ubiquitous to every Iranian official) says the Israelis should be executed for fighting "God and the Prophet". Again, he wants an international court to execute the heads of a multi-party, multi-ethnic, multi-religious democracy because they are fighting against his "God" and the prophet of that god. Is it an international offense to fight against an Arabian desert god, and a pedophile prophet? Only when you think you are the center of the universe.
Muslims are behaving like spoiled children, it's time to stop listening.
Anyhow, this is simply a result of solipsism. The Iranians treat Islam as a foregone conclusion of all societies. They are of course first to demand Shariah be shielded from criticism at the UN, because, of course, this is a divine issue above thought or reproach. It is also evident in a comment I shall detail below from Ahmad Khatami in DEFENSE of the genocidal Sundanese regime of Omar al-Bashir. When queried, the Ayatollah gave a contemptible defense saying that instead of concerning themselves with the 300,000 dead Africans (killed by those professing the religion of peace) the International Criminal Court should judge the heads of the 'Zionist regime' (Israel) and "execute them because they are seditious on the land and are fighting against God and the Prophet."
I would like to take a moment and deal with this flat earth cretin who seems to think the world revolves around his mephitic theocracy. First of all this clumsy term "seditious on the land" refers to either the Islamic concept of fasad fi'l-ard (corruption in the land) or fitna (meaning a societal strife), either way it has absolutely no value for an international court made up of non-Muslims. This is like a Hassidic Rabbi asking the ICC to try the Chinese for eating pork, it makes no sense accept that it details an advanced state of delusion about one's own importance.
The Ayatollah (one could possibly site senility for his ramblings if it weren't ubiquitous to every Iranian official) says the Israelis should be executed for fighting "God and the Prophet". Again, he wants an international court to execute the heads of a multi-party, multi-ethnic, multi-religious democracy because they are fighting against his "God" and the prophet of that god. Is it an international offense to fight against an Arabian desert god, and a pedophile prophet? Only when you think you are the center of the universe.
Muslims are behaving like spoiled children, it's time to stop listening.
Islamic Radicals Target British Troops for Protest
Yet ANOTHER revolting story of dhimmi capitulation coming to us from the United Kingdom. Bearded Muslim radicals have targeted British troops for protest as they returned from Iraq (a country the British are spending millions of pounds to rebuild for the ungrateful population).
The Times carried a story March 11th. Some excerpts:
This is too rich considering this:
Or maybe this one:
When not denying the Holocaust these UK radicals are applauding it. Now they have the nerve to compare British soldiers to Nazis? Apparently Islam forbids a sense of irony. And in a final hurricane of hypocrisy the local Muslim apologist said the following:
Hopefully the British don't incur a concussion by prostrating too quickly to Mecca.
The Times carried a story March 11th. Some excerpts:
Islamist extremists in the UK are plotting to repeat their protest of yesterday in which they held up banners labelling British troops on their homecoming parade as "cowards" and "butchers".Funny I don't see them protesting suicide bombers as butchers and cowards, apparently only those brave enough to fight in a uniform and refusing to use children as human shields are cowards. The fifth column jihadists issued the following statement about the soldiers:
"They are terrorists and cannot be excused for simply 'carrying out their duty', which incidentally (and vividly) was also used by Nazi soldiers in Germany to justify their notorious and bloody campaigns in the early 20th century"
This is too rich considering this:
Or maybe this one:
When not denying the Holocaust these UK radicals are applauding it. Now they have the nerve to compare British soldiers to Nazis? Apparently Islam forbids a sense of irony. And in a final hurricane of hypocrisy the local Muslim apologist said the following:
Abdul Malik, a member of Luton’s Race Advisory Forum, also said that the protesters were likely to have been members of the banned group, but argued that such demonstrations - however "insensitive" - should be allowed in a democracy. "In a democratic system, however they are unacceptable, we must welcome their viewpoint and listen to it and give it attention," he said.Are they even serious anymore? Thankfully they kept Geert Wilders out to stop inter community "strife". What a joke.
Hopefully the British don't incur a concussion by prostrating too quickly to Mecca.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
George Galloway, Blathering Fucktard
Just when you think you have seen the lowest of the low when it comes to self loathing Islamophilia George Galloway reminds us he is still alive by breaking political wind.
The report:
The report:
GAZA CITY (AFP) — Firebrand British MP George Galloway on Tuesday donated thousands of dollars and dozens of vehicles to the Hamas-run government in the Gaza Strip after arriving in an aid convoy."We are giving you now 100 vehicles and all of their contents, and we make no apology for what I am about to say. We are giving them to the elected government of Palestine," Galloway said at a press conference in Gaza City.
Galloway said he personally would be donating three cars and 25,000 pounds (35,000 dollars) to Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniya as he dared the West to try to prosecute him for aiding what it considers a terror group.
"I say now to the British and European governments, if you want to take me to court I promise you there is no jury in all of Britain who will convict me. They will convict you."
Galloway made the announcement at an outdoor conference in the presence of several senior Hamas officials, and his words were greeted by shouts of "Allahu Akbar!" (God is Great)....
Oh yes, making no apologies for donating vehicles to a group that has called for the destruction of a UN member state. That has deliberately targeted women and children for violence, that has said all kinds of nasty and racist things about Jews, and assorted other non-Muslims. George Galloway gleefully donates to the cause of Islamic supremacism. Galloway was a friend to Saddam Hussein, no surprise that he is the closest British ally of Hamas.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jOjOUnorBs-cH0fNOpyL0WxZ3DQA
Is Islam a Form of Fascism?
Fascism:
"A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."
