A poster at Jihad Watch wrote recently: "There was a man from the Muslim Canadian Congress on who seemed like a decent, thoughtful man. But, when asked about the death sentence for apostasy, he said he would not say if it was right or wrong. He said he was troubled by it and agreed that most Muslim scholars interpreted the text as meaning what it says: apostates must be killed. So, he is troubled by it, but he won't renounce it. Why the heck not?"
He will not renounce it for the same reason that Hamid Mir accuses Robert Spencer of forcing him, Hamid Mir, by pointing out the real contents of Qur'an and Hadith, to learn of certain disturbing and unpleasant teachings of Islam and, having learned about them, accept them in toto.
For Hamid Mir asked Robert: "Why are you pushing me to adopt a more radical form of Islam?"
What Hamid Mir is admitting to is that he does not possess the moral freedom to weigh things and choose for himself. If it turns out that Islam says thus and so, as Robert maintains, then the supposedly heretofore innocent-of-all-this-unpleasant-stuff Hamid Mir has no choice: if it turns out to be part of Islam, then he must slavishly obey.
That is why he accuses Robert of forcing nice moderate Muslims such as -- Hamid Mir -- of having now to accept, and follow, the unpleasant commands of Islam that Robert has apparently uncovered, and that before Robert Spencer came along, Muslims such as Hamid Mir simply didn't know about. And how is Robert doing this forcing? By pointing out what the contents of the canonical texts (Qur'an, Hadith, Sira -- that is, the canonical biographies of Muhammad) actually contain.
An absurdity from first to last.
But of great significance is the admission that no matter what the Qur'an and Hadith might say, if they say it, then Hamid Mir will slavishly obey. For what is Islam but a belief-system that is uninterrupted by the workings of the individual conscience? In Islam, there is no mental freedom. You must submit. You must yield to the submission that Islam demands of its adherents. You cannot examine critically. You cannot consider, as Jews and Christians not only consider but recognize, that your own belief-system may not lie outside time, but has been created within history, at a certain time and a certain place and for certain aims. In the case of Islam, the goal was to create an Arab national religion at a time when the Arabs were already starting to conquer other, much richer, more industrious, wealthier, more settled communities of Christians and Jews (and a little later, Zoroastrians). The aim in the case of Islam was both to justify and promote the conquest of non-Muslim lands and peoples by the Muslim Arabs.
Whatever Allah tells him in the Qur'an, Hamid Mir will obey. That's what he says, that's what he reveals, when he exclaims to Robert, "Why are you pushing me to adopt a more radical form of Islam?"
The mentality of a slave, openly recognizing that he is a slave, and who refuses to be anything but a slave, who is ready to submit -- to Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira.
For Islam demands submission. Submission is all. Not thought, not questioning, not deciding that some parts must be rejected. Submission to the declared will of Allah. It is a religion that encourages mental slavery, that demands mental slavery. Some escape by becoming apostates. Others can't do that, don't know quite how to do that. So they pretend and live a lie, based on willful ignorance.
But now there is no room for willful ignorance. Everything is now capable of being known, and is being more widely known, among Infidels too, so there is no longer a possibility of denying or pretending. Those who call themselves Muslims must choose. The jihadi recruiters are asking them to choose. And so should Infidels.
Once to every man and nation/Comes the moment to decide.
It's up to them. If they continue to call themselves loyal Muslims, after learning and digesting thoroughly what Islam is all about, that is a declaration of war on Infidels. The war may be conducted openly, or it may be conducted through the deception that Muhammad talked about ("War is deception") and certainly practiced. But they should be seen as soldiers in that war being conducted against all Infidels -- perhaps not active soldiers, perhaps merely on inactive duty, in the reserves, but soldiers nonetheless in an army of enemy aliens whose hostility to us has no end, because no end to such hostility is permitted by the Qur'an and Sunnah. And that must be grasped and thoroughly assimilated by Infidels.
Hamid Mir need not remain on the side of the mujahedin, on the side of the Qur’an and Sunnah, now that there is no question that he knows the bases of their teachings. What he chooses to do now will be telling.
I don't think we even have to wait to see what Hamid Mir will do. It is obvious through his contact with OBL and Al-Qaeda that he has already made his decision!
http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com
085.019-020
YUSUFALI: And yet the Unbelievers (persist) in rejecting (the Truth)! But Allah doth encompass them from behind! Nay, this is a Glorious Qur'an, (inscribed) in a Tablet Preserved!
Of course he has no choice. The Qur'an is perfect is it not?
Whereas principles of Biblical exegesis allow for entertaining a more perspicuous verse to arbitrate a derivative meaning from two verses otherwise in seeming conflict, the Islamic doctrine of al-nasikh wa al-mansukh allows a verse to merely cancel the hukm of another (Surah 2:106).
