Islamic supremacist pseudo-moderate Reza Aslan claims Ahmadinejad is a liberal reformer

Reza is an amazing individual ! And I don't mean that in a positive way.

" The new Fritz Kuhn " is indeed an accurate description.

"Iran's Global Terrorist Reach"

(by Walid Phares)

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2010/07/irans_global_terrorist_reach.php

The petulant adolescent darling...

He's educated beyond his intelligence...Once he grows up he will just be petulant...

Gentlemen and Ladies, again, in my infinite wisdom, I issue the missive:

Don't let the other side fool you with your own (English) words.

This guy Azlan is a particularly greasy Anti- anti -Islamopube...or is it "Islamoprobe"?

His words:

"suggesting that Israel should be "wiped from the map." But even that case said as much about our limited understanding of him and his context as it did about Ahmadinejad himself. The expression "wipe from the map" means "destroy" in English but not in Farsi. In Farsi, it means not that Israel should be eliminated but that the existing political borders should literally be wiped from a literal map and replaced with those of historic Palestine."
_________________________________________________________

Boy, this is rich - I'm not sure where to begin, but the phrase:

"it means not that Israel should be eliminated but that the existing political borders should literally be wiped from a literal map and replaced with those of historic Palestine."

Just for starters, I would pose the following "riddle":

Define "political" borders.

Then I would ask,"Please explain what you mean when you say 'literal', Mohammedan"?

Then, finally, I would ask him to gently place a beso on my finely - honed Saxon Buddha a**.

Love,

Deebartok

oh yeah, by the way: VIVA ISRAEL SIEMPRE!!

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but again, read carefully:

"But even that case said as much about our limited understanding of him and his context as it did about Ahmadinejad himself."

WHAT?!

This is Islamic mumbo-jumbo.

This is not the result of petulant monkeys in Riyadh with less-than-stellar web translation apps.; nor does it have the slightest whit to do with context.

This is out-and-out verbal warfare with greasy Azlan-boy and his fellow supremacists.

big picture. why does he exist? he obviously feels he has a need to defend mohommedism. if he didn't, what would his job be? the very fact he has to defend it means its offended a lot of people.

OT but the same thug and Iran

http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2011/01/iran-on-%E2%80%9Cexecution-binge%E2%80%9D-immediate-moratorium-urged/

Ahmedinejad is a liberal reformer? Okay, now what did Reza bump his head into before he came up with that one?

Isn't Ahmedinejad a member of a sect known as the "Twelvers", which were banned during Khomeini's rule for being "too radical"? If you're too radical of Khomeini, passing yourself off as a liberal reformer is probably not going to be easy.

"The Iran Threat: President Ahmadinejad and the Coming Nuclear Crisis" is the book which alerted the American public to the dangers of the Iranian nuclear program.

The author,Alireza Jafarzadeh, also includes much material about Ahmedinejad. Ahmedinejad was likely one of the leaders of the student takeover of the US embassy in Iran, and was known as one of the most brutal of the participants. Ahmedinejad was also known for his brutality in enforcing the interests of the Revolutionary Guards. He may indeed be slightly more supportive of women's rights than the mullahs who put him into office, and may be a bit more willing to make conciliatory statements.

Truthfully, it doesn't make a lot of difference to the US and likely not to Israel. The link posted by Thomas Pellon above, which I highly recommend, shows the immense danger to US interests that Iran poses worldwide, through it's intelligence and terror networks. Amadinejad shows up in every one of the areas where Iran is attempting to extend its influence. So, in what way should we change our view of him? Is he still not a deadly danger to the US, as well as to any Iranian with any hope of lifting the boot of Islam from their necks?

The very idea of looking for a good Muslim amongst the leaders of Iran is a curious premise to begin with. Where does that come from? Regardless of whether it's Ahmedinnahjacket or whoever. Why spend time & energy looking for the good guys there? Why presume there are any good guys in Iran? Is there going to be a coup d'etat? Is there going to be a Putsch , miraculously turning the tables and saving the world? Wishful thinking as usual. Some Americans, readers of Atlantic, can easily fall prey to wishful thinking of all sorts.

I think assland is good for anti jihadists--the guy thinks people are stupid and that is never a good strategy when trying to peddle manure to farmers. Did you know that according to assland, in Arabic "Kill them wherever you find them" actually means "buy them a cup of coffee wherever you find them." And if you believe that, you probably also think chickens have hips.

oh, and his first name is arze

How Reza Aslan whitewashes Muhammad's caravan raids

First, notice how Aslan, on pages 82 and 83 of his book No god but God, makes Muhammad's caravan raids look bloodless:

By declaring Yathrib a sanctuary city, Muhammad was deliberately challenging Mecca's religious and economic hegemony over the Peninsula. And just to make sure the Quraysh got the message, he sent his followers out into the desert to take part in the time-honored Arab tradition of caravan raiding.

