| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Vain and ridiculous -- or ready for jihad?
The mainstream media and the learned analysts, clueless as ever, continue to flail about in trying to explain why Osama bin Laden shows up in his latest video with his hair dyed lounge-lizard black.
From "Bin Laden video may signal new attacks," by Mark Trevelyan for Reuters:
"He appeared without the military camouflage jacket he used to wear, without his favorite Kalashnikov which he captured from a Soviet general during the Afghan war," said Abdel Bari Atwan, London-based editor-in-chief of the Arabic newspaper al-Quds.By dyeing his hair and beard and wearing Arabic robes, bin Laden was trying to portray himself as a new, mature figure -- the spiritual leader of al Qaeda, Atwan said.
Others said the makeover was bizarre.
"It makes him, a man who claims he wants to be a martyr, look vain and ridiculous," said M.J. Gohel of the Asia-Pacific Foundation, a London think-tank.
Gohel is right: it does make him look ridiculous, but that is not the end of the matter. And certainly it has nothing to do with OBL's "trying to himself as a new, mature figure -- the spiritual leader of al Qaeda."
Have Atwan and Gohel actually read what Islamic legal texts say about hair dyed black? Or have they dismissed a priori such religious concerns as irrelevant?
As I noted here yesterday, the Shafi'i school of Islamic jurisprudence forbids men and women to dye their hair black "except when the intention is jihad...as a show of strength to unbelievers" ('Umdat al-Salik e.4.4). OBL is not a member of the Shafi'i school; the Wahhabis adhere to the Hanbali school, and the Deobandis (the dominant sect among the Taliban) are Hanafis. But this is not just a Shafi'i view: Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, in his internationally influential The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam, says essentially the same thing: "Some of the early Muslims, including some sahabah [companions of Muhammad] such as Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas, 'Uqbah ibn 'Amr, al-Hassan, al-Hussein, Jarir, and others permitted the use of black dye. Some scholars, on the other hand, do not consider the use of black dye as permissible except during time of war, when the enemy might be impressed by the fact that all the soldiers of the Muslim army look young."
Does Osama's dye job mean that he is going to participate personally in jihad warfare? Not necessarily. But it could be another signal that an attack is imminent.
Meanwhile, the TV talking heads will continue to tut-tut about Osama's vanity, and remain utterly clueless about what is most likely really going on here. Keep talking, fellows.
Wolf Pangloss has the full text of Osama's message.
Posted by Robert at September 8, 2007 1:07 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
I thought Islam only permitted Henna for hair colouring.
The guy has a complete dye job.
Haram?
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 8, 2007 1:34 PM
Robert said
Meanwhile, the TV talking heads will continue to tut-tut about Osama's vanity, and remain utterly clueless about what is most likely really going on here.
I don't know if OBL is wearing a fake beard, or has dyed his own beard, or if he dyed it to look young and strong to frighten the infidels, or out of vanity.
I do know that what Robert has said is very plausible, and the information about the Shafi'i school has not been mentioned elsewhere.
And I do know that getting the correct interpretation is important; based on the fake beard analysis, the TV talking heads are recommending looking for OBL in the Philipines and Indonesia, rather than in Pakistan. Will our collective continued ignorance about Islam, Islamic history, and Islamic culture lead us astray again? How long can we affort to continue to set misplaced goals and make false assumptions?
Posted by: special_guest at September 8, 2007 1:34 PM
"Some scholars, on the other hand, do not consider the use of black dye as permissible except during time of war, when the enemy might be impressed by the fact that all the soldiers of the Muslim army look young"
We are soooooo impressed. What a buffoon! The biggest "impression" is the idea that a moron like this is still drawing breath on this planet someplace safe (temporarlily) from his final comeuppance. Remember Saddam and Zarcawi, Osama! Your day is coming soon.
Posted by: BB at September 8, 2007 1:37 PM
Expect many to say this is another "false flag" operation. They'll say that this isn't UBL and the dyed hair proves it. (Of course it's a stand-in - with red hair(?) or they would never have needed to give him a dye job!)
People are already calling the timing suspicious, since it comes on the eve of the Petraeus report to Congress.
Given the number of people who continue to believe 9/11 was an inside job, UBL could appear before Congress and everyone would accuse him of being George W. Bush's agent.
He would be better off postponing any new video until after Hillary is elected. No one will believe him as long as Bush is in office. He's waited six years for us to convert. Surely another seventeen months shouldn't be too much to ask.
Posted by: PMK at September 8, 2007 1:43 PM
He tells thousands of young guys to commit suicide while he is getting his hair done...living in safety and protection. Why don't these people get it? He wants all the attention and power and the glory and is willing to pay for it with everyone else's blood.
Posted by: Abby at September 8, 2007 1:44 PM
Greetings:
I think he just wants to look his best in case he runs into John Edwards a-marching through Pakistan.
Posted by: 11B40 at September 8, 2007 1:48 PM
He wants to be a 'martyr'.
Better keep those privates shaved, Osama. John Edwards is coming to get ya!
Maybe they can play footsie in a toilet somewhere in Waziristan..
Posted by: Allahfanculo at September 8, 2007 1:49 PM
It is bad enough that the TV "Middle East Experts" are so uninformed. But what I want to believe is that our intelligence services are better informed, that they have analysts who are familiar with the exegesis of Islamic texts and Islamic jurisprudence. And I want to believe that those analysts are not themselves members of the Religion of Peace, entrusted by our "leaders" to offer an honest and impartial analysis.
One can dream, can't one?
Posted by: special_guest at September 8, 2007 1:53 PM
He wants all the attention and power and the glory and is willing to pay for it with everyone else's blood.
Abby,
Just like Muhammad.
Posted by: PMK at September 8, 2007 1:56 PM
...hmmm, how about an Osama die job....
Posted by: exsgtbrown at September 8, 2007 1:57 PM
Dudes, is it me, or does Osama look just like the main character in the movie 'Weekend at Bernie's'? I mean, he looks DEAD! Like in 'Death Becomes Her' dead. Alive, yet nobbut a corpse, really. With a good dye job and airbrushed tan, even the dead can look refreshed and rested. So to speak. I applaud the superior technical wizardry of the Islamic scientists who developed a way of making the dead talk. A Nobel Prize for them!
Posted by: Jauhara Al-Kafirah at September 8, 2007 2:00 PM
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO POST THIS ANNOUNCEMENT AT OTHER WEBSITES
The U.S. Senate Project (an initiative to increase congressional awareness of the nature and goals of jihad) currently has 78 volunteers in 38 states.
WE ARE STILL SEEKING ADDITIONAL CITIZEN VOLUNTEERS FROM ALL 50 STATES, ESPECIALLY THE FOLLOWING 13:
Connecticut
Delaware
Hawaii
Kansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Montana
North Dakota
Oklahoma
South Dakota
Vermont
West Virginia
Wyoming
The Project: We're looking for people in every state of the Union who would be willing to purchase, from Amazon or any other source, a copy of Robert Spencer's Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't and mail it, on an agreed upon date, to one of the senators in your state. We want to get the book simultaneously to all 100 senators, in order to send a strong message. If we get more than two people per state, books can also be sent to the U.S. House of Representatives.
