| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
A poster was put up near a Somali-owned store in Lewiston, Maine. It says a dog named Mohammed has been lost, and that the dog is not good with children and cannot be trusted. The Somali community in Lewiston is upset (thanks to Weasel Zippers for the heads-up), and now the rest of the community is swinging into action too, against this possible hate crime.
A mildly obnoxious teasing poster is a possible hate crime? Well, remember that Lewiston, Maine is the home of the notorious Ham Steak of Hate: the placement of a bag containing a ham steak on a table in a middle school where a group of Muslim students was sitting was investigated as a hate crime. So if there is any place in the United States where a poster of a dog can get traction as a hate crime, it's Lewiston.
But the reaction to this poster is really over the top, with Jewish and Christian leaders leading the charge:
"City leaders decry slander," by Bonnie Washuk in the Sun Journal (thanks to Peggy):
LEWISTON - City and religious leaders gathered Friday to condemn what some are calling an act of hate targeting the Somali community.On Thursday several copies of an anti-Muslim poster appeared outside a downtown Somali-owned store. The poster showed an angry Rottweiler beneath the words "Lost Dog" and "Mohammed." It said, "Mohammed is NOT GOOD with people or kids. Do not trust him." It included a phony phone number.
The posters were affixed to a tree and a utility pole outside the Barwaqo Halal Store at the corner of Chestnut and Lisbon streets. They were discovered by store owner Hussein Ahmed.
The Lewiston Police Department and the Maine Attorney General's Office are investigating. Police said at the very least the posters are harassment, and could be a hate crime.
Friday's show of support for Muslims was organized by Rabbi Hillel Katzir of the Temple Shalom of Auburn. Katzir also represents the Lewiston-Auburn Interfaith Clergy.
Officials representing churches, the city, Sisters of Charity Health Care and the Maine People's Alliance stood in front of Ahmed's store Friday. They "turned out to say these posters that were left, this kind of hate, this is not us. This is not Lewiston," Katzir said. "We wanted to be out here to make sure the general public knows that, that we represent the greater Lewiston and not these crazies who do this kind of thing."
Words can hurt, the rabbi said. "The words on this poster have hurt members of our community. We're here to offer our support and our healing to them."
When any religion is attacked, all religions are attacked, Katzir said. He added that Mainers need to understand that their human rights "depend on safeguarding the rights of all Mainers."
Sister Claire Lepage of Lewiston said she laments the harassment "of our local Muslim community. These are peaceful religious members that have earned our respect." People need to remember "these people come from war-torn countries. We have a responsibility to welcome them in our city."
Lewiston Mayor Larry Gilbert agreed that the "cowardly" posters are not reflective of the community. The incident is being investigated by police and will be prosecuted fully, Gilbert said. "The city supports people of all faiths, of all nationalities."
Father Michael Seavey of St. Joseph's and St. Patrick's churches read a statement from Maine Catholic Bishop Joseph Malone, who said it's discouraging "to see harassing displays of hatred aimed at peaceful people who are part of our own communities."...
And in this story, Katzir says:
"Attacking or making fun of any religion," said Katzir, "is the same as attacking and making fun of all religions. If we don't stop it here, who's next? Someboy will be next. That's guaranteed. We know that from history."
"Attacking or making fun of any religion is the same as attacking and making fun of all religions." Really? So where was Katzir when Piss Christ was being defended as art? Where was Katzir when Chris Ofili's dung-encrusted portrait of the Virgin Mary was being shown at the Brooklyn Museum of Art? Has Katzir written an angry letter to Bill Maher?
The point is that there is a glaring double standard at work here. And I am sure that Katzir and Seavey and the Mayor of Lewiston aren't even aware of it, and would indignantly deny it. They are so conditioned to seeing Muslims as victims, that when they heard about this poster they jumped into action, and I would expect they did so without considering the larger implications of what they're doing.