I had the extremely unpleasant occasion to have an exchange with the archetypal self hating useful idiot who busied himself explaining, in sanctimonious fashion, that Islam is nothing like fascism and if we just showed Muslims more respect terrorism and such would simply evaporate. However useless the statement, this self flagellator did get me thinking about how Islam is, precisely, like fascism.
I will add yet another definition of fascism, from my beloved Wikipedia:
Islam promotes violence amongst nations demanding that jihad be conducted to spread the Islamic state and Shariah, subordinating all people to this ideology, regardless of local beliefs or customs. Islam refers to polytheists as the worst of peoples and Jews as descendants of "apes and swine". Islam institutionalizes inter-religious hostility. In summary Islam versus anyone else. This is why Islamic scholars have divided the world into two competing factions, Dar al-Islam (The Realm of Islam) and Dar al-Harb (The Realm of War). An area is either Islamic, or it is subject to the hostilities of the mujahideen commanded by the Caliph.
Now there is a slight departure here, the social Darwinism certainly does not apply to the Islamic form of fascism, but the notional ideology here is the same, namely that there is an external force exerting pressure to separate those that are "worthy" of survival and those that aren't. The social Darwinists (and I object to this being inextricably linked to fascism, but this is another matter) would say that there are environmental pressures that would shape the destiny of humanity, yet the fascist state must intervene to expedite this process by the domination and even extermination of these inferior people. Islam accepts that this external force is god, and that the Muslim is called to strive in his path to implement his will, that his religion, Islam, be spread to every part of the globe, that the inferior faiths of Christianity and Judaism be "brought low" (to quote the Qur'an) and others be exterminated or brutally oppressed. In both instances the fascist state assigns itself the right to carry out the mandate of an external and invisible force, one which places them at the pinnacle of society, to carry out the destruction and oppression of the inferior peoples.
Finally I would say the warrior mentality is common to Islam as well. Muhammad said that fighting one day of jihad is better than months upon months spent in a mosque. Ibn Qayyiam al-Jawziyya wrote in his work Zaad al-Ma'ad (Provisions for the Hereafter) that "jihad is the pinnacle of the Islamic faith, and that the Messenger experienced it in all its aspects". The warrior, the martyr, is rewarded with virgins in the hereafter, he holds the highest place in heaven. Furthermore, Islam views this state of war between the Muslims and the Kuffar (Infidels) as the natural order of the world. This is why truces are non-existent in Islamic law, save that they can be used to cease hostilities long enough for the Muslims to rearm and gain enough strength to overcome those they wish to conquer.
As we return to our definition, I have made a few edits (bolded italics):
With a few simple edits we have Islam and fascism defined. The fascism model fits Islam so perfectly, is it any wonder that Churchill said that Mein Kampf was "the new Koran of faith and war: turgid, verbose, shapeless, but pregnant with its message"?
"A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."
I had the extremely unpleasant occasion to have an exchange with the archetypal self hating useful idiot who busied himself explaining, in sanctimonious fashion, that Islam is nothing like fascism and if we just showed Muslims more respect terrorism and such would simply evaporate. However useless the statement, this self flagellator did get me thinking about how Islam is, precisely, like fascism.
I will add yet another definition of fascism, from my beloved Wikipedia:
Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist ideology that aims to create a single-party state with a government led by a dictator who seeks national unity and development by requiring individuals to subordinate self-interest to the collective interest of the nation or race. Fascist movements promote violence between nations, political factions, and races as part of a social Darwinist and militarist stance that views violence between these groups as a natural and positive part of evolution. In the view of these groups being in perpetual conflict, fascists believe only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and have an aggressive warrior mentality by conquering, dominating, and eventually eliminating people deemed weak and degenerate.If we take the above definition we can see that Islam is in fact a fascist enterprise. Namely that istseeks an authoritarian single party state. Islam demands the institution of Shariah, and that the leader of such a state would be the "shadow of god on earth", meaning that he would carry out the political and military aspects of the Islamic state (while the clerics would administer Islamic justice), meaning he would be amir al-mu'mineen (Commander of the Faithful), and would command the jihad conquest of non-Muslim areas. Shariah would be the exclusive law of the land and no new law could be enacted that contradicted any aspect of Shariah.
Islam promotes violence amongst nations demanding that jihad be conducted to spread the Islamic state and Shariah, subordinating all people to this ideology, regardless of local beliefs or customs. Islam refers to polytheists as the worst of peoples and Jews as descendants of "apes and swine". Islam institutionalizes inter-religious hostility. In summary Islam versus anyone else. This is why Islamic scholars have divided the world into two competing factions, Dar al-Islam (The Realm of Islam) and Dar al-Harb (The Realm of War). An area is either Islamic, or it is subject to the hostilities of the mujahideen commanded by the Caliph.
Now there is a slight departure here, the social Darwinism certainly does not apply to the Islamic form of fascism, but the notional ideology here is the same, namely that there is an external force exerting pressure to separate those that are "worthy" of survival and those that aren't. The social Darwinists (and I object to this being inextricably linked to fascism, but this is another matter) would say that there are environmental pressures that would shape the destiny of humanity, yet the fascist state must intervene to expedite this process by the domination and even extermination of these inferior people. Islam accepts that this external force is god, and that the Muslim is called to strive in his path to implement his will, that his religion, Islam, be spread to every part of the globe, that the inferior faiths of Christianity and Judaism be "brought low" (to quote the Qur'an) and others be exterminated or brutally oppressed. In both instances the fascist state assigns itself the right to carry out the mandate of an external and invisible force, one which places them at the pinnacle of society, to carry out the destruction and oppression of the inferior peoples.