In pre-Islamic Arabia, caravan raiding was a legitimate means for small clans to benefit from the wealth of larger ones. It was in no way considered stealing, and as long as no violence occurred and no blood was shed, there was no need for retribution. The raiding party would quickly descend on a caravan -- usually at its rear -- and carry off whatever they could get their hands on before being discovered. These periodic raids were certainly a nuisance for the caravan leaders, but in general they were considered part of the innate hazards of transporting large amounts of goods through a vast and unprotected desert.

Though small and sporadic at first, Muhammad's raids not only provided the Ummah with desperately needed income, they also effectively disrupted the trade flowing in and out of Mecca...

[The Muslim raiders] encouraged each other, and decided to kill as many as they could of them and take what they had. Waqid shot Amr bin al-Hadrami with an arrow and killed him...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

How Reza Aslan misleads about Muhammad's marriage to 9-year-old Aisha

Notice how Aslan, on pages 64 and 65 of his book No god but God claims that Muhammad did not consummate his marriage to Aisha when she was 9:

...Aisha...was nine years old when betrothed to the Prophet...And while Muhammad's union with a nine-year-old girl may be shocking to our modern sensibilities, his betrothal to Aisha was just that: a betrothal. Aisha did not consummate her marriage to Muhammad until after reaching puberty...

Why doesn't Aslan mention what the core Islamic texts tell us?

From Sahih al-Bukhari, the most canonical hadith collection:

1. Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64:

Narrated 'Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

2. Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65:

Narrated 'Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)."

3. Sahih, Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88:

Narrated 'Ursa:

The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

4. Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236:

Narrated Hisham's father:

Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

-------------------------------------

Many other core Islamic texts could be quoted in a similar vein.

It should be noted that Aisha was nine lunar years old. Since a lunar year is about 355 days, Aisha may actually have been eight.

Reza Aslan is untrustworthy, at best.

According to core Islamic texts, Muhammad was in his fifties when he consummated he marriage with Aisha.

I'll say it again. Reza Aslan is full of it! TIME FOR ANOTHER ENEMA!

Reza Aslan will one day not be able to shoot up enough heroin to block the self-loathing that he lives with day after day. At which point he will go through withdrawal and confront the horrific damage he has done to people. May God have mercy on him. Or not. Whatever.

It must be understood that the more counter intuitive, the more controversial, the more unconventional equates to the more "intellectual" as that term is applied in the vaunted halls of academia where tenured, leather elbowed, pot smoking professors, untainted and unsullied by immersion in the dirty world of American Capitalism, teach their students to question everything, take nothing at face value, only believe what THEY tell you and not your lying eyes and ears. These "intellectuals" are agitators full of questions, questions, questions but no answers that make any common sense and the more that flies in the face and makes all around blink and stutter the greater must be their "superior" knowledge, judgment and, yes, intellect. "Common" sense is just that; common, mundane, based on experience, that which has been tried and "utterly failed." No? Just ask them. They have a "better way" that, if tried, has only failed because of the faulty implementation of courageous, altruistic, charismatic but lesser advocates of social revolution.

So, don't believe your lying eyes and ears when the thug in chief says "death to America" and promises the total destruction of Israel and slaughter of the Zionists. It's all smoke and mirrors constructed by those evil Zionists bent on taking over the world and taking credit for all those technological and scientific advancements they stole from those poor, helpless, gentle followers of (dare his name be mentioned by an infidel?) Mohammad.

Of course Ahmadinejad is a liberal reformer. Everyone knows that Ho Chi Minh was a democratic nationalist, Mao Zedong an agrarian reformer, and Iosip Stalin a liberal in a hurry. And of course everyone knows that Muhammad was a benign prophet of peace, love, and tolerance.

As Reza Aslan claims Ahmadinejad is a liberal reformer, there is no need for him to be here. Its time to call his bluff and deport him to Iran, because it is presumably safe for him to be there.

Good riddance to bad rubbish, I say.

Using semantics in tagiyya is nothing new. It is why "true" Muslims are encouraged to memorize the Quran in Arabic. In Arabic the Quran is much more violent. For example, the exhortation to "smite" their (non-Muslim's) necks which has been explained as being symbolic, in Arabic it literally says to hack at their necks with an axe (which Muhammad himself did in beheading non-Muslims).

Ahmadinejad's ambition is to retake back the lands (once conquered) for Islam (Israel) and bring about the political Mahdi, who will unite Muslims in the global jihad. To do that, he would have to wipe out the Jewish population in Israel. Squabbling about how he intends to do that is just distraction.