Hence the constant recrudescence to wooden literalism (and decapitations and such). This compounded by the closure of the "gates of ijtihad" in the Abassid era, with reduction to four schools of jurisprudence, in happy unanimity with regard to jihad and dhimmitude, where the newborn wooden literalist can find a happy nest.
The rise of smorgasbord Muslims is of no comfort in the ongoing search for the theologically "moderate" Muslim. They are merely damp fuses that will eventually dry out and spark in the "heat and light" of the Qur'an and its overheated literalist votaries.
We need to ridicule these people, instead of taking them at their word. Their words mean nothing. The game of playing "mollify the Infidels" is long over. We need to read the Koran, point out the tacit teachings in regards to jihad and dhimmitude of the infidels, and make them defend what THEY KNOW to be indefensible.
So if thats true, why the insistance that people learn about Islam and the Quran?
This article should be disconcerting to Mr. Hamid Mir.
In that Mr. Hamid Mir is a muslim I do not expect him to respond. By nature muslims seem to be intellectually deficient cowards compared to the properly trained western mind.
This in itself may not be enough to save our civilization from the muslim invasion/cancer, but at least we have a chance.
Of course, it's not a matter of forcing Hamid Mir to adopt a more radical form of Islam, but to admit, to himself and others, that there really is only one form of Islam.
That some Muslims do not know what Islam teaches, or that some ignore what it teaches, or that some lie about what it teaches, does not negate what it teaches.
That some Muslims do not know what Islam teaches, or that some ignore what it teaches, or that some lie about what it teaches, does not negate what it teaches.
Posted by: PRCS
c'mon.. does anyone REALLY think this guy Mir doesn't know what is written in the koran??!! I mean if WE know what the koran really means how can anyone possibly assume that ANY moslem doesn't know??!
it's all part of Taqquiya!!
When they don;t know what to answer when you bring up the facts they say oh i dind't know. Sounds like an awful lot of post-war Germans to me. Only we're in a Pre-war state now. it's a cold war right now in the sense that only one side is fighting it.
He said he was troubled by it and agreed that most Muslim scholars interpreted the text as meaning what it says: apostates must be killed.
At least he was "troubled" by it, and accepted that it means what it says.
Tony Delroy's "Nightlife" radio show had a couple of
"moderate Muslims" on Wednesday night, & when a caller asked about verses in Koran (such as 8:18) that call for the slaying of infidels, the moderate voices said they would be "surprised" if such verses could be found, and were "very positive" they were not from the Koran.
Podcast /MP3 is at
http://abc.net.au/nightlife/stories/Muslim_Voi_m1325900.Mp3
Question & response is at the 33:30 minute mark, approx - near the end of podcast.
Wednesday Nightlife
Moderate Muslim voices in Australia. In the recent
debate we've heard about the extreems but what
about the people who fall into the middle? Tonight
Tony Delroy is jjined by Randa Abdel Fattah,
lawyer and author of "Ten Things I Hate About
Myself" and Ghassan Al Shatter for the Centre of
Arab and Islamic Studies at the ANU.
So we hear that this Moslem man has a conscience? God himself has put within each and every man on earth the ability to know right and wrong. On this we will all be judged. May this man have the courage to obey his conscience.
"What Hamid Mir is admitting to is that he does not possess the moral freedom to weigh things and choose for himself. If it turns out that Islam says thus and so, as Robert maintains, then the supposedly heretofore innocent-of-all-this-unpleasant-stuff Hamid Mir has no choice: if it turns out to be part of Islam, then he must slavishly obey."
That is extremely insightful. You have made good sense of something that previously appeared (to me at least) to make no sense at all. But that also means that given this Muslim mindset, there is some truth to the claim that explaining what Islam actually teaches, creates extremists. (Not to be confused with the issue of being responsible for them becoming extremists. But still, something of a dilemma, perhaps, when you're dealing with this kind of mindset.)
germaninamerica,
I suspect that Hamid Mir belongs in the second or third group from my post, for I am not sure exactly what knowledge he has of Islam.
You may recall Mukhtaran Mai, a Pakistani woman who was gang raped in 2002 on the orders of her tribal council.
She would be in the first category; for she was illiterate at the time of the rape.
Some Muslims really don't know what Islam actually teaches.
posted by PRCS
I suspect that Hamid Mir belongs in the second or third group from my post, for I am not sure exactly what knowledge he has of Islam.
Mr Mir is aware of these passages and his intentions are to soothe the non-muslims to have the operational extremeists continue as usual.
When you talk about the illiterate I'd like to add on that illiteration is kept for the only purpose to outnumber the 'infidels'.