Finally I would say the warrior mentality is common to Islam as well. Muhammad said that fighting one day of jihad is better than months upon months spent in a mosque. Ibn Qayyiam al-Jawziyya wrote in his work Zaad al-Ma'ad (Provisions for the Hereafter) that "jihad is the pinnacle of the Islamic faith, and that the Messenger experienced it in all its aspects". The warrior, the martyr, is rewarded with virgins in the hereafter, he holds the highest place in heaven. Furthermore, Islam views this state of war between the Muslims and the Kuffar (Infidels) as the natural order of the world. This is why truces are non-existent in Islamic law, save that they can be used to cease hostilities long enough for the Muslims to rearm and gain enough strength to overcome those they wish to conquer.
As we return to our definition, I have made a few edits (bolded italics):
Islamic Fascism is a radical, authoritarian religio-nationalist ideology that aims to create a single-party religious state with a government led by a Caliph who seeks national unity and development by requiring individuals to subordinate self-interest to the collective interest of the Islamic state. Islamic Fascist movements promote violence between nations and religions as part of a theologically militarist stance that views violence between these groups as a natural and positive part of divine order. In the view of these groups being in perpetual conflict, Islamic fascists believe only the divinely chosen can survive by being healthy, vital, and have an aggressive jihad mentality by conquering, dominating, and eventually eliminating people deemed religiously inferior and degenerate.
With a few simple edits we have Islam and fascism defined. The fascism model fits Islam so perfectly, is it any wonder that Churchill said that Mein Kampf was "the new Koran of faith and war: turgid, verbose, shapeless, but pregnant with its message"?
Friday, March 6, 2009
An Exegesis of the Opening Chapter of the Qur'an
As I have discussed numerous issues on Islam on this site, I figured I should take the time to outline a classical exegesis of the opening chapter of the Qur'an, known as Surat al-Fatiha or "The Opening".
I shall quote the Fatiha here both in the Arabic, English transliteration and English translation.
By way of introduction, let me make some brief remarks on the position and importance of this sura. It is the opening chapter of the Qur'an, it is often referred to as Um al-Qur'an (The Mother of the Qur'an) or Um al-Kitab (The Mother of the Book). It is referred to subtely later in the Qur'an as Lawh al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet). It is the position of many scholars of Islam, that the Fatiha is a summary of the entirety of the Qur'an. That every theme is contained in these 7 verses. It is recited at the beginning of every raka'a of the prayer, which means it is recited no less than 17 times per day (assuming one performs the five obligatory prayers), and is the only sura which is required to be recited during prayer. The Chapter is divided into seven verses. It breaks down into the three beginning verses which are dedicated to the description and praise of Allah, the last three verses which are pleas from the believer made to Allah, and a middle verse which serves as a transition.
Invocation:
بِسْمِ اللّهِ الرَّحْمـَنِ الرَّحِيمِ
Bismillahi al-Rahman-ir-raheem
"By the name of Allah the compassionate the merciful"
This is the invocation made at the beginning of every chapter of the Qur'an. However, the Fatiha is the only chapter where this is included IN the chapter and not as a disconnected pre-amble. All major scholars agree to this, save for the Shafi'i who do not consider this a part of the chapter and thus do not recite it as part of the chapter (as most Arabs are Shafi'i I shall exclude it from the chapter). This is often mistranslated as "In the Name of Allah", however the "bi" sound is what is referred to in Arabic as harf ul-ma'ana. Meaning "a letter with meaning", denoting it is neither noun nor verb, but has significance. In fact it means "by", not "in", and this should be translated as "by" the means (name) of Allah, not "in" his name. The very word "Allah" means "God", some say this comes from the Arabic conjunction of the definite article "al" and the word for God "Ilah" making it al-Illah, however most Muslim scholars debate this formulation saying Allah is the name God chose for himself above all others. The next to words mean "The Merciful, the Compassionate" (Often translated as "The Beneficent"). These are two among the 99 other names Allah has chosen for himself and are placed here as a reminder to believers that their piety will be rewarded with mercy and compassion.
1)
الْحَمْدُ للّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ
Al-Hamdullilahi-rub il-'alameen
"All praise is for Allah, Lord of the Worlds"
This verse begins the praise and description of Allah. The word hamd comes from the verb h-m-d which means to "praise" and thus the noun is "praise". However this word is used exclusively for the praise of Allah, any other form of praise from a human to a human would be described by the verb m-d-h. The letters remain the same but are in a different order. In the trickiness of the Arabic language this could be accidental, or it could be some strange design of the early Arabs. The next two words describe Allah as "The Lord of the Worlds". Specifically the world (this one in which we live) is known as al-'Aalam, but here it is pluralized, and scholars of Islam have posited that this means 10,000 worlds, and that Allah is ruler of all. The question has been bandied about (uselessly as it makes no sense) that this could mean universes, dimensions, or inhabitable planets. All attempts to rationalize Abrahamic faith.
2)
الرَّحْمـنِ الرَّحِيمِ (1:
al-Rahman ir-Raheemi
"The Compassionate The Merciful"
Once again the Qur'an is drawing attention to these two qualities and descriptions of Allah. They remain in the case known as majroor in Arabic, meaning they are either in a genitive form or reside next to a harf al-ma'ana (or are the indeclinable noun). In fact they are a continuation of the description of Allah as "Lord of the Worlds". Thus that he rules these worlds with the exact same compassion that he rules this one, as evidenced by the opening verse.
3)
مَـالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ (
Maaliki Yawm i-deen
"Master of the Day of Faith"
The opening word in this verse is Malik coming from the verb meaning "to own" which is a derivative of all things to do with "kingship", mulk is kingdom. Malik is literally "King". So some would say Allah is "King of the Day of Faith". The "Day of Faith" is simply the Day of Judgment where a person's faith will be tested. The Qur'an is explicit about this last day saying "No other religion (other than Islam) will be accepted of them", meaning that all the Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and any other assorted infidels will be condemned to the hellfire (which is described in both the Qur'an and the Hadith).