If you’d like to be involved, please write to me at traehnam@yahoo.com under the subject heading “Senate,” and tell me the state your senator represents, an email address where I can reach you, and a nickname. No need for your real name. And I will never share your email address with anyone, not even with other volunteers for this project.
And visit www.jihadawareness.blogspot.com to get more info on this project and to leave comments other volunteers can read. You can also see there the growing list of participants in this project, and the states their senators represent. I've also designed a graphic that might amuse. Scroll down when you get to the site.
Once we have at least two people from every state, we can agree on a mailing date and then each of us can mail a copy of the book on that date.
Right before each of us mails the book, we can issue a press release to various media outlets in every state, and in that way announce and explain the mailing. And perhaps we can come up with some other ways of maximizing the effectiveness of this project and gaining as much positive attention as possible.
One of the project's volunteers suggested contacting Rep. Sue Myrick, who started the Anti-Jihad Caucus in Congress. I'll try to coordinate this project with Rep. Myrick to maximize its effectiveness. I've also been calling various congressional offices to get advice on how best to go about the project.
Posted by: traeh at September 8, 2007 2:11 PM
Jauhara Al-Kafirah ...Yep he looks dead, I blew the picture up to 12x12. It's a little grainy, but you can clearly see that his right eye is drooping at the lid, his mouth is open in a weird way, that could be explained if he was speaking, but if this is a posed picture, what is the purpose of the open mouth? Or is it just stuck open? Strange picture no matter how you cut it...
Posted by: duh_swami at September 8, 2007 2:19 PM
Time for "Weekend at Osama's"?
Posted by: PMK at September 8, 2007 2:28 PM
The one sentence that struck me as odd was where he mentioned the anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks. Now, that may be just so that we all knew it was a recently made video...
When I watched the whole video (almost napped from the droning voice) I did notice that his fingers on his left hand were moving, and that he changed the papers with his left hand.
Posted by: gymgal at September 8, 2007 2:37 PM
Thanks for the elucidation, Robert.
He's black dyeing to try and show us how vigorous and manly he is, a;;owed in islam as the presage to war.
There is the message.
A drone missile is the answer.
Posted by: dgene at September 8, 2007 2:46 PM
I guess Blackbeard and his advisors don't realize that dying your hair black makes you look older, not younger. Any good hairstylist will tell you that.
Posted by: atheling at September 8, 2007 2:51 PM
Shafi'i, Wahhabis, Hanbali, Deobandis, schools of Islamic jurisprudence? Forgive my naiveté Mr. Spencer, but do you have a book out going into detail on the differences of these branches of Islamic thought and how they interact with Kafur, Jihad, and such? If not, are you planning one, because I need ever ounce of scholarly ammunition for my arsenal of Freedom?
Besides there is gray matter needing expanding, space on my book selves to fill, and coin in my pocket for it.
P.S. You last book on Christianity and Islam was absolutely inspiring.
at September 8, 2007 2:51 PM
If you look just above his left shoulder there is an unnatural shadow. Hold down your keyboard control button and then use your scroll wheel turning it towards yourself until it gets very large and then go to the area and you will see what I mean. If there is a hidden message in this video that is where it is. If you enlarge it the pixels have an unnatural pattern also.
You can call me paranoid if you want to. It's ok.
Posted by: Borg at September 8, 2007 3:02 PM
Rather roll the wheel away from yourself.
Posted by: Borg at September 8, 2007 3:05 PM
I see that Borg, but what stands out even more is the "X" on his forehead. Take a look, actually looks like a target, lol.
Posted by: gymgal at September 8, 2007 3:12 PM
Everybody, obviously Ossie's dye job was not for our consumption. He does not care what we think of his looks. It was a very cryptic thing to do.
Time for us to start collecting water, canned goods, fuel, and ammunition. Oh, make sure that camp stove is ready. How long can someone live on a Spam and ravioli diet? I sure would like to have a stockpile of irradiatd food right now.
Posted by: Pelayo at September 8, 2007 3:21 PM
Robert: Hi, sorry, but you're wandering a bit astray again here.
Technically, "Wahhbis" in Saudi are from the Hanbali Fiqh.
But, we must remember, a "Fiqh" is one of the four Accepted Sunni Islamic Schools of Jurisprudence, and by Sunni Islamic tradition, the Schools of Jurisprudence are now Closed; so we are stuck with: Malaki, Shafi'i, Hanafi, and Hanbali.
So, technically, the "Wahhabi" belong to the Hanbali Fiqh.
But what people lose track of, overlaying the 4 traditional Sunni Schools of Jurisprudence, are the many different Schools of Sunni Islamic THEOLOGY!
Interpreting thus, what someone like Bin Laden, or Qaradawi believe, and practice, is much more complicated than a basic:
Muslim: Sunni or Shia?
If Sunni: Malaki, Shafi'i, Hanbali, Hanafi
If Hanbali (what Theology??): Wahhabi, Salafi, etc.
If Wahhabi: which of the scores of Sufi "Tariqa" (brotherhood), if any, and it's special practices and believes, etc..
So, it's a very complicated picture, and not for the faint of heart, nor the amateur Islamist!
Like I said, just like Shrek & Onions.
Regardless, the Deobandis, are NOT "Hanbalis" as you point out above.
The Deobanis, which is both an Islamic Theology, AND a Sufi Tariqa, are in fact, members of the Sunni HANAFI Fiqh, NOT "Hanbalis".
Technically, all of the Saudis, whether Wahhabis or not, belong to the only recognized Fiqh in Saudi, which is the Hanbali Fiqh.
However, the Theology of "Salafiyyism", is very prevalent" within Saudi Arabia, and one of the sub-currents of Salafi theology is that there should be NO Fiqh's at all, only Salafiyyah (from "Salaf" or the Pious Ancestors; in other words, we need to return to the pure form of uncorrupted Islam, practiced in Mohammed's time by him, and his immediate followers, and the Ahl-y-Bayt, or members of his family!)
Thus Saudi Salafiyyah themselves, do not necessarily like to be called "Wahhabiyyah" or "Hanbali"; on the "Wahhabiyyah" term, they're on more solid Islamic ground, because to name a group of Muslims, after a name of the founder of that Theology, implies that the theological founder is more important than Allah and Mohammed himself; a bit no-no for them.
As for doing away with the four accepted Fiqh's, a bit more problematic for them; the Islamic theologians who founded the four different Sunni Fiqh's hold an exalted, and special place in Islamic history and theology, and it's a dicey proposition to imply that they are now to be ignored; and thus the Saudis and other Salafiyyah instead, pick and choose from among the four Fiqh's, for theological guidance.
Which brings us to Qaradawi!