The only thing to combat this is to make it clear that we know the system and that we will not indulge it any longer.
You may recall Mukhtaran Mai, a Pakistani woman who was gang raped in 2002 on the orders of her tribal council.
She would be in the first category; for she was illiterate at the time of the rape.
Some Muslims really don't know what Islam actually teaches.
Perhaps its time for those who haven't read it yet to search a bit about sex in islam
http://civoc.com/newsline/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=9
Arnie,
I haven't read anything by Mir that would allow me to assess his knowledge of Islam. Have you?
And you'll have to help me out here:
"When you talk about the illiterate I'd like to add on that illiteration is kept for the only purpose to outnumber the 'infidels'."
P.S. Have you listened to the broadcast listed by Xaragma above?
Podcast /MP3 is at
http://abc.net.au/nightlife/stories/Muslim_Voi_m1325900.Mp3
I'd say the Muslim woman is definately in group three.
I'd say the Muslim woman is definately in group three.
We need to implement global rules, so that everyone who is held captive by islam can savely get out.
A difficult task but
MISSION POSSIBLE
http://civoc.com/newsline/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=9&limit=1&limitstart=1
Arnie,
Many do not want out. It's all they know.
What we really need, IMO, is a national discussion about what Islam really does teach, and an acknowledgement by Muslims that some aspects of Islam, if carried out, violate the US Constitution and our laws.
Americans, generally ignorant about Islam, are bombarded by the press, politicians, and Muslim advocacy groups with the ROP message; as a result, they think they've been properly informed.
I would love to have congress hold such hearings (probably won't happen until after we're nuked).
'Freedom of speech' for Mohammedans means they don't charge you for your opinion, but if its not to their liking, you'll be axed at once:
http://forums.muslimvillage.net/index.php?act=boardrules
"illiteration..."
-- from a poster above
Some Muslims may attempt to use their supposed ignorance of the contents of the Qur'an based on their own illiteracy as a defense against Western charges. If they can't read, supposedly they can't possibly be held to knowledge of, the contents of the canonical books. But they have been taught quite enough from their imams, and from the societies suffused with Islam that they grow up within. And now audiocassettes, videocassettes, satellite television, all make clear to the illiterate what Islam teaches. In many villages in Afghanistan or Indonesia or Pakistan, even if they are illiterate, are unfamiliar with the tenets expressed in Qur'an and Hadith about Muslim treatment and attitudes toward Infidels, or those of Muhammad, so worthy of emulation?
One might call this, echoing Churchill, "apt illiteration's artful aid."
Another Churchill.
l recently listened on talk radio with Robert speaking about his book. it was with Dennis Praeger, and he asked Robert if you follow the Koran does that make you a terrorist..(l am paraphrasing) that was the only fuzzy question and answer l heard on the whole interveiw, l think Robert was trying to convey that not all who follow the Koran are terrorist. but those muslim terrorists all follow the koran. and Dennis Praeger although one of the best talk show hosts, just could not grasp that the Koran is actually evil. l think many Westerners tend to treat all religions as equal. soon l hope they will connect the dots.
One might call this, echoing Churchill, "apt illiteration's artful aid."
Some may; others are too busy trying to feed their families.
"'One might call this, echoing Churchill, "apt illiteration's artful aid.'"
Some may; others are too busy trying to feed their families."
-- from an unnecessarily acidulous, and mistaken, poster above
But surely one can be busy "trying to feed" one's family and also take pleasure in words, in language well rather than ill-wrough. The traditional entertainments of those without money, after all, are words and sex.. And sometimes, in entertainments generated from the folk rather than concocted in Hollywood and forced down our collective throats, words and sex can be united in song. Cockney rhyming slang cost nothing. Word-play is free. The ginguettes of the quartiers populaires in Paris cost next to nothing. But that was in the old days. How many Cockneys in sight of Bow Bells today? And as to France, les guingettes ont ferme ses volets.
Now, in the Iron Age first of Television and now of the Computer, the Age of False Abundance, that word-based entertainment can be found only in pockets of resistance, here and there, to things as they are. Forty years ago students of working-class society, urban and rural, such as Richard Hoggart (“The Uses of Literacy”) and Peter Laslett ("The World We Have Lost") analyzed and rather than bemoan themselves, left their readers to bemoan. But they were living in quasi-paradisiacal times, before the flood. We are post-diluvian, just keeping afloat, fluctuat nec mergitur – keeping afloat just the way I am barefly managing to do, even if a poster above apparently thinks that my play with language or allusion must reflect the leisure of a well-heeled rentier, relying on a storehouse acquired in idle hours. .
How wrong he is. And how right I wish he were.
"How wrong he is. And how right I wish he were."