But what are those larger implications? Katzir goes on to say, "If we don't stop it here, who's next?" So in other words, if we don't make it a crime to post an obnoxious poster making fun of Muhammad, next thing you know people will be posting obnoxious posters making fun of Moses and Jesus. This sounds like an ominous "First they came for the Jews, but because I was not a Jew, I said nothing" argument, but it falters for several reasons.
1. People are already poking fun at Judaism and Christianity, in major forums, without consequences. See Maher for the latest of many, many examples. For other examples consult Abe Foxman and Bill Donohue.
2. Katzir seems to be calling for the classification of poking fun at religious figures as a hate crime. This would in practice be primarily aimed at shielding Muslims from such ridicule, since Jews and Christians already put up with it on a more or less daily basis (see #1). But the placing of Muslims and Islam beyond criticism as a semi-protected class would only fuel the resentment that leads to this sort of thing, not calm it.
3. Many, many Muslim spokesmen since 9/11 (and before that also) classify any honest discussion of the elements of Islam that jihadists use to justify violence and supremacism as "hateful." It is therefore likely that if Katzir got his way and ridicule or fun-poking at a religious figure were classified as "hate," jihadists and their allies would use such laws to stifle any investigation into jihadist motives and goals, and thus put us all at greater risk.
Posted by Robert at January 6, 2008 8:10 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
An insult is an insult only if one responds to it.
Ignore it and it vanishes like fog in the sun.
Posted by: tanstaafl![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at January 6, 2008 9:27 AM
Rabbis like this Kutzer is the reason I haven't been in a synagogue in twenty years.
Posted by: poetcomic1 at January 6, 2008 9:33 AM
Since when did world become full of people born with their heads in the ground? In particular western religious leaders should stand up for those values which they hold important in while living in a pluralistic society.
moslems are still living in the 7th century. It is highly time that they get their eyes opened and realize they are not special. If they do not change their ways, then people are not going to give them special accord. As an American, I can name my dog or any other four legged animal, any name I want. It is called freedom.
Don't Tread On Me!
at January 6, 2008 9:40 AM
I registered at the sunjournal to comment, but no comment form appears when I login.
Anyone know why?
My God these Maine people are screwed up. I've been there to Acadia National Park and to the various Harbors on the East Coast, and it is so breathtakingly beautiful. However, generally speaking, I did not like the inhabitants.
Has anyone else registered and then tried to comment on this ridiculous little 'paper?
Go Mohammed dog!
Posted by: darcy at January 6, 2008 9:40 AM
Also, something encouraging is that if you read the 16 comments - 99% are on OUR side!
Posted by: darcy at January 6, 2008 9:43 AM
Interesting colouring for a Rotty! Do the two fingers holding the photo mean anything, as they do here in the UK?
Posted by: grobari at January 6, 2008 9:48 AM
This dhimmi is typical:
"Sister Claire Lepage of Lewiston said she laments the harassment "of our local Muslim community. These are peaceful religious members that have earned our respect." People need to remember "these people come from war-torn countries. We have a responsibility to welcome them in our city."
However, sister Claire forgets to mention just how these people earned her respect. Neither does she mention why she she has a responsibility to welcome peaceful people from war-torn countries. Does she want her own city to become peacefully war-torn as well?
Why does nobody seem to question the fact that once "peaceful" refugees have established their "communities" under asylum in other countries, they immediately start reestablishing the conditions from which they fled their "war-torn" countries.
Posted by: Osmund Bindalen at January 6, 2008 9:53 AM
When any religion is attacked, all religions are attacked, Katzir saidWell, then, let's censor the filthy Qur'an, since therein Christianity (or what Muhammad was Christianity) is mocked and attacked. Can I count on your suport, Rabbi?
It distresses me greatly to see Christians being so idiotic like the ones who rushed to label this as "hate". Go back to church, open your Bible and see hw much "hate" the Almighty has sent towards the Canaanite belief system (which included things that are still part of Islam).
Posted by: Crusader at January 6, 2008 10:13 AM
Why is the Qur'an not investigated as a hate crime? Surely a book that calls for murder is a hate crime?