Very influential among Muslim Brotherhood members, and Salafiyyah, and Qutbiyyah like Bin Ladin; hated by the more traditionalist members of the 4 Fiqh's, and even by some Saudis who consider themselves Hanbalis and "Wahhabi" (our term, not theirs), but NOT Salafiyyah!
Qaradawi is an Egyptian, a follower of Hassan al Banna and Syed Qutb, both Salafiyyah and Muslim Brotherhood members of course, both Sufis, and Qaradawi has been a member of the Muslim Brotherhood (al Ikhwan) himself.
However, he has been quite open, in talking about his advocation of "pure" Sufism, and his respect for a little known, and largely extinct Islamic Theoglogy called the "Ashari", which was founded by a Persian named al-Ghazali in the early 12th century.
Ghazali's main contribution to the modern Jihadis, is his many treatises on the fact that "Ijtihad" (from the Arabic root word "Jihad" of course; but from a theological sense, it means the interpretation of Islamic Law) had to CEASE!
In other words, Ghazali wanted no more independent, free-thinking, innovative Islamic Law interpretations!
If you study him, you will find out that his movement to stop "ijtihad", basically froze the innovation of Islamic theoglogy in the early 12th century!
With his Ashari style Theology, coupled with 11th Century Islamic Theologian Ibn Tamiyah's push to return Islam as a whole, back to the time of the "Salaf", these two strains of Islamic thought are what coallesced into modern day Jihadism thru subsequent Salafiyyah theologians and leaders such as Jamal ad Din al Afghani (who was really a Persian and a Shia, so he added "al Afghani" to his name so no one would know, talk about practicing "Taqiyah"), Hassan al Banna, Syed Qutb, Abdullah Azzam, Qaradawi, and bin Laden/Zawahiri!
In fact, Ghazali's Ashari theology is what inspired the formation of the Almohad Dynasty in Al Andalus, which is regarded as a turning point in the history of Islamic Spain, from one of tolerance, innovation, and multi-culturism with Muslims, Jews and Christians living side-by-side, too one of religious intolerance and persecution, and eventually undermined support for Islamic rulers in Spain, by their Jewish and Chritian subject, who began to defect to the Catholic Kingdoms to the north!
Qaradawi was probably born a Shafi'i, and studied at Al Azhar in Cairo; but his many calls, missed in the West, for the establishment of an entirely new Fiqh, or a return to the Asharite theology, and to turn it into a recognized Fiqh, has not endeared him to the traditionalist of the 4 traditionalist fiqhs, the Malakis, Hanafis, Hanbalis and Shafi'i.
His pronouncements though, do betray him as a Salafiyyah or Neo-Salafiyyah, and even Qutbiyyah, in the mold of Bin Ladin and Zawahiri, because if you study their theological pronoucements, they will in fact, draw upon theological strains, from all 4 Fiqhs, as well as from Salafiyyah and Qutbiyyah theologians to make their fatwas, and theological arguments!
Finally, do not be thrown by my disucssion of the Salafiyyah as "Sufis".
It is widely held misconception, based upon ignorance, that the Salafiyyah, and Bin Laden/Al Qaeda, are persecuters of Sufis, and reject it's tenets.
You have to know, which TYPE of "Sufism" you are talking about here!
Salafiyyah believe that the Prophet Muhammed was the first "Sufi", and that Sufism is the perfect state of man!
However, they few Sufism as an internal struggle, a person's internal quest for "Allah", and purity!
This is simplifying it, but that's the basics. My own term for this brand of Salafiyyah Sufism, is the "Internalist" or "Traditionalist" Sufi movement.
The type of Sufism that the Salafiyyah despise, and do persecute, is the type of "Folklorist" Sufism that is widespread across the Muslim world, that has EXTERNAL manifestations, that Salafiyyah find out and outright heretical, including: deification of the Sufi brotherhood lader; celebration of Muhammed's birthday; visiting the tombs of Saints, and other Islamic Holy Men, on religious holidays; Religious Festivals NOT approved by Muhammed, to include the widespread "Spring New Year's" celebrations, some harkening back to Pre-Islamic festivals in Pharaonic Egypt and Zorastrian Perisa, etc.
Interestingly enough, Qaradawi himself has approved the celebration of Muhammed's birthday, which is not something his fellow Salafiyyah approve of; so he definitely takes an independent course of his own, that is hard to pin down to one specific Fiqh or School of Theology.
This may be the reason for his popularity; he's seen a person who is trying to bridge the ideological gaps between Sunni Fiqh's and Theological Schools of thought, and thus appeals to the greater pull of Pan-Arabism and Pan-Islamic (Sunni) thought!
It's also one of the rasons why Jihadis like Bin Ladin, will pick and choose what he needs, from various Fiqh's, and Sunni Theologies, to make his case for worldwide Jihad!
Posted by: Dale in Atlanta at September 8, 2007 3:25 PM
Robert, I wonder what your thoughts are about Michael Scheuer? He's been about on a few shows during the past 24 hours and mentioning that neither political party is "getting it" regarding this video and OBL in general?
Cheers,
Greg
at September 8, 2007 3:32 PM
I guess now Islam has become a suicide and dye cult.
Posted by: jewdog at September 8, 2007 3:47 PM
I would be very suprised if someone in the Goverment were not reading this site. The Media, well, they are another matter alltogether. With their defination of Hate Speach coupled with their desire to filter sites like this, would make it difficult to even get to.
Just acknowledging the distinction opens the feeding frenzy in the Press for the who,what where, when and ( well, we know the why).
Early reports suggested a "present" with our 9/11. Possibly against our soft underbelly called Europe. Either interupted or completely foiled.
O'Samma must have become lonely at the top. For 6 years he hasn't been able to show his face while his followers are getting it from all sides in Iraq. While Ineedajob and Nasrallah have been grabbing all the Headlines.
After 3 years I would expect he had something in mind to show his intent and determination to get us to convert. Failing to make a big noise in the process only makes him look more foolish than his use of Boot Polish.
How can O'Samma expect to get the support of the Demoncrats with a tax rate of only 2.5%???
Posted by: flowerknife_us at September 8, 2007 3:52 PM
He has colored his hair for imminent 'Jihad' and made the Quranic 'offer you can't refuse' (Submit to Submission!).
I get the feeling all these various fairly amateur plots the past year that have been neatly prevented were betrayed by al-Qaeda itself to put us to sleep for the coming Sept. 11 mass murder of epic proportions OR else in the words OBL "We are willing to wait till patience has worn out patience". On the other hand Hillary asked them to please-pretty-please wait before you butcher us so the democrats can get in. OBL whatever else you say about him can 'smell dhimmi'.
at September 8, 2007 3:56 PM
He wants to be a martyr and get hold of the virgins. Guess living in a hole with his monkey men can be a pain in the ass.
at September 8, 2007 4:03 PM
He looks intolerably constipated, poor guy... trying real hard but can't get it out.
Posted by: redg27 at September 8, 2007 4:08 PM
FNC finally said it. The dye job is only permitted for jihad, to appear more youthful, fearsome.
