| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
Jihad Watch Advisory Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald takes on this outstanding display of dhimmitude from the eminently cloudy-minded Thomas Friedman at the New Duranty Times:
Everyone will have his own startling encounter with Islam -- the real thing, not what Muslim apologists, hoping to give everyone a carefully-circumscribed "peek into the Koran" (and let's make sure that none of these unwary Infidels manages to read anything beyond the Michael Sells "Approaching the Qur'an" and by all means, keep them from looking into the Hadith or the Sira), have on offer. It is almost always limited to highly selective quotation from the Qur'an. The Hadith, and the Sira -- sorry, off limits for now.One keeps being surprised at how little people think they need to know before making grand pronouncements. Yesterday, amused by the latest display of vacuity and portentousness by Tom Friedman, nominating -- modestly -- Ali al-Sistani for the Nobel Prize -- I went to www.sistani.org to look around. There, between Sistani's complete banning of chess (and to think that checkmate is merely the Persian "shakh mat"), and his discussions of all the usual subjects that inquiring Muslims wish to know about, from whether it is okay to marry the sister of a man you have sodomized, or who has sodomized you (I forget which) to whether your canonical prayers count if you haven't performed the wudu (ablutions) correctly -- you know, all the stuff that you want to know, was something else, and that something was all about what is considered by Sistani and those who seek his guidance to be "Najis" or "unclean."
If you click on "Muslim Laws" on the left, and then, once a list comes up, click on "najis things," you will get a list -- #84 -- and if you then go a little further, and click on the menu where, among those unclean things, the "kafir" (which is to say, the Unbeliever, that is to say -- You and I, Dear Reader) you will get a further discussion of how, in the wonderful, "moderate" Islam of the al-Sistani variety, the Unbeliever, the Infidel, the Kafir (guilty of "kufr" or "ingratitude" for failing to receive the Revelation of the Last of the Prophets in the right, accepting, submissive way) is viewed.
So here, for everyone out in Ames, Iowa, is just a little sample of what you are missing, and what one suspects that Mohammed Fahmy, and Tariq Ramadan, and Hamid Dabashi, and Zeinab Bahrani, and a cast of hundreds of millions, would prefer that you not inquire into too deeply. And please, whatever you do, in order to accommodate them, at least promise that you will NOT read the websites www.dhimmitude.org and www.faithfreedom.org and www.co-jet.org and www.jihadwatch.org, and certainly do NOT read anything by Bat Ye'or, but especially do not read Islam and Dhimmitude or The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam. And do not read Ibn Warraq's Why I Am Not a Muslim. And let's not even talk about Robert Spencer. These books will only confuse you. And never pay attention to a man named Ali Sina or any of those ex-Muslims who appear at his website. Never google the name "Habib Malik" to read what he has to say about the historic relationship of Islam to Christianity; never read a similar article by James V. Schall, a professor at Georgetown; never take a peak at the Western scholars whose work may be sampled in the anthology The Legacy of Jihad by Andrew Bostom.
Well, here is what you can find at www.sistani.org:
"84. The following ten things are essentially najis: 1. Urine 2. Faeces 3. Semen 4. Dead body 5. Blood 6. Dog 7. Pig 8. Kafir 9. Alcoholic liquors 10. The sweat of an animal who persistently eats najasat [i.e., unclean things].108. The entire body of a Kafir, including his hair and nails, and all liquid substances of his body, are najis.
109. If the parents, paternal grandmother and paternal grandfather of a minor child are all kafir, that child is najis, except when he is intelligent enough, and professes Islam. When, even one person from his parents or grandparents is a Muslim, the child is Pak (The details will be explained in rule 217).
110. A person about whom it is not known whether he is a Muslim or not, and if no signs exist to establish him as a Muslim, he will be considered Pak. But he will not have the privileges of a Muslim, like, he cannot marry a Muslim woman, nor can he be buried in a Muslim cemetery."So who wants to second the nomination of Al-Sistani for the Nobel Prize? Anyone out there in Ames, Iowa?
Posted by Robert at March 21, 2005 4:42 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't al-Sistani refused to personally meet with any of the Kafir who liberated his country because they are najis?
How do you reward such arrogance with a Nobel Peace Prize?
I guess the same way you reward Yasser Arafat with one...
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at March 21, 2005 6:28 PM
Well, the important question now becomes how to contact the Nobel organisation to let them know about al-Sistani's bigoted views. Anyone have an idea on how this might proceed?