4)
إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ
Iyyaka na'badu, wa iyyaka nasta'een
"To you we turn in worship, to you we turn for aid"
This is the transitional verse of which I spoke in my opening remarks. The firt phrase "to you we turn in worship" continues the theme of describing Allah and the believers duty and relationship to him, and the second shifts the theme of the verse to the Muslim as they seek aid from Allah. "Unto you" is fronted here (meaning the direct object is placed before the verb and the subject of the verb, which in Arabic is contained in the verb itself), the verse would have been more tradiontally Arabic if it had use the "you" as an enclitic suffix, saying Na'buduka, but the author of the Qur'an was very specific in making sure that the object was held up as the most important aspect of the verse. Thus using a more poetic construct to front and emphasize the object. The same holds true as the chapter shifts emphasis to the Muslim with iyyaka nasta'een, with similar fronted object (Known in Arabic as the Mafa'ul bihi).
5)
اهدِنَــــا الصِّرَاطَ المُستَقِيمَ
Ihdina al-Sirat al-Mustaqeem
"Guide us (to) the straight path"
This verse begins with an imperative verb, Ihdina with the enclitic suffix "we" (here "na"). The believers are imploring Allah, en masse, for guidance upon the straight path. The word for path al-Sirat is not actually an Arabic word by origin, which is interesting in that Muslims will contend that the Qur'an is the pinnacle of the pure language of Allah. However the word for path here is most likely derived from Latin or some other Mediterranean (pre-Islamic) language. It would be a sore irony for Muslims to think of this 17 times per day in prayer, so it is generally left undiscussed, or simply as a "miracle" of Allah.
6)
صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنعَمتَ عَلَيهِمْ
Sirat aladheena an'amta 'Alayhum
The path of those upon whom you have bestowed your blessings
Again we see the invasion of non-Arabic on the opening chapter of the Qur'an. in the form of Sirat. Now we see the verb na'ma from n-'-m. This literally means to bless or bestow. However the form used is confusing as it uses the second person singular past tense, which denotes familiarity (this is also the case in iyyaka). Usually when Allah describes himself, or when Muslims address him, the royal plurals are used. For instance the royal we or royal you. The second person plural is a sign of respect in Arabic, while the royal we is a sign of arrogance. And by no coincidence Allah describes himself as al-Mutakabar (The Arrogant).
7)
غَيرِ المَغضُوبِ عَلَيهِمْ وَلاَ الضَّالِّينَ
Ghayri maghdubi 'alayhim, wa la Daaleen
"And not those who have earned your anger (condemned) and not those who go astray"
And here we have Allah dedicating the final verse to the non-believers. The Muslim is imploring Allah to spare him/her from the anger he has reserved for these two groups of people. Those who have earned Allah's anger are, of course, the Jews. The Jews angered Allah by killing "his prophets" and other assorted evils traditionally ascribed to Jews in anti-Semitic libels. And who is it who has gone astray? The Christians who bungled Jesus' (Arabic: 'Issa) message and began to worship him as a God. Now this ritual disdaing is encoded in the 17 raka'a (prostration) of prayer performed every day. Daily Muslims are called to remember those whom are ritually disdained in Islam, and eternally disdained by Allah. And by no coincidence, this is the message that Allah leaves for last, and by definition most lasting.
This concludes my exegesis of the opening chapter of the Qur'an. I hope it has been helpful.
I shall quote the Fatiha here both in the Arabic, English transliteration and English translation.
By way of introduction, let me make some brief remarks on the position and importance of this sura. It is the opening chapter of the Qur'an, it is often referred to as Um al-Qur'an (The Mother of the Qur'an) or Um al-Kitab (The Mother of the Book). It is referred to subtely later in the Qur'an as Lawh al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet). It is the position of many scholars of Islam, that the Fatiha is a summary of the entirety of the Qur'an. That every theme is contained in these 7 verses. It is recited at the beginning of every raka'a of the prayer, which means it is recited no less than 17 times per day (assuming one performs the five obligatory prayers), and is the only sura which is required to be recited during prayer. The Chapter is divided into seven verses. It breaks down into the three beginning verses which are dedicated to the description and praise of Allah, the last three verses which are pleas from the believer made to Allah, and a middle verse which serves as a transition.
Invocation:
بِسْمِ اللّهِ الرَّحْمـَنِ الرَّحِيمِ
Bismillahi al-Rahman-ir-raheem
"By the name of Allah the compassionate the merciful"
This is the invocation made at the beginning of every chapter of the Qur'an. However, the Fatiha is the only chapter where this is included IN the chapter and not as a disconnected pre-amble. All major scholars agree to this, save for the Shafi'i who do not consider this a part of the chapter and thus do not recite it as part of the chapter (as most Arabs are Shafi'i I shall exclude it from the chapter). This is often mistranslated as "In the Name of Allah", however the "bi" sound is what is referred to in Arabic as harf ul-ma'ana. Meaning "a letter with meaning", denoting it is neither noun nor verb, but has significance. In fact it means "by", not "in", and this should be translated as "by" the means (name) of Allah, not "in" his name. The very word "Allah" means "God", some say this comes from the Arabic conjunction of the definite article "al" and the word for God "Ilah" making it al-Illah, however most Muslim scholars debate this formulation saying Allah is the name God chose for himself above all others. The next to words mean "The Merciful, the Compassionate" (Often translated as "The Beneficent"). These are two among the 99 other names Allah has chosen for himself and are placed here as a reminder to believers that their piety will be rewarded with mercy and compassion.