Posted by: interestinconundrum at September 8, 2007 4:21 PM
Dale in Atlanta
Thanks. I am well aware that the Deobandis are Hanafis, as I wrote about here in January 2006:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/009791.php
The reference above was just a typo, now corrected, and thanks.
The rest of your information, while interesting, hardly amounts to, as you announce it, my "going astray." You are assuming way too much yet again, as with your earlier false assumption that I was saying Osama was a Shafi'i.
I am only saying what I am saying, and that's all. If you wish to assume that one or two posts containing a few sentence is the sum of my knowledge of a given topic, have at it. My opponents routinely charge me with ignorance, yet haven't ever come up with anything I've actually gotten wrong, and I'm afraid your post is just another example of this: I have discussed the madhahib, and the material you discuss above, at some length in a variety of contexts, including several books, and stand on what I have written. In view of that it will be hard for you to make the case that I am unaware of the facts you have noted, but I invite you to do your best.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at September 8, 2007 4:26 PM
There is an X on his forehead.
Posted by: interestinconundrum at September 8, 2007 4:32 PM
There is an X on his forehead....mark 'o the beast?
Posted by: interestinconundrum at September 8, 2007 4:33 PM
Robert,
I wonder what your thoughts are about Michael Scheuer? He's been about on a few shows during the past 24 hours and mentioning that neither political party is "getting it" regarding this video and OBL in general?
Posted by: scooternyc at September 8, 2007 4:45 PM
I saw the debate on Figh in the previous thread.
I did some checking and discovered you can get
'Hanbali Fiqh' by purchasing the 5-vol set
'Sufficient Provision for Seekers of the Path of Truth'
here:
http://www.al-baz.com/ourbooks_page2.shtml
Posted by: silent_rage at September 8, 2007 4:47 PM
Silent Rage,
Well, Scheuer is certainly right about that.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at September 8, 2007 4:56 PM
I think we're looking at Mr.Dead here.
It just seems bizarre.
It is common in the middle east for Arabs and Asians to dye their hair, they usually do it on Fridays too.
They are very vain and effeminate, you only have to look at the gay Taliban pictures that are all over the net now.
But this from the "soft spoken and humble" Bin Laden?
I can't help wondering why there is only approximately 5 minutes of moving video but 30 minutes of audio with the video frozen for the rest of the time?
Call me stupid but I really do think this is fake.
Just like the beard.
at September 8, 2007 4:58 PM
This site does a good job at indexing what's
available online concerning the different
schools of figh.
http://godlas.myweb.uga.edu/practices.html
Posted by: silent_rage at September 8, 2007 5:04 PM
Could someone help me join the dots.
1) OBL arrives of the scene with new hair do can be interpreted as preparation for the Jihad.
2) Issues statement that can be interpreted as calling on the non-muslims to convert, therefore legalizing his case under Islamic law for an unpremeditated attack on the non-muslims.
3)Pakistan the land of the Pure has the Atomic bomb
4) Pakistan muslim country, highly unstable.
5) OBL lives in exile either on the boarder or inside Pakistan
6) OBL very rich, money talks, tends to talk twice as fast when owned by fanatics.
7) Radicalized, don't you just love that word, Pakistani nuclear scientists reputedly have had meeting with OBL
8) Only about 10% of all containers entering ports around the world are checked by customs.
9) Tomorrow is the anniversary of the bombing of Nagasaki.
10) Tuesday, well we all know what anniversary that is.
11) Large numbers of frustrated muslim young men willing to blow themselves up so they can enter a mythical whore house. The ultimate con.
Question After joining the dots, do I need to buy iodine tablets.
at September 8, 2007 5:04 PM
I think we're looking at Mr. Dead here.
It's true that in the middle east Arabs and Asians dye their hair all the time (usually on a Friday).
They are very vain and effeminate, you only have to look at the gay Taliban images that are all over the net now.
But this from the "soft spoken, simple and humble" Bin Laden?
Why is there approximately only 5 minutes of moving video over 30 minutes of audio?
Call me stupid but I think this is fake.
Just like the beard.
at September 8, 2007 5:07 PM
9) Tomorrow is the anniversary of the bombing of Nagasaki.
I like your list, but # 9 is a month off the mark.
Posted by: jihadwatcher at September 8, 2007 5:25 PM
That's also a suicide job - dyed by his own hand.
Posted by: Pelayo at September 8, 2007 5:44 PM
gymgal,
I noticed that the world just celebrated the 63 anniversary of the Hiroshima attacks. There, save my sentence and release it next summer, and then tell people, it’s recent you know. Ha. Anniversaries are predictable unfortunately, we need him to site a random current event not generalizations otherwise I have to assume it is islamist theatre and that’s Bernie bin laden. The guys not an idiot but some in the west are so how hard would it be to pre record democrats lose, democrats win, democrats leave Iraq, democrats stay in Iraq on down the line?
at September 8, 2007 5:50 PM
"Large numbers of frustrated muslim young men willing to blow themselves up so they can enter a mythical whore house. The ultimate con"....how true.
A lascivious life style is forbidden in Islam here on earth -- and yet it's the selling point they use to promote blowing oneself & others up for allah.
Hmmm.
at September 8, 2007 5:58 PM
This worries me.
Posted by: nyone at September 8, 2007 6:03 PM
Robert: it seems you do not take, what you perceive to be criticism, very well!
That's kind of interesting!
I'm not criticizing you at all, frankly; therefore I'm not a "critic" of you, nor your work!
I actually am extremely pleased at what you do, as I've said before, and I'm happy as hell, that there are people like you around, who do in fact, "get it", and who take the time to not only publish books on the topic, but also run sites like this!
That's the bottomline.
The fact is, though you may not have outright said OBL was a "Shafi'i", you kind of implied it; I corrected you, correctly, and also pointed out your misapplication of the term "Hanbali" to the Deobandis; it may have been a typo, as you said, it may not have been; regardless, it doesn't matter, I pointed it out, it's been corrected, and that's all that matters.
The rest of my information, that I imparted to you, was in NO way intented to challenge you on anything, nor was a criticism of your work; again, a bit sensitive and thin-skinned of you!
It was merely to emphasize the points, that Qaradawi is an interesting individual, not easily shoe-horned into one specific Fiqh (and I'm NOT saying YOU said that!), and that the particular brand of Jihadism promoted by Bin Laden and others of his ilk, also transcend the standard limited knowledge of your run-of-the-mill TV talking heads, and most IC "analysts", like Michael Scheur for example, who since 1977 post-Khomeni, suddenly figured out there were Sunni & Shia's in the Muslim world, and then, after 9/11, kinda got a clue there might be "Salafiyyah" and "Wahhabis"; but that is the extent of their veneerish knowledge, in a topic that is exceedingly complex, and one that even the "experts" cannot readily agree upon as to what are all the pieces of the puzzle!
AGAIN, I have never implied, nor am implying, that includes You!