This is what is so ridiculous about multiculturalism, it is totally contradictory. The truth is that the politicians are so afraid of being branded racist/islamophobic etc. they turn a blind eye to this hate filled religion.
at January 6, 2008 10:33 AM
"Why is the Qur'an not investigated as a hate crime? Surely a book that calls for murder is a hate crime?"
Oh, that's good, DaveMate. I'm going to remember that.
at January 6, 2008 10:41 AM
When any religion is attacked, all religions are attacked, Katzir said.
Gee, Rabbi, I just didn't understand. I realize now that when I criticize Moslems for engaging in honor-killing, I'm really attacking Presbyterians, 7th-day Adventists, and Wiccans.
My apologies to all.
at January 6, 2008 10:54 AM
"Friday's show of support for Muslims was organized by Rabbi Hillel Katzir of the Temple Shalom of Auburn. Katzir also represents the Lewiston-Auburn Interfaith Clergy."
-- from the article above
"Show of support" for what? For a display of hysteria by local Muslims about the attempt (successful as it turned out) to provoke their hysterical reaction to anything they deem other than deeply respectful of Islam, when part of the achievement of the West, sometimes abused, is that aspects of various religions are mocked all the time. And when the faith in question is Islam, and there have been repeated examples of murderous Muslim reactions (to, for example, the Danish cartoons) it is not only not wrong to criticize, but useful to protect, such criticism of Islam, even if it is meant to test the Musilm reaction -- let that reaction be tested. If they wish to live in the West they will have to accept the legal and political instiutitons of that West, and that includes free speech, as defined by us, and not by them.
As for Rabbi Katzir, who "represents the Lewiston-Auburn Interfaith Clergy," one can imagine him thinking of himself as some brave Atticus-Finch (Northern Division), standing tall "with my Muslim friends" in their "time of need." But it's nonsense. It is Muslims who need to be told, or need to be shown, that this lost-dog sign, while hardly a brilliant sally of wit, is neither prosecutable as a crime nor, in the civil law,actionable. And that the hysteria that they are showing, designed of course to force everyone to go after anyone who dares to display an attitude other than one of respect, or even reverence -- designed that is, to force non-Muslims in a non-Muslim land to behave as circumspectly, or deferentially, toward Islam in all of its aspects, when such deference and such circumspection is not demanded of us, we do not demand it of ourselves, in regard to any non-Muslim faith.
The transparent attempt to manipulate non-Muslims, aided and abetted by the moral-preeners who choose never to quite come to grips with the collectivism and the aggressive nature of Islam, because to begin to stuy and analyze Islam, to find out that it is not, pace George Bush, one more "religion" like any other, would throw cock-a-hoop the worldview of those wedded, coute que coute, to the pieties of interfaith gatherings that, while they are perfectly fine when they do not involve those whose "faith" is a Total Belief-System that mandates a "struggle" to spread that faith until it not only can be found everywhere, but until it everywhere dominates, is not at all fine when it becomes one more instrument for those conducting Jihad by using, as Muslims have set out clearly their intent to use, the naivete and weaknesses of the West (including mental weakness, and that strand of self-righteousness that the more rigid, and wilfully ignorant, interfaith-healers, in Sweet Auburn, lovelist village of central Maine, or anywhere else in this land of ours, during what is looking more and more like, if more people don't pull up their socks and come to their senses, what Karl Kraus would have called "the last days of Mankind."
Posted by: Hugh at January 6, 2008 11:05 AM
When any religion is attacked, all religions are attacked, Katzir said.
Gee, Rabbi, I just didn't understand. I realize now that when I criticize Moslems for engaging in honor-killing, I'm really attacking Presbyterians, 7th-day Adventists, and Wiccans.
My apologies to all.
Posted by: ebonystone at January 6, 2008 10:54 AM
Really. The stupidity of that Rabbi is unbelievable. Let's see, the "Piss Christ" was also attacking Buddhism.
at January 6, 2008 11:06 AM
Note that the poster includes the phone number "867-5309."