Posted by: Hugh
Have you considered collecting your "Tributes" and selected other illuminations into a handsome bound volume? "A Guide to Islamic Apologists, Eurodhimmis and Other Media Whores", replete with photos, candid comments, and, of course, the ever pleasant assessments of your work. Include something outlandishly controversial about the MSM talking heads or, better, Prince Charles to boost sales.
Silly me.
The obvious thing would be to put GWB on the cover. You've got enough material on him to fill volume I. Even Cindy Sheehan would buy it.
"But of great significance is the admission that no matter what the Qur'an and Hadith might say, if they say it, then Hamid Mir will slavishly obey. For what is Islam but a belief-system that is uninterrupted by the workings of the individual conscience? In Islam, there is no mental freedom. You must submit. You must yield to the submission that Islam demands of its adherents. You cannot examine critically."
Wow. Thank you, Hugh Fitzgerald, for another thought-provoking article.
I think I understand but it's hard to get my mind around this. My mother always said that post-secondary education teaches a person to think. How is it that so many of the new batch of terrorists are highly educated men? Are their slavish minds not liberated by education? How are they able to bifurcate their minds to allow analysis and rational thought about their topics at school and in the workplace but not apply it to their religion?
What keeps them enthralled and enslaved to their religion? For those who are able to think rationally about other things, it must be a terrible fear. If the Koran can be wrong or if Allah can be unjust about one thing, then wouldn't the whole house of cards come crashing down? And what does it mean to someone to face that loss of religion which includes a rigid system for living? You'd be facing possible punishment or death on earth and possible eternal damnation. You'd have to examine every thought and every belief. You would be shunned by family and friends and would lose your "community". Is this enough to make the mind shut down and choose to remain a slave?
There must be a certain amount of cultish mind control in Islam. The prayers five times a day, the recitation of verses, all must serve to perpetuate the slave mind.
"Some Muslims may attempt to use their supposed ignorance of the contents of the Qur'an based on their own illiteracy as a defense against Western charges."
Some may. Others are too busy just trying to feed their families.
My original thought:
That some Muslims do not know what Islam teaches, or that some ignore what it teaches, or that some lie about what it teaches, does not negate what it teaches.
Illiterate Muslims believe what they've been taught about Islam, not what they have personally read. And that education may not always comport with Qur'an, hadith, and sira.
Add in local customs and an illiterate Tajik peasant's practice of Islam likely differs from that followed in Bangladesh.
Few in those environments spend much time honing their Churchillian illiteration skills.
The posting above makes me wonder if indeed I misunderstood. For if I did, then I must change the addressee of my reply/retort, and do it bashfully and abashedly. Instead, I will address it to a more general To Whom It May Concern.
"Cet animal est tres mechant/Si on l'attaque, il se defend."
If I think I am attacked, I attack right back. But if I misunderstood in the first place, and there was no attack and hence no need to deflect assorted slings and arrows, then I withdraw each and every allegaton of my original plaintiff's complaint. But the observations generated can still be permitted to stand as they transcend the moment, and do not date.
Methinks Hamid Mir is practicing on his Taqiyya.
You cannot go to over 80 percent of the mosques in the USA without being hammered every Friday with Wahabbi-Moslem-Brotherhood hate speech: kill the Jews and Infidels, apes and pigs, etc. Or could Hamid be going to one of 20 percent(-) of the supposed mosques for moderates that ignore the Koran? Is ignore the right word here? Are there such mosques? I would not bet on it.
No attack, sir. Merely an unintentionally acidulous and inarticulate statement on my part.
Indeed, there are those who do practice to deceive.
For the record, I suspect that Hamid Mir IS, most likely, an accomplished illiterationalist.
He, and other literate Muslims, should be challenged at every opportunity with the actual texts of their own 'faith'.
That given, I look forward to possible future debates between he, or Edina Lekovic, and RS.
The fact that I can read such open wizened comments from so many makes me feel better about the task at hand. I don't feel so alone in my worry about this particularly violent, virulent religion.
Does anyone know what happened to the poster JihadLove who was on here last week. He was a recent young convert to Islam who was unaware of the apostasy rules, until informed by this site.
Did he just decide to stop posting or did he change his name to something more appropriate.
Are you still here Jihaddlove and what are your thoughts about this thoughtful essay by Hugh and your feelings towards your new religion now you are little more aware of its teachings?
Once the mass of mutant muslim minds enters and accepts the 21st century many of them will become willing apostates. The rest who don't will just die off. They will have to admit to the lies, hate, and falsehoods of their brainwashing books. Feeling betrayed and used by Mohammed they will convert to other religions. Weak minded people, able to be bullied and manipulated by crazy men.