Anybody seen this?
It's extremely ripe for the pickings....I know Mr. Spencer published something on this the other day, but I copy it here en todo, for your convenience and "reading pleasure".This is from the Opinion Section of the Washington Post, from a few days ago:

By QANTA A. AHMED
When New York Rep. Peter King, the new chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, called for congressional hearings on radical Islam in America this fall, the reaction from the official Muslim community was swift. Ibrahim Hooper, president of the Council on American- Islamic Relations, said he feared the hearings would become an "anti-Muslim witch hunt." Abed A. Ayoub of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee asserted that Mr. King's proposal had "bigoted intentions."

While Mr. King has a reputation for adopting polarizing positions—particularly when it comes to immigration—his hearings deserve serious consideration. "There has to be an honest discussion of the role of the Muslim community—what they are doing, what they're not doing," he explained to the New York Observer in a Nov. 30 article. "I talk to law enforcement people across the country; they will tell me. . . . They don't feel any sense of cooperation."

These concerns are reasonable. Histrionic objections to them only deter Muslims from fulfilling a fundamental Islamic obligation: Meeting our duty to the society in which we live.

According to Islamic law, Muslims are obligated to three entities: the self, God and society. This last has been overlooked too often by Muslims and their adopted societies.

Similar to the Christian obligation to "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's," the Quran and the derived corpus of Islamic jurisprudence support Muslims' engagement with those to whom power is entrusted. Chapter 4, verse 59 of the Quran reads: "Verily, Allah commands you to give over the trusts to those entitled to them, and that, when you judge between men, you judge with justice."

That patriotic majority has a duty not only to follow the laws of the United States, but to make sure that their fellow Muslims do the same. Islam calls this duty "commanding the right and forbidding the wrong." It is an obligation that is sourced widely in Islamic scripture, beginning with the Quran. The scriptures even underline that this duty is shared by both men and women.

View Full Image

Associated Press

Rep. Peter King
.In one verse, Muslims are instructed: "Let there be one community of you, calling good and commanding right and forbidding wrong" (3:110). Another instructs: "Believers, the men and the women, are friends of one another; they command right, and forbid wrong" (9:71). Impartiality is critical to fulfilling this duty. As it is written: "And let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice" (5:8).

The holy texts of Islam emphasize that one's greatest allegiance should be to justice—superseding family and co-religionist ties. "Be strict in observing justice, and be witness for Allah, even though it be against yourselves or against your parents or kindred," the Quran says in chapter 4, verse 36.

Justice is the cornerstone of Islamic life—despite the appalling reality of many Muslim-majority countries today. Every faithful Muslim must contribute to the preservation of justice within their society.

How we respond to possible hearings on radicalism will reveal our own commitment to Islam. Cooperation can take the form of expert testimony, informing on radical entities, and perhaps foremost, educating ourselves about our religion. Lest any doubt remain as to how Muslims must respond to Mr. King's call, an anecdote from the hadith (the Prophet's sayings) makes it explicit.

Marwan, a twice-appointed Muslim governor of Medina in the seventh century, performed two actions considered religiously unorthodox by his contemporaries: He brought out a pulpit, even though it was a feast day, and then delivered a sermon before leading prayer.

These ritual infractions precipitated an outcry, compelling one congregant to speak up: "Marwan, you've gone against sunna [a normative practice demonstrated by the Prophet]!" A companion of the Prophet, Abu Sa'id Al Khudri, observing the scene, supported this public admonition and turned to the objector: "You have done your duty." Promptly, he quoted the Prophet, "Whoever sees a wrong and is able to put it right with his hand, let him do so; if he can't, then with his tongue; if he can't, then in his heart, and that is the bare minimum of faith."

Exposing nefarious forces at play within our community is a Muslim responsibility—the "bare minimum of faith" for every Muslim man and woman.

Dr. Ahmed is author of "In the Land of Invisible Women: A Female Doctor's Journey in the Saudi Kingdom" (Sourcebooks, 2008).

___________________________________________

The phrase which irks me the most is:

"These concerns are reasonable. Histrionic objections to them only deter Muslims from fulfilling a fundamental Islamic obligation: Meeting our duty to the society in which we live."

Ms. Ahmed really means to say:

"These concerns are reasonable from the Kuffar point-of-view, but not the Muslim's. Histrionic objections to further investigate terrorist acts only serves to deter us Muslims from fulfilling MUSLIMS' fundamental obligation: meeting our MUSLIM duties, first and foremost vis a vis the particular part of Dar-al-Harb in which we have chosen to "live".