I bet the hapless owner of that number, if it hasn't been retired in U.S. area codes, thought that scourge ended when the song fell off the charts in the '80s.
And said phone customer would be more a victim here than anyone else involved... Imagine the calls.
Posted by: MarisolJW at January 6, 2008 11:11 AM
"...to anything they deem other than deeply respectful of Islam, when part of the achievement of the West, sometimes abused, is that aspects of various religions are mocked all the time." --Hugh
Voltaire - a huge mocker of the Catholic Church, and the author of "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." Bravo.
To the Lewiston, ME, Mohammedans and Mohammedan Apologists: IMO, Islam sucks. Ditto Mohammed the false prophet. Have a nice day, darcy
Posted by: darcy at January 6, 2008 11:13 AM
So many Americans have become toadying worms to Barbarians.
I'm so ashamed of them.
Posted by: darcy at January 6, 2008 11:17 AM
It is so sad, when pets get lost. I really feel for Tommy Tutone, and I hope he gets his puppy back. My heart aches for lost puppies and misplaced hamsteaks.
Posted by: Jauhara Al-Kafirah at January 6, 2008 11:28 AM
I do hope the family who's dog is missing will get their dog back. Also from what I have seen, this report is a sad reality of our PC culture.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at January 6, 2008 12:27 PM
...Yet there are attacks that are made against Jews and Christians by Muslims against them and their religious figures. Go figure.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at January 6, 2008 12:34 PM
In the Netherlands, an Iranian photographer has just had to close her exhibit (something about Islam, and homosexuality, and \hypocrisy, a point apparenlty made by her photographs of naked Muslim men wearing face-masks of Muhammad and Ali), first at one museum, and then at another, in response to death threats which still stand. Leaving aside the question of tastefulness, leaving aside that eternal problem of defining "what is art" -- "Chto takoye iskusstvo?" said Tolstoy, and stayed too long in order to give his own very long answer -- there is still the little matter of those threats to commit murder, that successful attempt to initimideate, in the Netherlands, by Muslims "defending" the image of Islam.
The moral-preening interfaith-healers of sweet Auburn and nearby towns, as they congratulate themselves on their display of solidarity with their "Muslim brothers," should bethink themselves.
The dog-poster was clearly an attempt to flout the wishes of those Muslims who, not only in sweet Auburn but around the world, think that they have every right to stop all criticism of Islam, to shut it down, by playing the poor victim and waiting for the rabbi-katzirs to come running, at one end, and by death threats, and then by murdering, the theo-van-goghs at the other end.
What the rabbi-katzirs and other interfaith-healers fail to understand, in their mediagenic indignation and outrage and "standing with our Muslim brothers" treacliness, is that they have a duty not to promote themselves as morally superior beings, but rather a duty to the legal and politicial institutions, including the individual freedoms, of the advanced democracies of the Western world. They have a duty,that is, not to take the side of the Muslims behaving as if a single poster applying the name of Muhammad is a dog is practically Kristallnacht, but to calmly explain that in the West such making-fun of this or that faith is permissible, is done all the time (simply turn on Bill Maher), and that by far most of the mockery is directed at the religions of the West, but that Islam will not be considered to be immune to criticism, discussion, or mockery, and they had better get used to it.
Everyone in the Lands of the (Relatively) Free West should be able to mock Islam, just as they can and do mock mock Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, or as they mock those who mock Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism. Whether the mockery hits home, whether it scores a palpable hit, is another matter.
In the affair of the photographs, no doubt the kind of mapplethorpian thing that are not to everyone's taste, Wouter Bos, the deputy prime minister of the Netherlands, said the right thing when both museum directors, and other political figures, were saying the wrong one.
And here is what he said:
“In a democracy, we do not recognise the right not to be insulted.”
Put that in your interfaith peace-pipe and smoke it. For that, Rabbi Katzir, trumps your desire to show just what a swell fellow you are.