1)
الْحَمْدُ للّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ
Al-Hamdullilahi-rub il-'alameen
"All praise is for Allah, Lord of the Worlds"
This verse begins the praise and description of Allah. The word hamd comes from the verb h-m-d which means to "praise" and thus the noun is "praise". However this word is used exclusively for the praise of Allah, any other form of praise from a human to a human would be described by the verb m-d-h. The letters remain the same but are in a different order. In the trickiness of the Arabic language this could be accidental, or it could be some strange design of the early Arabs. The next two words describe Allah as "The Lord of the Worlds". Specifically the world (this one in which we live) is known as al-'Aalam, but here it is pluralized, and scholars of Islam have posited that this means 10,000 worlds, and that Allah is ruler of all. The question has been bandied about (uselessly as it makes no sense) that this could mean universes, dimensions, or inhabitable planets. All attempts to rationalize Abrahamic faith.
2)
الرَّحْمـنِ الرَّحِيمِ (1:
al-Rahman ir-Raheemi
"The Compassionate The Merciful"
Once again the Qur'an is drawing attention to these two qualities and descriptions of Allah. They remain in the case known as majroor in Arabic, meaning they are either in a genitive form or reside next to a harf al-ma'ana (or are the indeclinable noun). In fact they are a continuation of the description of Allah as "Lord of the Worlds". Thus that he rules these worlds with the exact same compassion that he rules this one, as evidenced by the opening verse.
3)
مَـالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ (
Maaliki Yawm i-deen
"Master of the Day of Faith"
The opening word in this verse is Malik coming from the verb meaning "to own" which is a derivative of all things to do with "kingship", mulk is kingdom. Malik is literally "King". So some would say Allah is "King of the Day of Faith". The "Day of Faith" is simply the Day of Judgment where a person's faith will be tested. The Qur'an is explicit about this last day saying "No other religion (other than Islam) will be accepted of them", meaning that all the Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and any other assorted infidels will be condemned to the hellfire (which is described in both the Qur'an and the Hadith).
4)
إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ
Iyyaka na'badu, wa iyyaka nasta'een
"To you we turn in worship, to you we turn for aid"
This is the transitional verse of which I spoke in my opening remarks. The firt phrase "to you we turn in worship" continues the theme of describing Allah and the believers duty and relationship to him, and the second shifts the theme of the verse to the Muslim as they seek aid from Allah. "Unto you" is fronted here (meaning the direct object is placed before the verb and the subject of the verb, which in Arabic is contained in the verb itself), the verse would have been more tradiontally Arabic if it had use the "you" as an enclitic suffix, saying Na'buduka, but the author of the Qur'an was very specific in making sure that the object was held up as the most important aspect of the verse. Thus using a more poetic construct to front and emphasize the object. The same holds true as the chapter shifts emphasis to the Muslim with iyyaka nasta'een, with similar fronted object (Known in Arabic as the Mafa'ul bihi).
5)
اهدِنَــــا الصِّرَاطَ المُستَقِيمَ
Ihdina al-Sirat al-Mustaqeem
"Guide us (to) the straight path"
This verse begins with an imperative verb, Ihdina with the enclitic suffix "we" (here "na"). The believers are imploring Allah, en masse, for guidance upon the straight path. The word for path al-Sirat is not actually an Arabic word by origin, which is interesting in that Muslims will contend that the Qur'an is the pinnacle of the pure language of Allah. However the word for path here is most likely derived from Latin or some other Mediterranean (pre-Islamic) language. It would be a sore irony for Muslims to think of this 17 times per day in prayer, so it is generally left undiscussed, or simply as a "miracle" of Allah.
6)
صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنعَمتَ عَلَيهِمْ
Sirat aladheena an'amta 'Alayhum
The path of those upon whom you have bestowed your blessings
Again we see the invasion of non-Arabic on the opening chapter of the Qur'an. in the form of Sirat. Now we see the verb na'ma from n-'-m. This literally means to bless or bestow. However the form used is confusing as it uses the second person singular past tense, which denotes familiarity (this is also the case in iyyaka). Usually when Allah describes himself, or when Muslims address him, the royal plurals are used. For instance the royal we or royal you. The second person plural is a sign of respect in Arabic, while the royal we is a sign of arrogance. And by no coincidence Allah describes himself as al-Mutakabar (The Arrogant).
7)
غَيرِ المَغضُوبِ عَلَيهِمْ وَلاَ الضَّالِّينَ
Ghayri maghdubi 'alayhim, wa la Daaleen
"And not those who have earned your anger (condemned) and not those who go astray"
And here we have Allah dedicating the final verse to the non-believers. The Muslim is imploring Allah to spare him/her from the anger he has reserved for these two groups of people. Those who have earned Allah's anger are, of course, the Jews. The Jews angered Allah by killing "his prophets" and other assorted evils traditionally ascribed to Jews in anti-Semitic libels. And who is it who has gone astray? The Christians who bungled Jesus' (Arabic: 'Issa) message and began to worship him as a God. Now this ritual disdaing is encoded in the 17 raka'a (prostration) of prayer performed every day. Daily Muslims are called to remember those whom are ritually disdained in Islam, and eternally disdained by Allah. And by no coincidence, this is the message that Allah leaves for last, and by definition most lasting.
This concludes my exegesis of the opening chapter of the Qur'an. I hope it has been helpful.