Geoff
Posted by: Geoff at March 21, 2005 6:35 PM
Geoff-
I believe they have a website - perhaps they can be contacted there (?).
at March 21, 2005 6:41 PM
As long as the Peace Prize was constructed of the very same material which made Mr. Nobel so wealthy, sure.
Then stand back.
Yours truly,
Kafir Pig-Dog No. 2,345,678,092, the Third
Posted by: BigSleep at March 21, 2005 7:05 PM
Hugh!
excellent article as always. I certainly hope you send a copy over to Thom (I believe that's how he spells it, Thom) Friedman. I mean the guy has wet noodles between his ears. And people listen to him - and I wouldn't be surprised if this weren't some kind of trial balloon from the White House. Who, by the way, are at the moment looking rather unsure about it all. Why are they unsure? They have macular degeneration of the mind. They can't see what's right in front of them without including the Islamic dimension, and they clearly are not seeing the Islamic dimension at all, because they have not been allowed to see it by the overall PC of the modern world. I'm very afraid they've bought "The Myth of Islamic Tolerance." (plug, plug)
We must all plead for reason.
Posted by: rb at March 21, 2005 7:12 PM
Yes, I came across this pearler of a site a week or so ago and was utterly shocked and disgusted at what I found. I forwarded the URL to many a friend and relative of mine.
I fail to see how anyone, even the most fervent and rabid Islam-apologist, can explain this one away. Good ole Sistani is just so clear and concise in his feelings about us. No fancy, poetic Arabic language to have to interpret or wade through. No excuses of "out of context". Just a nice, plain, clear list; something any idiot could understand.
And the Islam-apologists will struggle to come up with a moral equivalence, like they constantly do whenever you bring up the atrocious nature of Islam. No grand poobah of any other religion goes around saying people not of their faith are equivalent to excrement and piss.
I just hope the site isn't taken down if they realize that too many of us filthy kafirs are reading it and seeing their disgusting hypocrisy and lies.
Posted by: feralee at March 21, 2005 8:49 PM
Sistani is indeed the grand poobab of the bunch, but he allows his aides to meet with kafirs. If a kafir is filthy, a kafir will contaminate any muslim. What if kafir contamination is contagious? Is there a vaccine for it?
If I thought it would do any good, I would send our new secretary of state a copy of Hugh's post.
She could share it with the President, and they could do whatever it is they do when they receive "outside" advice from concerned citizens. It would behoove both of them to realize that there is a real world out there beyond diplomacy, where reality prevails and freaks like Sistani are far more important and respected than they are. I'm sure President Bush would be delighted to know that he's in the same league as dog shit and other assorted detritus.
Considering the precious American lives and billions of dollars we're wasting on these medieval, tribal barbarians, he should be aware of their gratitude.
at March 21, 2005 9:09 PM
No wonder it's so easy for Muslims to murder us. After being trained to think of us as equivalent to excrement, it's no problem to blow us away. We're dehumanized and denigrated from day one by Muslims. And yet we constantly hear this incessant whining from Muslims about how they're victimized and oppressed. Oh boo hoo! Yet we don't go around telling our kids to think of other people not of our faith as filthy and disgusting. Our religious leaders don't tell their flock to think of other religions as filthy and disgusting.
What vile, lying little hypocrites. Bleating and mewling about being victims of racism and oppression while they teach their kids to view us as unclean, as objects of disgust, to be avoided. And while most of us are working to pay tax to support these ingrates.
Posted by: feralee at March 21, 2005 9:32 PM
Great article Hugh. I am apalled at how many people thought of as "experts" in the ME probably have not even cracked open a Koran. That totally blew away all of my post-modernist conditioning. Even more shocking are the number of so-called "liberals" who read the Koran and never manage to find anything wrong with it. Friedman probably belongs to the first group only because he probably never read the Koran. In other words, it probably wouldn't make any difference if he did read it!
Posted by: Rublev at March 21, 2005 9:55 PM
I have to admit, I was in the same category as Rublev until a few years ago, when I started reading the Quran. I was shocked. I'd always been told that the three Abrahamic religions were basically equivalent and so to find what I did in the Quran (Pikhtal translation) was really horrifying. I didn't believe it for a while; thought I'd got a bad copy somehow, or that it had been translated incorrectly. Surely the people who'd told me they were all the same weren't mad? They seemed like nice people. I thought initially it was still me that was at fault, somehow. Unfortunately, the other translations I checked out read the same way as Pikhtal. Then, of course, I starting checking out muslim websites and talking to them about religion. "But surely, you must believe that the Jews follow corrupt ways. They bring it on themselves" I heard from a muslim at work was possibly the capper to my investigation.