Posted by: Hugh at January 6, 2008 12:38 PM
Want to bet that Katzir and the other so-called religious leaders are from the liberal/left branches of their respective faiths?
Because no one else except a bunch of self-righteous and hysterical leftists would get their panties in a knot over a joke like this.
And the mayor is probably cut from the same leftist cloth as the those religious bozos.
BTW the prankster must be laughing his ass off at the hysterics and bloviating generated by his joke.
Also we have found a another chink in the Moslem faith - mockery and all it takes to be successful is a desk jet or laser printer.
Posted by: waltc at January 6, 2008 12:39 PM
poetcomic1 writes:
"Rabbis like this Kutzer is the reason I haven't been in a synagogue in twenty years."
I understand your feelings, but you can always try
and find a synagogue with a rabbi who's views are
closer to yours, you know.
I wonder what denomination the synagogue is. Most
likely Reform, or some liberal variant of Conservative Judaism.
I'd certainly quit my synagogue over any outreach to
mohammadans, but it is indeed a battle of ideas.
at January 6, 2008 12:53 PM
So is it illegal to call a dog Mohammed?
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at January 6, 2008 12:53 PM
Ironic this is going on when in the Middle East, the Arab Muslim newspapers attack all things dear to Jews and Christians. Also it was just recently that there was that offendsive Nativity manger scene that showed the Isreali security wall standing in front of the Holy Family of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph. What hypocracy.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at January 6, 2008 1:00 PM
I hope that someone finds Mohammed, before he attacks a child or medina, again.
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at January 6, 2008 1:05 PM
If you drag and drop the dog poster onto your desktop you will see that the Maine WCSH6 press named the dog poster jpeg image as "racsim1.jpg". Classic social engineering.
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at January 6, 2008 1:10 PM
MarisolJW!!!!!!! You beat me to the culture punch.lol
Note that the poster includes the phone number "867-5309."
Posted by: MarisolJW at January 6, 2008 11:11 AM
at January 6, 2008 2:10 PM
That is very funny. I would like to post them all over my town. Whoever made the poster has a good heatlhy sense of humor. Yea, way to go man!
Posted by: Truth at January 6, 2008 2:14 PM
Islam is a hate-full religion, ergo any discussion of it is hateful. I can see a certain through-the-looking-glass logic to that!
RG
Posted by: RightGirl at January 6, 2008 2:24 PM
This story brings to mind about another dog
FOR IT IS THE DEVIL
Indonesian Workers Attack Dog Calling It "Haram"
At about 9am on Dec 2, 2006, Sabrina Yeap, managing partner of the Furry Friends Farm (FFF), rescued a dog at the Ki-Park Sri Utara construction site belonging to developer, Kepong Industrial Park Sdn Bhd (KIP Group).
http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2006/12/for-it-is-devil.html
Posted by: shiva at January 6, 2008 2:40 PM
A few years back, a poster named Timbo posted a comment here about a lost dog in Lahore, Pakistan.
The dog was named Mahmud
The bereft owner advertised his loss in a local newspaper. He described the missing animal, offered a reward, and explained that the dog answered to the name "Mahmud.
Of course you can guess the reaction
http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2006/06/great-story.html
Posted by: shiva at January 6, 2008 2:48 PM
But the reaction to this poster is really over the top, with Jewish and Christian leaders leading the charge:
Ironic, is it not? This reality is the real strength behind islam's march and it is based on the sactimonious delusions of the very people who have the most to fear from the tenets of sura 9.
at January 6, 2008 3:00 PM
“In a democracy, we do not recognize the right not to be insulted.”
Indeed, we do not, but it seems we're getting there, slowly but surely.
HAID
Posted by: Haid Dasalami at January 6, 2008 3:13 PM
Gee. A Teddy Bear named Muhammad, and now a dog! Actually, we've got to understand that a lot of people were upset by 9/11, then CAIR screaming about turning the USA Muslim, and then others blaming the USA and Israel for world terrorism when it's perpetrated by guys named Ali and Abubekr. We need to be patient and accepting of these people who have snapped and named their attack dogs Muhammad.