Your senstivity to what you interpret as to be my criticism you, is not only misplaced, but is again, extremely interesting to me in light of that.
As you can tell, I've never posted on your site before, though I do read it on a daily basis, because it is a valuable and useful resource.
The only reason I even posted to begin with, was to point out what I thought would be a simple addendum to your original post, and to also maybe point out, that if there was an implication in your words that UBL/Qaradawi were Shafi'is, that that wasn't quite correct.
It was NOT meant as a "critism" of you!
My second post, today, was again, to point out a glaring typo, not for YOUR sake, but the sake of your readers, who do rely upon you for accurate information and analysis; and again, to just provide some additonal background information that your readers might find interesting, to help put the whole Fiqh vs. Theology issus, plus, to put into perspective, how the particular ideologies of Qutbism and Salafism utilize a "cherry-picking" approach to formuate the theological approach of their own movement.
However, it appears that even that minor attempt, to inject some additional information into the dialog, is too much for your surprisingly thin skin!
Fool me once, shame on you!
Fool me twice, shame on me!
You will not fool me a third time.
I will refrain from posting again, regardless of circumstances, in order not to raise your hackles, and your obviously defensive nature.
Additionally, I think your sensitivity to my minor attempts to correct any misinterpretations your readers may have had, based upon your posts, say way more about you, than they do me!
Regardless, this is neither here nor there.
You are a knowledgeable and impressive individual.
I consider you a valuable resource, and ally, in the battle against Militant Islam, that threats us all.
Even though you have no idea who I am, and purposely so, I might add, I will continue to read your books, and monitor your website, and I think you for all that you do, and for the level of expertise and scholarship you bring to the topic.
Your book about the Crusades for example, I consider to be one of the most valuable resources ever published in that arena, and a seminal work, I might add.
All the more enjoyable because it thoroughly pisses off the bad guys, and their apologists!
Again, thank you for your time, and I wish you well.
Posted by: Dale in Atlanta at September 8, 2007 6:05 PM
Goodness gracious me you are right. I apologise, I usually don't get my dates wrong.It must be the Tuborg I am drinking, blame it on those pesky Danes.
Posted by: Holger Dansker at September 8, 2007 6:06 PM
How come he didn’t congratulate Ellison? With the attention that received I am shocked, yes shocked that he neglected to mention the first muslin elected to the house. Racism? Even if Ellison’s, head looks like a raisin (sahih bukhari volume9 book89 number256) I would have thought he would get a hat tip. Any guesses?
Posted by: tgusa at September 8, 2007 6:20 PM
It is quite possible that the dyed beard itself is a signal to launch attacks or some other stage in preparation for future attacks. That much I definitely agree with.
Posted by: Foehammer at September 8, 2007 6:29 PM
Yeah , what is the story? hair color or jihad?.
At least Nero fiddeled.
at September 8, 2007 6:32 PM
Seńor doeboy said:
Shafi'i, Wahhabis, Hanbali, Deobandis, schools of Islamic jurisprudence? Forgive my naiveté Mr. Spencer, but do you have a book out going into detail on the differences of these branches of Islamic thought and how they interact with Kafur, Jihad, and such? If not, are you planning one, because I need ever ounce of scholarly ammunition for my arsenal of Freedom?
Over at FaithFreedom's forum, I get proselytized all the time by the devout, but blathering sons of Allah. My response is always this:
"There are 72 brands of Islam on the market these days. The choices! Tell me, which brand should I buy into, cuz, ya know, it always seems that where ever the followers of Mohammed go, death, destruction and endless sorrow and suffering follow."
at September 8, 2007 6:46 PM
According to Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani a 10th century Maliki jurist:
Jihad is a precept of Divine institution. Its performance by certain individuals may dispense others from it. We Malikis maintain that it is preferable not to begin hostilities with the enemy before having invited the latter to embrace the religion of Allah except where the enemy attacks first. They have the alternative of either converting to Islam or paying the poll tax (jizya), short of which war will be declared against them.
According to al-Mawardi an 11th Century Shafi'i jurist
The mushrikun [infidels] of Dar al-Harb (the arena of battle) are of two types: First, those whom the call of Islam has reached, but they have refused it and have taken up arms. The amir of the army has the option of fighting them…in accordance with what he judges to be in the best interest of the Muslims and most harmful to the mushrikun… Second, those whom the invitation to Islam has not reached, although such persons are few nowadays since Allah has made manifest the call of his Messenger…it is forbidden to…begin an attack before explaining the invitation to Islam to them, informing them of the miracles of the Prophet and making plain the proofs so as to encourage acceptance on their part; if they still refuse to accept after this, war is waged against them and they are treated as those whom the call has reached…
Ibn Taymiyya , a 14th Century Hanbali jurist15
Since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God's entirely and God's word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought. As for those who cannot offer resistance or cannot fight, such as women, children, monks, old people, the blind, handicapped and their likes, they shall not be killed unless they actually fight with words (e.g. by propaganda) and acts (e.g. by spying or otherwise assisting in the warfare).
In the Hidayah, vol. Ii. P. 140 (Hanafi school)
It is not lawful to make war upon any people who have never before been called to the faith, without previously requiring them to embrace it, because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith, and also because the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war… If the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax, it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do."
Ibn Khaldun the 15th century Tunisian Historian states
In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force... The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense... Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.
Al-Ghazali, a Sufi orthodox Muslim, and follower of the Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence, wrote this about jihad war and the treatment of the vanquished non-Muslim dhimmi peoples, in the Wadjiz: [4]
[O]ne must go on jihad (i.e., warlike razzias or raids) at least once a year…one may use a catapult against them [non-Muslims] when they are in a fortress, even if among them are women and children. One may set fire to them and/or drown them…If a person of the Ahl al-Kitab [People of The Book – primarily Jews and Christians] is enslaved, his marriage is [automatically] revoked…One may cut down their trees…One must destroy their useless books. Jihadists may take as booty whatever they decide…they may steal as much food as they need…
[T]he dhimmi is obliged not to mention Allah or His Apostle…Jews, Christians, and Majians must pay the jizya [poll tax on non-Muslims]…on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits [thedhimmi] on the protruberant bone beneath his ear [i.e., the mandible]… They are not permitted to ostentatiously display their wine or church bells…their houses may not be higher than the Muslim’s, no matter how low that is. The dhimmi may not ride an elegant horse or mule; he may ride a donkey only if the saddle [-work] is of wood. He may not walk on the good part of the road. They [the dhimmis] have to wear [an identifying] patch [on their clothing], even women, and even in the [public] baths…[dhimmis] must hold their tongue….
Legal war (jihad) is an obligatory social duty (fard-kifaya); when one group of Moslems guarantees that it is being carried out in a satisfactory manner, the others are exempted.