Three Cheers for Italy as they Pull out of Durban
Let's hear it for the Italians, who are actually getting it now. Europe might not be totally lost. The Italians have pulled out of Durban. The Daily Telegraph had the following reason:
"Foreign Minister Franco Frattini decided that Italy was withdrawing its delegation because it does not approve of the draft declaration, which contains unacceptable, aggressive and anti-Semitic phrases,'' a spokesman said today.That's right, the OIC is attempting to have Islam held above reproach, while allowing it's own proponents (Imams) to say the following, which went uncondemned in the wider Muslim world:
"Oh Allah, take your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh Allah, take the Jews, the treacherous aggressors. Oh Allah, take this profligate, cunning, arrogant band of people. Oh Allah, they have spread much tyranny and corruption in the land. Pour Your wrath upon them, oh our God. Lie in wait for them. Oh Allah, You annihilated the people of Thamoud at the hand of a tyrant, and You annihilated the people of 'Aad with a fierce, icy gale. Oh Allah, You annihilated the people Thamoud at the hand of a tyrant, You annihilated the people of 'Aad with a fierce, icy gale, and You destroyed the Pharaoh and his soldiers — oh Allah, take this oppressive, tyrannical band of people. Oh Allah, take this oppressive, Jewish, Zionist band of people. Oh Allah, do not spare a single one of them. Oh Allah, count their numbers, and kill them, down to the very last one."A prescient move for the Italians if you ask me. And the Italians hit the nail on the head with the following statement from their foreign ministry, saying attendance of the conference "would lend credibility to the efforts by some states to single out Israel for criticism ... and distract from the very real problems of state-sponsored racism in their own countries.'
I am going out for pizza.'
Aid to the Palestinians
I try to keep things reasonably original around here, but Peggy Shapiro over at "The American Thinker" has written such a wonderful article that I must reword some of that article here and quote some excerpts.
One of the arrows in the quiver of the anti Israel crowd is the amount of aid sent to Israel, on a yearly basis, from the United States. And this isn't untrue, the US sends about $5 billion per year to the state of Israel in the form of loans and other gifts. But what about the money sent to the Palestinians? Well in 2009 the Palestinians are projected to receive $4.5 billion. And considering the Palestinians are about one third the number of Israelis, this works out to a high per capita receipt. In 2008 the Palestinians received $3.5 billion. The 2009 projection would mean over $4,000 per Palestinian household. And if you consider that the Palestinians have stayed "refugees" for 60 years, well the dollars seem to pile up (Palestinian refugee status is inherited generation after generation).
So where did the money go? How did the Palestinians (and their relief agency UNRWA) squander this money? Well first and foremost, the United Nations in its exceptionally finite wisdom staffs the UNRWA with Palestinians, which is a bit curious as it doesn't conduct outside audits of this organization. But the destructive power of an Islamic society is the ultimate cause, and I think it is summed up in this paragraph from Shapiro describing the almost entirely Muslim Gaza Strip:
That is about it right there. Self sabotage. Rampant barbarism, lawlessness, and tribal thuggery are the orders of the day. After 1949 there were roughly 800,000 Jews in Israel and 700,000 Palestinian refugees (some say 800,000). Now let's look at the trajectory of those two peoples who inhabited the same land. It is quite telling indeed.
I would blame the Jews for all my problems if I were a Palestinian. How else would I cover up such gross incompetence, theft, and stupidity.
********
The original article on The American Thinker:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/dollars_for_hate_1.html
One of the arrows in the quiver of the anti Israel crowd is the amount of aid sent to Israel, on a yearly basis, from the United States. And this isn't untrue, the US sends about $5 billion per year to the state of Israel in the form of loans and other gifts. But what about the money sent to the Palestinians? Well in 2009 the Palestinians are projected to receive $4.5 billion. And considering the Palestinians are about one third the number of Israelis, this works out to a high per capita receipt. In 2008 the Palestinians received $3.5 billion. The 2009 projection would mean over $4,000 per Palestinian household. And if you consider that the Palestinians have stayed "refugees" for 60 years, well the dollars seem to pile up (Palestinian refugee status is inherited generation after generation).
So where did the money go? How did the Palestinians (and their relief agency UNRWA) squander this money? Well first and foremost, the United Nations in its exceptionally finite wisdom staffs the UNRWA with Palestinians, which is a bit curious as it doesn't conduct outside audits of this organization. But the destructive power of an Islamic society is the ultimate cause, and I think it is summed up in this paragraph from Shapiro describing the almost entirely Muslim Gaza Strip:
Even if there is a miraculous shift in the Palestinian government and UNRWA opens its books to pubic scrutiny, money won't address the problems of a people who are so indoctrinated against Israel that hate trumps survival. When Ariel Sharon forced Gaza's Jewish inhabitants to move out, they left behind state-of-the-art greenhouses which produced high-end flowers, fruits, and vegetables to large international markets. Expecting the greenhouses to be an economic boon for Palestinian Gazans and thus a step towards peace, American Jewish donors contributed $14 million to buy the greenhouses from their owners and transfer them to the Palestinian Authority. Former World Bank president James Wolfensohn, who acted as the broker, threw in half a million dollars of his own money to make the deal happen. Within hours after the disengagement, Palestinians looted and destroyed the greenhouses even though they were destroying their own chances for an economic revival.
That is about it right there. Self sabotage. Rampant barbarism, lawlessness, and tribal thuggery are the orders of the day. After 1949 there were roughly 800,000 Jews in Israel and 700,000 Palestinian refugees (some say 800,000). Now let's look at the trajectory of those two peoples who inhabited the same land. It is quite telling indeed.
I would blame the Jews for all my problems if I were a Palestinian. How else would I cover up such gross incompetence, theft, and stupidity.
********
The original article on The American Thinker:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/dollars_for_hate_1.html
Thursday, March 5, 2009
CAIR Complains about Muslims Getting Caught Plotting Jihad
Leave it to the Council on American Islamic Relations (an unindicted co-conspirator in a terror case) to come to the defense of jihadists plotting murder, instead of the law enforcement agencies who are attempting to stop them.
That is right, CAIR is now complaining because the FBI had infiltrated an Orange County (California) mosque. The undercover agent recorded Ahmadullah Niazi (the brother-in-law of one of Bin Laden's bodyguards) talking about blowing up buildings, acquiring weapons and sending money to jihadists in Afghanistan.