Posted by: Kepha at January 6, 2008 3:21 PM
Insulting, poking fun of, making a parody of ANY religion is a basic freedom of speech of any living human being. Unfortunately, some countries doesn't follow it, like Saudi Arabia, Iran...
The thing is, if we can't make jokes of anything that is religious, especially islam, then what do we have? Freedom? Nope, that is what we DON'T have, what we gain with those people complaining? Slavery... Submission...
And those terms, I WILL NEVER submit.
I'm an atheist, I poke fun of any religious stuff I find, especially if its abrahamic religions(christianity and islam). But there difference is, christianity has evolved in a more humane, tolerant religion, which at least 99% forgive and keep living... while islam 99% get angry, death threats and start suing.
Of course, christianity is far from being perfect, and far from being completely peaceful, but it is closer to that than islam.
Islam is the most violent and blood thirsty religion on earth.
Posted by: Dr.CancerMan at January 6, 2008 4:58 PM
This rabbi makes me puke, He is also a big one for saving Sudan, yet he is so dense he doesn't realize that it is Islam that is killing Sudan. He wants all us Jews to cry about an iinsult to some Muslims, who would be the last to help us Jews. Stupidity knows no boundaries..
Posted by: Dumbo at January 6, 2008 4:58 PM
Victimhood is an essential component of identity for the ordinary mohammedan.
I'm not fully clear on the origins of this condition, but it is easily observed.
Victimhood as personal identity is by no means unique to mohammedan culture. And I think it's safe to say that most people have witnessed at least one such person during the course of their lives.
Those of you who are old enough may remember the American TV show "Queen for a Day", where the greatest sufferer was awarded for their pitiable story.
But for some reason it seems to be exceptionally common among the mohammedans, at least in their presentation of themselves to the public.
We did see a rise of this sort of thing in the US in the 70's as the left co-opted the advancement of women and the assertion of the rights of the black folks. From that point forward there seemed to be more and more people every day whose primary point of pride was how they were innocent victims of circumstance.
It may be my imagination but that seems to be falling back to normal levels of ordinary human self-pity (right or wrong) except in academia -- the last bastion of militant victimhood.
That this is a passionate issue is also easily observed. I expect there are few people who haven't witnessed two others heatedly battling over who is the bigger victim and how they are due special consideration as a result -- just in personal matters.
And if you've watched carefully you will have noticed that the assertion that one of the parties is not a victim is taken as an insult and answered with a wave of anger. A real hot-button.
All that said however, It seems that there is something in the mohammedan cultures that really pumps up the sense of victimhood and celebrates it.
Need I mention the mothers of suicide bombers who are celebrated and rewarded for their "loss", the shia custom of self-flagellation in the streets and the ubiquitous celebration of "martyrdom".
The most obvious public pattern is that whenever something happens that they don't like, they rush forward with claims of victimhood, frequently followed by orgies of violence.
I'll just note a few things:
1) Self-defence is the only generally accepted reason for the use of force, so it pays one to have such a rationale handy if one wants to kick some butt.
2) I have had the unfortunate opportunity to make the acquaintance of a number of street criminals in my day. Nearly all of them were, in their own eyes, victims. Victims before the crime. Victims in their motivation to commit the crime. Victims in suffering the consequences of their actions.
3) I've had several occasions to observe that people who see themselves as victims are somewhat self-consistent as they have a very primitive underdeveloped notion of self, will and choice -- a dim view if any of their own decision making process -- and a strangely passive view of events in the world as they impinge on their senses. Their conversation is pretty consistent in these matters.
A bizarre example: I have seen street thugs walk into other people, through sheer negligence, and claim, sincerely mind you, to have been struck.
I've seen similar things from more conventional citizens with a victim self-image.
4) A hyper-sensitivity to insult and reputation. It is very much as if the line between public image (imagined public image) and actual self is almost non-existent. The "self" to the extent that it exists, is extraordinarily fragile.