I find this site very disturbing. I am not Muslim, but I find many of the comments offensive -- and very pro-Israel. The statement "Viva Siempre Israel!" essentially reflects the attitude of the majority of persons who have made comments on this site (and whom I assume to be Jewish). I am not anti-semitic, but I do have to say that I have noticed various Jewish people (definitely not all) who seem to have an absolute attitude of supremacy. One Jewish person I know had two expressions that I feel could sum up the attitude of most of the commentors on this site -- "Wingo Muslims" and "Wingo Christians." I would say that the vast majority of the commentors on this site have an attitude that Jewish/semitic/Israeli people are far superior to all others - Muslims, Christians, etc. They are not. Jewish and Israeli people are just like the rest of us -- grains of sand on a beach -- some that may be smoother, more polished and more beautiful than others -- but just grains of sand all the same. Some people I know have an attitude that all Jewish people are greasy shisters - a viewpoint that I have tended not to share as I do know many Jewish people who are not -- most on the leftist side, to be sure. However, the attitudes of the majority of commentors on this site would lead me to believe that they fit the image of a Jewish shister.

Oho.

I take a stroll back in time through past threads, and what do I find, tacked onto the end of the thread, presumably 'planted' in the hopes of achieving a little well-poisoning in case of unwary googlers lobbing into this site at this point, a comment by an obvious antisemite - whose nom de plume I have never read here before.

He slanders Jews as sneering supremacists (all except, of course, the self-hating/ jihad-enabling Jews who are to be found on 'the left'); when it is in fact **Muslims** who perhaps more than any other socio/ cultural group on the planet are puffed up like bullfrogs with an overweening and (given the dismal achievements of the Muslim Ummah) wholly unjustified arrogance, pride, and sense of total entitlement.

Jews see their 'chosenness' as a burden: it places upon them an obligation to behave with justice and charity, to teach and heal and thus reflect the character of a holy and loving covenant-keeping God (we saw that Jewish vocation of healing beautifully expressed in the Israeli field hospital in Haiti after the earthquake).

When Muslims see themselves as 'the best of peoples' they take this as entitling them to be the despots of the world, grinding their feet down hard on everyone else's faces, humiliating and hurting others for *fun* and profit; not teaching and healing, but robbing, raping, enslaving and mass-murdering.

Jewish culture emphasises truth, self-examination, and covenant-keeping; MUSLIM 'culture' is manifestly rotten with lies and fraud and deception from top to bottom. Any decent and sane person prefers a truth-loving culture to a culture of falsehood and lies; thus, I infinitely prefer Jews to Muslims, and would love to visit Israel, whereas I have not the least interest in visiting any Muslim country.

Now, jihadwatch is indeed a Jew-friendly and Israel-friendly forum: all the regulars here (the majority of whom are not Jewish, and not all of whom are Christian, and many of whom are not American) oppose the Arab/ Muslim jihad against the Jews which is also a jihad against the Jewish state of Israel.

We here care about Jews - who could quite reasonably be described as the most persecuted tribe in human history - exactly as we care about all others who have suffered and are suffering atrociously as victims of Jihad throughout the ages since Islam was first invented and Mohammedans began waging exterminating warfare upon all who refused to Submit.

I am completely shameless about saying, " long live Israel!" Magdi Cristiano Allam, apostate from Islam, convert to Catholic Christianity, has written two books. The first is called Viva Israele! - long live Israel. The second is called Europa Libera Cristiana - 'Europe, Christian, [and] Free'.

I will also say, 'Long live Timor Lorosae as a free non-Muslim country, liberated from Muslim oppression and violence'. And I hope I shall be able to say, 'Long live South Sudan, an African Christian commonwealth!'

**Just as** we oppose the jihad against the Jews, decent regular here opposes the Muslim jihad against Buddhists in Southern Thailand; we are disgusted by what Indonesian Muslims did to Catholics and animists in East Timor; we pray for the utter defeat of the jihad that Muslim sharia-pushers are waging against Catholics in the southern Philippines; and we are implacably opposed to the Muslim jihad against Hindus and against India. We denounce the Muslim rape and forcible conversion of Hindu girls in Pakistan and Bangladesh, and the Muslim rape and forcible conversion of Christian girls in Iraq, Egypt, Pakistan and Bangladesh. We are outraged by Muslim oppression of Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, and Taoist/ Confucians in Malaysia and Indonesia. I denounce the Muslim mass murders and mass enslavement of black Africans - whether animist, Christian, or insufficiently-Islamic black Muslims - that have been going on in Sudan since the 1950s.

I do not see that opposing the evil done, all over the world, by Muslims - Muslims imitating the malevolent example of the lying, slave-taking, raping, robbing, murderous Arab warlord and consummate conman Mohammed, called by Maimonides 'ha Meshugga', 'the Mad One' - makes me a wingnut. It makes me a sane, decent human being with historical awareness, knowledge of the texts, and plain old commonsense and a survival instinct.

By the way, I am not Jewish; I am a practising and professing Christian within the Anglican Communion.