What did CAIR have to say?:
“infiltrating mainstream mosques the way FBI informants infiltrate white supremacist groups illustrates the FBI’s perception of American Muslims as a community that must be constantly monitored, instead of being treated as an equal partner in fighting crime and terrorism.”
That's right, the problem isn't that American mosques are centers of radicalism and terrorist plots its that the FBI is actually doing what it is supposed to do. Americans pay taxes so that the FBI will identify suspicious people and act against them in accordance with the laws and Constitution of the United States. to prevent terrorist attacks that will kill or harm American citizens. Of course CAIR wants Muslims to be seen as "equal partners". Why don't they start by turning over these kind of preachers and actively eschewing this kind of talk and behavior? CAIR continues to refuse to condemn Hamas, funny how that works.
The prosecutor for the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 said that the recruitment, training, and weapons transactions actually occurred inside of mosques. This is nothing new, Jihadists in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan repeatedly use mosques to store deadly weapons and launch attacks, then cry foul when the very people they are attempting to kill attack them inside their mosques. The jihadists militarize their mosques, and then complain when that comes back to bite them.
This certainly explains why the FBI has broken off its relationship with CAIR. CAIR actively uses the pretense of civil rights to better disguise the fact that there is a minority (however small) of American Muslims who are actively plotting violent jihad, in of all places, the houses of worship of the "religion of peace".
That is right, CAIR is now complaining because the FBI had infiltrated an Orange County (California) mosque. The undercover agent recorded Ahmadullah Niazi (the brother-in-law of one of Bin Laden's bodyguards) talking about blowing up buildings, acquiring weapons and sending money to jihadists in Afghanistan.
What did CAIR have to say?:
“infiltrating mainstream mosques the way FBI informants infiltrate white supremacist groups illustrates the FBI’s perception of American Muslims as a community that must be constantly monitored, instead of being treated as an equal partner in fighting crime and terrorism.”
That's right, the problem isn't that American mosques are centers of radicalism and terrorist plots its that the FBI is actually doing what it is supposed to do. Americans pay taxes so that the FBI will identify suspicious people and act against them in accordance with the laws and Constitution of the United States. to prevent terrorist attacks that will kill or harm American citizens. Of course CAIR wants Muslims to be seen as "equal partners". Why don't they start by turning over these kind of preachers and actively eschewing this kind of talk and behavior? CAIR continues to refuse to condemn Hamas, funny how that works.
The prosecutor for the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 said that the recruitment, training, and weapons transactions actually occurred inside of mosques. This is nothing new, Jihadists in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan repeatedly use mosques to store deadly weapons and launch attacks, then cry foul when the very people they are attempting to kill attack them inside their mosques. The jihadists militarize their mosques, and then complain when that comes back to bite them.
This certainly explains why the FBI has broken off its relationship with CAIR. CAIR actively uses the pretense of civil rights to better disguise the fact that there is a minority (however small) of American Muslims who are actively plotting violent jihad, in of all places, the houses of worship of the "religion of peace".
HTML Links Dun Werk
I cannot get the html links to work properly on either of the blogs I run. Must be my computer... Steve Jobs watch your ass, I am pissed. Anyhow, I shall repost my rant from Quidnuncs here:
**********************************************************************
***********************************************
Since it didn't work I will now add a Hail Mary:
"Hail Ricky Martin, full of grease, the FSM is with thee, blessed art thou amongst boy bands, blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jeebus, Holy Martin mother of Menudo pray for us sinners now and at the hour of hour next big attempt to link html. Amen."
If that doesn't get html working, I might have to talk to a tech nerd..... Any takers?
**********************************************************************
Oh fer Chrissakes. I can’t get the html links to work on this computer of mine. This is clearly divine retribution for years of inattentive behavior…. and of course Bachanalian revelry at every chance I got.
I pray, oh Flying Spaghetti Monster, return my ability to link html!!! The FSM giveth, the FSM taketh away. I think an “Our Father” ought to clear this up.
“Our Spaghetti, who art in Las Vegas, hallowed be thy name, the 4 course meal come, thy will be done, in my bunker in an undisclosed location, as it is in Vegas, forgive us our drunken fumblings with sorority girls as we forgive those who fondle us, for fuck’s sake lead us into temptation, and deliver us a pizza. Amen.”
Damn, still no html links… grrrr.
Since it didn't work I will now add a Hail Mary:
"Hail Ricky Martin, full of grease, the FSM is with thee, blessed art thou amongst boy bands, blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jeebus, Holy Martin mother of Menudo pray for us sinners now and at the hour of hour next big attempt to link html. Amen."
If that doesn't get html working, I might have to talk to a tech nerd..... Any takers?
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Anti-Blashpemy Laws at the UN
Resolution 62/154 (nonbinding) is an attempt to block free speech when such speech offends Islam. The entire resolution is some bit of Orwellian quackery that boggles the mind when one attempts to imagine what kind of person would write it. One paragraph from the preamble reads thus:
This is just the beginning, much like Hitler militarizing the Rheinland, it is only a small taste of what is to come. It is a central tenet of the Shariah that those who insult Muhammad be put to death. This is one of his self aggrandizing proclamations, rendering himself, and his faith, above reproach. Such self laudatory proclamations are the norm of Muhammad and his ficticious Allah. This became a problem in Andalusian Spain when the Zahiri (a now defunct literalists school of Sunni jurisprudence) and Maliki Qadis (judges) found themselves in an awkward position as Christian monks would scamper down to the local court and defame Muhammad and generally blaspheme in all directions in order to incur a death sentence and become a martyr for Christ.