When it comes to victim types, whether muscular thugs or ordinary housewives, this is an almost universal characteristic.
Remember that the murder of women is too often presented as a matter of "honor" -- which in this context has much to do with public image, and little if anything to do with personal integrity as understood in the west.
-------------
Whether, or how all this sort of thing fits into the mohammedan picture is hard for me to say. But the patterns of thought and behavior on display are far too consistent not to imply that some common and probably similar psychological forces are at work here.
The
-- non-productivity
-- reactivity to every possible slight, real or imaginary
-- conspiracy theories
-- the seeming obsession with imagined attacks and threats from outside (the alleged anti-islamic violence that is supposedly always threatened but never proves to be real)
-- the incapacity for reviewing the results of actions and responsibility
-- the obsession with public image
And above all the sense that the world is something happening to poor innocent me.
-------------
There's something going on here, but I haven't seen much published about it.
Have you?
Posted by: joeblough at January 6, 2008 5:52 PM
Mohammed is NOT GOOD with people or kids. Do not trust him.
Mohammed is also not good with other dogs. Or with bleating sheep. Or with well-intentioned Good Samaritans who hold out their hand with a yummy treat.
If the poor family who lost this dog Mohammed find him, I hope they put him down. It's the only humane thing to do.
Posted by: special_guest at January 6, 2008 6:32 PM
My article Are Big Dogs Safe around Little Children points out that seemingly peaceful animals can be quite dangerous. A Brooklyn family found out the hard way that their trusty, friendly, gentle family dog had a primitive brutal side that they denied in their own hearts.
Unfortunately, there are many people who believe that Islam is a religion like any other peaceful religion and its adherents would never harm the rest of us. One day they will find out the hard way.
at January 6, 2008 6:34 PM
Lets cut to the chase. If it weren't for the dumb 1965 Immigration Act there would be no Somali community in Maine to get all upset and very few other Muslim groups in America for that matter. Now imagine how things will be when Muslims constitute 10 to 20% of the population as in parts of Europe. The only way to avoid this is to reform our immigration system in such a way as to ban or severely restrict Muslim immigration, as Hugh has advocated a number of times.
It is also legal immigration that is the source of most Muslim (as opposed to illegal immigration which is mostly Mexican) immigrants. There are only two top tier Republican candidates (forget about the hopeless Democrats) who support even those efforts directed at illegal immigration; these are Romney and Thompson. The rest either skirt the issue (Giuliani) talk out of both sides of the mouth (Huckabee) or clearly resent the fact that the American people have demanded that the problem be dealt with (McCain). Now if even the modest step of curbing illegal immigration is too much for these guys, what chance will reforming legal immigration have?
Posted by: RBLA at January 6, 2008 6:47 PM
867-5309! ROFLMAO!!!!!!!
Posted by: j_not_a at January 6, 2008 7:12 PM
??? So how come all the non-mo's jumping to defend ISLAM don't contradict the lost dog poster, and say that Mo WAS good with children, that he WAS kind and got along with others, that he CAN be trusted?
In other words, everyone (muslim and non-muslim) seem to agree that MO was just a really bad person, they just don't want to have anyone else bring it up?
Posted by: RecycledCG at January 6, 2008 7:27 PM
"Attacking or making fun of any religion is the same as attacking and making fun of all religions"
Then it can't be discrimination.
Posted by: Old Atlantic at January 6, 2008 7:30 PM
I'm an atheist, I poke fun of any religious stuff I find, especially if its abrahamic religions(christianity and islam). --posted by Dr.CancerMan.
Islam is NOT an "Abrahamic religion."
Mohammedans claim that, but it's not true.
Judaism and Christianity are Abrahamic religions. That's all.
Islam is nothing. It's made-up, fabricated, by false prophet Mohammed. On your way, ignorant atheist.
Posted by: darcy at January 6, 2008 7:42 PM
The fact that this article exists is proof that inbreeding is not confined to southern Applachia.
Posted by: credit man at January 6, 2008 7:54 PM
Applachia.