The jihad becomes a strictly binding personal duty (fard-‘ain) for all Moslems who are enlisted or whose country has been [invaded] by the enemy. It is obligatory only for free men who have reached puberty, are endowed with reason and capable of fighting. Jihad is the best of the works of supererogation. Abu Huraira relates that “The Prophet, when asked what was the best of all works, replied: Belief in God [and in His Prophet].– And then? someone asked him. – War for God’s cause, then a pious pilgrimage.” Abu Sa’id reports also that the Prophet, when asked who was the best of all men, replied, “He who fights for God’s cause, personally and with his goods.”… It is permitted to surprise the infidels under cover of night, to bombard them with mangonels [an engine that hurls missiles] and to attack them without declaring battle (du‘a’). The Prophet attacked the Banu Mustaliq unexpectedly, while their animals were still at the watering-place; he killed the men who had fought against him and carried off the children into captivity. It is forbidden to kill children, madmen, women, priests, impotent old men, the infirm, the blind, the weak-minded, unless they have taken part in the combat.
The chief of State decides on the fate of the men who are taken as prisoners; he can have them put to death, reduce them to slavery, free them in return for a ransom or grant them their freedom as a gift. He must choose the solution most in keeping with the common good of the Moslems.
The jizya can be demanded only from the Peoples of the Book (Ahl-al-Kitab) and from Zoroastrians (Magus), who pledge to pay it and submit to the laws of the community. The Peoples of the Book are understood to mean the Jews and those who follow the religion of the Torah, as well as the Christians and those who follow the religion of the Gospel. When People of the Book or Zoroastrians ask to pay the jizya and to submit to the laws of the community, one must grant their request, and it is forbidden to fight them. The jizya is collected at the beginning of each year. It is set at 48 dirhems for a rich man, at 24 dirhems for a man of moderate means, and at 12 dirhems for a man of lowly estate. It cannot be demanded from children who have not reached the age of puberty, from women, helpless old men, the sick, the blind, or slaves, nor from poor people who are unable to pay it. An infidel subject to the jizya who converts to Islam is free of this obligation. When an infidel dies, his heirs are responsible for the jizya
at September 8, 2007 6:49 PM
Dale,
You say:
"Fool me once, shame on you!
Fool me twice, shame on me!
You will not fool me a third time."
Please be fair in your characterizations. Spencer hasn't attempted to fool anyone. I would say that you over-interpreted Robert's initial citation (in the previous thread) of the Shafi'i fiqh as implying that bin Laden was of that particular school, particularly since Robert had also cited Qaradawi's book, which is written for a wide Muslim audience, and which quotes Hadith. I also think you were reading too much into the typo. I've been reading this site long enough to know that Spencer knows enough not to confuse Hanbali and Hanafi, or to be naive about bin Laden's ideological influences.
You say: "I will refrain from posting again, regardless of circumstances, in order not to raise your hackles, and your obviously defensive nature."
Now that would be an overreaction.
A request from a fellow poster: Keep posting here, if you have the time. You're obviously a knowledgeable poster. I would look forward to reading your comments here in the future.
Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 8, 2007 7:16 PM
Infidels against extinction.
Even that message means hate.
at September 8, 2007 7:20 PM
PMK
one of the british "leaders" in the 9/11 conspiracy theory heirarchy has just announced that he is the messiah. david shayler.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=475616&in_page_id=1770
at September 8, 2007 7:44 PM
Dale -- Robert has the thin skin? Allow me to laugh. Tee Hee.
Posted by: champ at September 8, 2007 7:49 PM
Vis a vis. He is oh so enchanting. Where can I get my grubby little mitts on a stud like this?
Posted by: mustang65 at September 8, 2007 8:17 PM
Just plain fake looking. It looks very unreal bigtime.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at September 8, 2007 8:20 PM
Since Elric has been so kind to send so many of you to my blog... primarily because he does not think that there are any moderate Muslims, and that we never see any Muslims speak out against Radical Islam... I thought you might be interested in this story.
http://eaglespearlsofwisdom.wordpress.com/2007/09/08/where-are-those-moderate-muslims-here/
For those of you who have commented on my blog. Thank you
Posted by: Eagle at September 8, 2007 8:21 PM
Mid-life crisis or jihad?
Posted by: champ at September 8, 2007 9:14 PM
“Bali bomber’s date with death closer”- Really?
http://sheikyermami.com/2007/09/08/bali-bombers-date-with-death-closer-really/
at September 8, 2007 9:34 PM
gymgal-
Yes, I clearly see that when I control/scroll.
Strange. Perhaps a bandage over the bump on his forehead from thumping the ground? But why the X. My thoughts run to all the James Bond movies with their microchips and hidden messages. I haven't seen any explanation for that anyway.
Posted by: Borg at September 8, 2007 9:36 PM
Could be a Taliban dating service photo. That would explain the dye job and new set of duds.
Of course any lady suitors would have to submit a photo in full burga, but than, they couldn't be much less attractive at the unveiling than the usual mountain goat.
Posted by: rational at September 8, 2007 10:15 PM
The people posting at the BBC Have Your Say are still at it.
Blaming it on the US/CIA and timing it/planning it/using it for some nefarious purpose. The usual conspiracy theory stuff. And of course the muslims saying that he knows nothing about peaceful islam.
Lucky the majority of posts seem to be against bin Laden. Not all though.
Posted by: Borg at September 8, 2007 10:44 PM
To Dale in Atlanta
Are you actually Ed? You sound exactly like him!!!
at September 8, 2007 10:45 PM
Dale,
A request from a fellow poster: Keep posting here, if you have the time. You're obviously a knowledgeable poster. I would look forward to reading your comments here in the future.
Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at September 8, 2007 7:16 PM
Yes, please do. You should have chimed in long ago since experts on islam, especially islamic jurisprudence, are in short supply.
at September 8, 2007 11:27 PM
awake, how so?
Posted by: Eagle at September 9, 2007 12:11 AM
Reading the ABC blog about the video. Robert is right that some people actually responded to this. Why? TAXES. Many people posted they would convert to lower their taxes to 2.5%. I hope they were kidding.
But here's one tax comment that I did like. Gave me a chuckle.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/new-obl-tape-ir.html
[-]
Well, a 2.5% flat tax. That is better than the R or D party. Is Osama going to announce on the Tonight Show? Of course, their infrastracture is low maintenance. Bridge collapse? Well, there are no bridges. Health care, well if you live that is good, if not it is God's will. On the other hand, I bet they have no trial lawyers....
Posted by: jb | Sep 7, 2007 4:14:11 PM
[-]
And why is Osama's mouth purple? Inquiring minds want to know...
at September 9, 2007 12:25 AM
Awake, No he is not. I did go to his site.
Oh, eagle I see you responded. I understand were you are coming from. I just think your wrong in thinking that Islam is radicalized. I say if they read and understand what the Koran teaches they will be good Muslims not radicalized Muslims. The vast majority of muslims are not following the teachings. Just like a lot of so called church goers are not real Christians. I am not trying to bate you just stating what I understand on the subject.