One thing's for sure; I'll never trust in the glib assurances of my so-called 'political betters' ever again.
Geoff
Posted by: Geoff at March 22, 2005 12:00 AM
Sistani doesn't deserve the Norwegian Eurabian dhimmi worthless nobel piss prize because he does not meet the high standard set by the late terrorist Yasser Arafat. Only when Sistani follows in the footsteps of the great jihadist Arafat and immitates "prophet" Muhammad by murdering infidels should he be eligible for consideration for the nobel piss prize.
This is a great time for Islam. Muhammad the pedophile said "war is deceit", but there's no need for Muslims to deceive us. We're deceiving ourselves! All thanks to dhimmi, PC and spineless politicians, CNN, etc. Yuck.
at March 22, 2005 12:32 AM
Personally I'd like to seem Sistani win. Of course, he would have to go to a Kufr country to accept the prize, and he would have to take it from Kufr hands, and he would have to thank Kufr for it and generally act like a civilized human being.
Shoot, someone's dachshund might even hump and urinate on his leg while he's there.
Now that would be cool!
at March 22, 2005 12:37 AM
Personally I'd like to seem Sistani win. Of course, he would have to go to a Kufr country to accept the prize, and he would have to take it from Kufr hands, and he would have to thank Kufr for it and generally act like a civilized human being.
Yes, it might be a struggle for the kafir-phobic Sistani to accept this prize, but I'm sure he'd make the effort. Put on a show. Make temporary nicey-nicey with the filthy kafirs. A facade of lies and hypocrisy. Anything to fool the appeasing kafir fools. Part of the whole kitman and taqiyya thing they're into.
To present him with the award, I think they should choose a Jewish lesbian, who's blind and has to use a black guide dog that sweats profusely while eating bacon doggie snacks. And the prize should be a bottle of Jack Daniels.
Posted by: feralee at March 22, 2005 12:48 AM
Somehow I don't think Sistani would have any scruples accepting a Nobel prize. He managed to overcome his distaste for the unclean Kafir when he needed hospital treatment, in London.
http://www.iraq.net/displayarticle5130.html
And, of course, benefiting Islam trumps all.
Posted by: Silvester at March 22, 2005 3:30 AM
But Hugh, you are a professional reseacher and writer and have undertaken an exhaustive investigation to ferret out this material. One cannot expect those whose career is devoted to jet-setting around the Middle East, handing out billions of dollars in American aid, accepting Putlizer Prizes or interviewing rising stars in Dar al-Islam to have the time, staff or resources to explore such arcane issues.
Posted by: Charles Martel at March 22, 2005 8:11 AM
The poster above is correct that my "exhaustive investigation" would have been impossible for Tom Friedman to have undertaken himself. For he is so very busy, in all his hectic vacancy, composing platitudes and shallow plongitudes, putting on makeup for Charlie Rose, writing a desposit slip to accompany the $20,000 check he has received for a half-hour talk to some trade group (full of personal anecdotes about conversations he had with Arabs in Davos or Marrakech and his "personal takes" and "theories") on the subject of "whither the Middle East" -- what can you expect?
Yesterday, The Times carried an interview with Ricky Gervais [who co-wrote, starred, and immortalized "The Office"]. He explained that he had read only one book in his life, The Catcher in the Rye, at the age of 28, and while he had thoroughly enjoyed the experience, had not read any book since, because "there is only so much time in the day." Tom Friedman does not have the time to study the theory and practice of Islam for the same reason: "There's only so much time in the day." Amazing how the same phrase can be comic in one case, and tragic in the other -- and both the comedy and the tragedy are ours.
For the record, or the Paper of Record, it took about five minutes to find the www.sistani.org website, discover what was written there about Kafirs, cut-and-paste, and deliver it up here, on a well-pixelled platter, urbi et orbi. At the end of it all, I was so plumb tuckered out, that I had to keep on sitting.
at March 22, 2005 8:32 AM
Actually,
Friedman has written some good stuff, maybe he is going insane?
at March 22, 2005 1:40 PM
The above was of course, intended as sarcasm. It would only take five minutes of googling and surfing for Tom Friedman, the BBC stable of Arabists, Condi Rice or even ADHD-challenged GWB to gather the same info as that provided by Hugh. Whether they would publicly disclose their newfound wisdom is another question.
Jakester
Friedman is like one of those charlatan television psychics. If you look back at his columns over the years, you'll notice that he subtly revises his predictions and shifts his views to bring them into harmony with events. There's a reason he won a Pulitzer.
Posted by: Charles Martel at March 22, 2005 3:03 PM
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Dhimmi Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)