This is where we are heading. Islam is not a faith which makes concessions, it isn't a faith that will say "You give us Shariah, and we will go easy on gays in Iran". No, it is only one way. Nothing is gained for civilized society by allowing such a resolution to become even "non-binding". Here is another passage from the "resolution":
There will be no reciprocation of "tolerance", there will only be more rope taken, just like appeasing Hitler in his violations of the Treaty of Versailles, we will be setting ourselves up for catastrophy. We cannot afford to appease this any longer. It is one thing to have Muslims dictate the parameters of society in Muslim countries (this is self determination) but now we have the whimpering cowards in the west who will be allowing Muslims to dictate the parameters of our own societies. Stop the Quislings, stop Shariah.
First they came for Geert Wilders, but I wasn't a conservative, so I didn't speak up....
Now they are coming for you. It is time to speak up.
Underlining the importance of increasing contacts at all levels in order to deepen dialogue and reinforce understanding among different cultures, religions, beliefs and civilizations, and welcoming in this regard the Declaration and Programme of Action adopted by the Ministerial Meeting on Human Rights and Cultural Diversity of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, held in Tehran on 3 and 4 September 2007.Excuse me? "Deepen dialogue", "reinforce understanding"? Can someone show me where exactly Muslims are attempting to "reinforce understanding" between religions? Would that be in Saudi Arabia where no Churches or Synagogues are allowed to exist? Where you must be Muslim to be a citizen? Where the Qur'an is its constitution which says that on the Day of Judgment (Yawm al-Qiyama) that Islam is the only religion acceptable to Allah and "No other religion will be accepted from them"? Is this the kind of reinforcement we are hearing about? Or is it the reinforcement of understanding that the Iranians engage in when they persecute Baha'is? Or when they host Holocaust denial conferences? Is this the reinforcement that mandates the persecution of Ahmedis?
This is just the beginning, much like Hitler militarizing the Rheinland, it is only a small taste of what is to come. It is a central tenet of the Shariah that those who insult Muhammad be put to death. This is one of his self aggrandizing proclamations, rendering himself, and his faith, above reproach. Such self laudatory proclamations are the norm of Muhammad and his ficticious Allah. This became a problem in Andalusian Spain when the Zahiri (a now defunct literalists school of Sunni jurisprudence) and Maliki Qadis (judges) found themselves in an awkward position as Christian monks would scamper down to the local court and defame Muhammad and generally blaspheme in all directions in order to incur a death sentence and become a martyr for Christ.
This is where we are heading. Islam is not a faith which makes concessions, it isn't a faith that will say "You give us Shariah, and we will go easy on gays in Iran". No, it is only one way. Nothing is gained for civilized society by allowing such a resolution to become even "non-binding". Here is another passage from the "resolution":
...while manifestations of cultural prejudice, intolerance and xenophobia towards people belonging to different cultures, religions and beliefs generate hatred and violence among peoples and nations throughout the world.Oh this is too rich. Where were these multitudes of Muslim humanists when Yusuf Qaradawi said of Jews:
"Oh Allah, take your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh Allah, take the Jews, the treacherous aggressors. Oh Allah, take this profligate, cunning, arrogant band of people. Oh Allah, they have spread much tyranny and corruption in the land. Pour Your wrath upon them, oh our God. Lie in wait for them. Oh Allah, You annihilated the people of Thamoud at the hand of a tyrant, and You annihilated the people of 'Aad with a fierce, icy gale. Oh Allah, You annihilated the people Thamoud at the hand of a tyrant, You annihilated the people of 'Aad with a fierce, icy gale, and You destroyed the Pharaoh and his soldiers — oh Allah, take this oppressive, tyrannical band of people. Oh Allah, take this oppressive, Jewish, Zionist band of people. Oh Allah, do not spare a single one of them. Oh Allah, count their numbers, and kill them, down to the very last one."Wouldn't this count as generating "hatred and violence among peoples and nations throughout the world"? But you see, the Jews really deserve it, I suppose. This explains the nearly ubiquitous praise for Hitler which emenates from every anti-Israel rally where Muslims are present.
There will be no reciprocation of "tolerance", there will only be more rope taken, just like appeasing Hitler in his violations of the Treaty of Versailles, we will be setting ourselves up for catastrophy. We cannot afford to appease this any longer. It is one thing to have Muslims dictate the parameters of society in Muslim countries (this is self determination) but now we have the whimpering cowards in the west who will be allowing Muslims to dictate the parameters of our own societies. Stop the Quislings, stop Shariah.
First they came for Geert Wilders, but I wasn't a conservative, so I didn't speak up....
Now they are coming for you. It is time to speak up.
Hezbollah Operative: "We used to have sex with Syrian hookers"
In the ongoing campaign of attempting to dispel the notion that the violent and despicable actions of Muslims have nothing to do with Islam, the following story came to my attention:
An interview with Hezbollah operative Rami 'Aleiq...
****
An interview with Hezbollah operative Rami 'Aleiq...
****
Interviewer: "When you were young, you were a thug. You stabbed your sister with a knife because she didn't want to wear the hijab. You were 14 years old at the time."
Rami 'Aleiq: "Right."
"We Would Have Sex With Prostitutes For 500 Syrian Lira per Half Hour... In Islam... A Girl Is Mature from the Age of Nine... I Was a Child, and So Was She... I Was Not Allowed to Touch Her" Without Contracting a Pleasure-Marriage
http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD226909
****
This of course refers to the Shi'a practice of Zawaj Muta'a (temporary marriage). A man, who leaves home for a business trip of vacation (or just wants to go down to the local brothel), may make a temporary marriage contract with a woman (who is not his wife), and can make this contract for as long as he wants or as short as one day.
Once again we see the inherent respect for women in Islam.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