Here is another example. Most of the Germans supported Nazism but most did not actively go after the Jews or help in the genocide. Although indirectly they did. Same with the average Muslim. That is why you don't hear large numbers of them speaking out or turning the suicide bombers in.
Posted by: Im.mad.as.HELL! at September 9, 2007 12:33 AM
For Bin Laden's past speeches and fatwas, Bookyards has them in its library at http://www.bookyards.com/search_results.html?author_id=3720&type=books
Posted by: Victorlamp at September 9, 2007 12:39 AM
No way. What's more scary? A man in fatigues with an AK47 behind him or this strange and VERY unconvincing effort to look younger?
Does he REALLY need to signal to anyone that he's at war?
And isn't there some rule against trimming it?
What about the video quitting part way through? Did he say anything about current events before the video quit? I strongly suspect this tirade was taped in segments. The first part, with video, before the ravages of cave dwelling completely took their effects and the part addressing current events without video because he cannot allow anyone to see what his jihad has done to his face and body.
Posted by: Stuart Pendous at September 9, 2007 1:46 AM
Even though you have no idea who I am, and purposely so, I might add, I will continue to read your books, and monitor your website, and I think you for all that you do, and for the level of expertise and scholarship you bring to the topic.
posted by Dale in Atlanta
Are you friend or foe? On the one hand you sound like a friend but I sense something else, something a bit sinister. After carefully reading your post several times, some of which, by the way, I found quite interesting and informative, you seemed triumphant and delighted to accuse Mr.Spencer of "wandering a bit astray again", implying that he is often mistaken, confused, or ignorant. Then you embarked on a lesson in Islam 101, rudimentary, basic material that is common knowledge even to me. Your professorial demeanor was obviously intended to insult Mr. Spencer and perhaps suggest to his readers that he is indeed ignorant.
You implied that you are far more knowledgable than he, evidenced by your patronizing syntax.
But then you (sarcastically?) lavish him with accolades and announce that you will resume your role of anonymous Islamic scholar, reader, and "monitor", since your attempts to elulcidate were mistaken for criticism by an overly sensitive Mr. Spencer. Your identity and your agenda remain a mystery, but I have a nagging doubt that you are a friend.
Still, I wish you would reconsider and continue to post your comments.
at September 9, 2007 3:00 AM
Dale in Atlanta--
You added a nice contribution--then you wrecked it by taking Robert's counter point to the end you do--that he is thin skinned or whatever--that anytime you post more accurate info or interject something corrective into the discussion you would be dismissed for daring to do so. Come on bro!!! If RS was that thin skinned, your post would not still be there---but I have to admit--Robert, you come off as condescending--to a good post and poster. I understand that you are constantly challenged and your point is well taken too--except the way it seems you took the correction--from a typo or whatever--who cares?--the main thing is accuracy--we all want that and that is why we look to you as someone proven in battle many times.
Reminds me of the time I contributed a correction to a lecture in a class I took once--my prof--reflexively said, "oh, so I now have a redactor.." Such tends to make one say--"gee thanks for making me regret that I ever spoke up."
SO DALE---STICK AROUND!!!! We need the informed input.
As the proverb goes, "Iron sharpens iron..." your knowledge is needed here to hone us all in.
Robert--thanks for all you do too. What an asset you are in the fight for the truth. Subtract your contribution to the GWOT against islamo-fanaticism and we would all be losers.
VIVA JW!!!
Posted by: BB at September 9, 2007 3:04 AM
Fill in his “they”, with Islamist.
Lets get some reality out of all his bull.
“If they ISLAMISTS leave their barracks, the mines devour them, and if they refuse to leave, rulings are passed against them. Thus the only options left in front of them are to commit suicide or cry, both of which are from the severest of afflictions”.
“The Islamist are the ones suffering the “severest of afflictions”, they are the ones who cry. (CAIR good example. )
Hey, who are the ones strapping on the explosives or flying into buildings? Sounds like suicide.
Then he goes on to say this;
“So is there anything more they ISLAMIST can do after crying and killing themselves to make you respond to them? They are doing that out of the severity of the humiliation, fear and terror which they are suffering”.
Here is the real kicker;
The true religion is a mercy for people in their lives, filling their hearts with serenity and calm.
Must be them low taxes and that opium that gives warm fuzzy feelings of serenity and calm,.....
at September 9, 2007 3:07 AM
Oh and just for the record Mr Black beard, your
statement here;
You believe that Allah is your Lord and your Creator and the Creator of this earth and that it is His property, then you work on His earth and property without His orders and without obeying Him, and you legislate in contradiction to His Law and methodology.
No..Allah is not who I believe in,
Allah Lord of the worlds who is the devil.
at September 9, 2007 3:18 AM
I heard that this is really the result of the Taliban runners only being able to get one foodstuff through to Osama.
Bosco.
Posted by: profitsbeard at September 9, 2007 3:31 AM
They may see this kind of a dye job as a "militant gesture".. I STILL think that osama-babe is jes' a lil' bit gay..
i think [s]he wants nothing more than to hang out with John Edwards and Oprah to discuss favorite hairstyles..
Just my uneducated guess as someone who's lived in NYC for over 20 years..
LOL!!!!!
Posted by: Allahfanculo at September 9, 2007 3:56 AM
From eagle’s site he believes that the majority of muslims are peaceful and just want to get along with their lives. Those would be the ones we hear nary a peep out of regarding the islamists behavior. The thugs run the show, mo was a militant, they emulate him he commanded them to. How many 50%, 25% how bout 10%= 100 million +? And it isn’t just the militancy it is all the other stuff they are offended by and sooner or later they start demanding at the point of a knife that you change. You know it is true eagle we see it everywhere they go without exception and they are already doing it here.
Sure there are muslims that you describe but they are scared of the islamists and they find it safer to keep quiet its convenient. This I can understand but I do not have to accept it and I won’t. There is no other way to put it but the muslims are a threat to themselves as well as us, lets say mo was delusional as is sometimes debated, do you have any idea what the implications of that for the world are? I live in the USA and the Christians like to spread what they call the good word but they have never once told me what to do or when and how to do it that is not true of the muslims and they have been around here a helluva lot less time than anyone else.
If I see the day that these muslims you describe are chasing the islamists with pitchforks and clubs then I will know that you are right. Until then I have to give my civilization the benefit of any doubt. If you find the time maybe you could post an explanation for the extremely high rate of jihadists in the new convert arena on your site.
at September 9, 2007 6:07 AM
Posted by: Eagle
awake, how so?
You fail to mention who organized the rally
The rally was organized by a group called Muttahida Quomi Mahaz, lead by Altaf Hussain
Back in the late 70’s early 80’s, Altaf Hussain, then a Mohajir taxi driver in the United States, came back to Karachi and formed a student association.
This later on with army backing led to a network of professional militant bands with a hand in the drug trade of Karachi, composed of 5,000-6,000 hit men and notorious criminals.
Carjacking, land grabbing, extortion, kidnapping, drug running, illegal construction made them unbelievable sums of money which gave them remarkable gains in successive elections.
Altaf also opened up a number of torture cells around the city for those hard cases(reporters, human rights activists, doctors, police officials, etc.) who refused to toe his line.
Besides the professional criminals and terrorists, the MQM also trained a whole generation of street gangs in the ABC’s of street thuggery, and used them to ensure that the people in the MQM ‘areas’ toed the party line.
Sadly, many still support the MQM, though it has to be said that a sizable percent only do so out of fear.
Does bringing up people in large numbers really show the TRUTH ?
And so can Benazir & . And so can Osama Bin Laden.
Saddam Hussain used to have rallies in 80's of similar nature Even the mass murdered Muqtada-Al Sadr can bring people on streets.
"The pictures are the true representation of illetrate Pakistan,whether they are fooled by Altaf(MQM) the Mullahs or Benazir,they will be keep getting screwed.
The plain truth is the do noy know about extremism, they are more concerned about their tv,cds and dvd shops being shut down.
More
http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/
at September 9, 2007 7:05 AM
Leon,
If David Shayler is here to spread the message of love, I suggest he start with Osama. If he was da Vinci in a past life, then HE must have known of the 9/11 attacks before they happened, as well, since it's believed that da Vinci foretold all of this. He was George Washington, so we should thank him for our independence.
He can prevent terrorist attacks, so where was he when London and Madrid were bombed? (He probably felt it wasn't the time for his services but Glasgow was a test of his faith?)
The twin towers were brought down by "missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes"? Not even the Americans thought of that one. They all think it was controlled demolition.
One says the Pentagon was brought down by a plane that flew a missile into the building, which is why the plane was seen in the sky soon after.
Shayler has the best weapon to fight terror and he should work to universalize it. Imagine if it was spread all through the Muslim world. Islam truly would be a religion of peace. Peace through cannabis. "...it makes you more spiritual and less violent and takes you closer to the light."
Thanks.
at September 9, 2007 10:15 AM
Eagle,
While your personal sentiments are admirable, they are essentially, valueless. People who you would call "extremists", like bin Laden, are nothing of the sort. They are examples of those who are practicing true Islam, the abrogated Medinan version.
When one understands that sura 9 was "revealed" to Muhammad as the penultimate chapter of the Qur'an, it is impossible not to question the degree of influence via the obvious contradictions that were presented through the process of naskh. For example, the "there is no compulsion in religion" verse that was present in the Meccan verses of the Qur'an, now appear, by the presence of the verse of the sword, to be in direct contradiction.
Most historical Islamic scholars agree that any contradictions in the Qur'an are settled by observing the later revelation of the two. Sura 9 being one of the last (second to last specifically) is most problematic to the non-Islamic community, in my opinion.
When one has the comprehension of that, coupled with the additional obstacle that the Qur'an is perceived by Muslims to be the direct, immutable word of Allah, it is somewhat utopian to expect a major reformation in Islam. Muslims, especially scholars who use Islam as a socio-political weapon, will not line up to change or clarify the Qur'an. To do so, essentially strips the Qur'an of it's supposed divinity.
If for example, the intolerant verses in sura 9 are considered moot, or are not to be considered as dominant, does it no imply that Allah made mistakes? Currently, it is arranged that Allah just changed his mind and adapted to the changing historical times. Logically, it can be no other way.
No one has ever stated at Jihad Watch that all Muslims are terrorists. Most Muslims are completely irrelevant when compared to the ideology of Islam. Many are merely cultural Muslims, no different than nominal Christians, declaring themselves as such merely for cultural identification purposes only. That being said, the overwhelming majority of terrorist acts commited today are perpetrated by Muslims.
I fear that based on the aforementioned reasoniong, that Dar al-Islam and Dar al-harb will remain perpetually locked in a state of conflict. It is possible to offset this, but the onus is completely on the Islamic community as a whole and will not be accomplished by any amount of empty lip-service paid to it. Without further abrogation or at least exploratory interpretation as it was during the time of ijtihad, questioning the Qur'an itself, nothing will change.
Posted by: awake at September 9, 2007 11:34 AM
Seconding 'awake' - yes, not all Muslims are terrorists.
The problem for the authorities in non-muslim countries, however, is telling the difference, at any given moment, between those who are and those who are not.
Because SOME of those who appear not to be terrorists, ARE. They are merely concealing their intention and waiting till the time is right to strike. Over the past ten/ twenty years we in the West - and elsewhere - have seen way too many examples of this type of Muslim.
And among those who may currently happen to be peaceful - sitting lightly to their religion, or ignoring it entirely, genuinely making friends with non-muslims, not observing sharia nor plotting jihad - a significant proportion may, suddenly and unpredictably, 'get religion' and turn nasty. We have seen plenty of examples of this kind of thing, too - witness the 'doctors' plot'.
And then, too, a frightening percentage of new converts to Islam appear to become armed and dangerous with distressing speed. For example, the German jihadists so recently arrested.
I am afraid that the 'presumption of innocence' is something of a handicap in a political situation where one really CANNOT assume, a priori, that this or that adherent of the System of Islam is not either a present or a future danger to all kafirs they may encounter.
Suppose you have a factory manufacturing sweets: some contain deadly poison; some do not; there is no way to tell which is which by looking at them; and some of those which are non-poisonous will become poisonous after purchase. Would you buy those sweets in large quantities, and put them in your pantry?
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at September 9, 2007 10:18 PM
Malaki, Shafi'i, Hanafi, and Hanbali = Muslim
Tiger, Whitetip, Hammerhead, Mako = shark
Copperhead, Fer-de-lance, Coral, Cobra = snake
I am not going to get tied up in the minutae of who believes what. There may or may not be a significance in OBL's black dye job; the prudent thing to do would be to assume that this is an ominous change in appearance. We cannot forget what each and evry Muslim has in common - a belief in the Qoran and the sayings and doings of ole Mo hisself (that is plenty).
Posted by: Pelayo at September 9, 2007 11:29 PM
Suppose you have a factory manufacturing sweets: some contain deadly poison; some do not; there is no way to tell which is which by looking at them; and some of those which are non-poisonous will become poisonous after purchase. Would you buy those sweets in large quantities, and put them in your pantry?
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at September 9, 2007 10:18 PM
That is an excellent analogy! I don't know why it is so difficult for islamic apologists and "peaceful" (at the moment) muslims to understand why we are concerned about the rapidly growing muslim presence in our countries. Maybe some of them will wrap their challenged imaginations around your wonderful example and derive some wisdom from it, although I expect their more likely response will be: duhh?
at September 10, 2007 1:03 AM
I've been looking at Figh books and I've found a new
book. Came out last year. It's a Hanafi manual
Hidayah
ISBN-10: 0954054490
ISBN-13: 978-0954054496
at September 10, 2007 8:25 AM
Osama is completely like Robert spencer, both are terrorists. One is Muslim terrorist and another one is christian terrorist.
Bush is opposit. He always clean shaved person like Higida
at September 11, 2007 4:16 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)