Posted by: credit man at January 6, 2008 7:54 PM
Post a comment
Uh, it's spelled "Appalachia," credit man.
So, don't be so smug. Learn how to spell before you insult.
Posted by: darcy at January 6, 2008 8:09 PM
so then is it ok if i write abook to bad mouth mohamass like saliman rushdie did or like the lady in pakistan now who now the hides out for her life? or the cartoonist in denmark?
frankly i find this ''poster'' to be nothing more than a cartoon myself. i laughed at it. i laugh at comedy clubs also and black poeple who make fun of themselves also. and i laugh at many things. i am laughing right now at this stupid rabbi, an i am jewish myself. so am i going to get arrested for harrassment becasue i called this rabbi stupid?
since when can people not poke fun at themselves?
and islamic people who blow themselves up maybe if they could learn to laugh once in aw hile they might decide to forget about doing other people in....
Posted by: zionist122 at January 6, 2008 8:21 PM
Dogs shouldn't be haram if properly eaten with mustard and relish. And they must be grilled, not boiled and soggy. And the buns should be lightly toasted, if you are able to do it. Above all, do not eat a dog with Mayo. It is really gross.
Posted by: Jauhara Al-Kafirah at January 6, 2008 8:23 PM
and islamic people who blow themselves up maybe if they could learn to laugh once in aw hile they might decide to forget about doing other people in....
Posted by: zionist122 at January 6, 2008 8:21 PM
"There is no humor in Islam." --Ayatollah Khomeini, 1979
at January 6, 2008 8:24 PM
INSULT ISLAM AND MOHAMMED. THEY DESERVE IT.
End of Story.
Posted by: darcy at January 6, 2008 8:28 PM
I keep being totally amazed that something which is not in itself a crime is trumpeted to the media as a "hate crime". (And I am also totally amazed that in America we have two different punishments for a given crime, depending on whether or not somebody -who, exactly?- determines that the crime was committed with antipathy toward not just the victim, but some entire class of people the victim represents to the perpetrator. I always figured that mugging somebody was a reprehensible act in itself, you know what I mean? But now it's legally even worse if it's a "hate-mugging" !!)
And dear Sister Claire Lepage of Lewiston "laments the harassment of our local Muslim community. These are peaceful religious members that have earned our respect ... these people come from war-torn countries... " Sister, what exactly have these people done to "earn our respect"? Bailed out of their corrupt third-world countries to practice their Islamic backwardness over here? So they can support the holy jihad through donations to their local mosque? So they can agitate for Sharia law in their local communities (after all, it's "part of their culture")?
I vote for: not a crime, therefore NOT a 'hate crime'. Agreed, it's not the "warm, neighborly American hospitality" we're familiar with. But, no crime.
Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at January 6, 2008 8:44 PM
When I told my dog "Buster" that Mohammed had escaped he went and hid under the sofa!
Posted by: rookie at January 6, 2008 8:51 PM
"We did see a rise of this sort of thing in the US in the 70's as the left co-opted the advancement of women and the assertion of the rights of the black folks. From that point forward there seemed to be more and more people every day whose primary point of pride was how they were innocent victims of circumstance." -- posted by joeblough Jan 6 5:52pm
---------------------------
Yeah, that brings to mind the Richard Lamm speech about how to destroy America
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50997
His points include: "I would ... invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal"
and
"I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of victimology. ... all minorities [would blame] their lack of success [on] the majority"
and
"I would ... promote divided loyalties. I would 'celebrate diversity' ... [which] stresses differences rather than commonalities. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together ..."
The elevation of "group rights" over "individual rights" is one of those problematic things that should be examined more closely in this country. How do we determine that some "group" is being discriminated against? We look at outcome: If there are 72% white, 15% black, 12% Hispanic and 1% other in a community, the "group rights" people cry foul if there aren't 15% blacks and 12% Hispanics on the police force, or in the city council. What if there isn't a lot of interest in these jobs among those populations; or what if there aren't a lot who are qualified? What about on the basketball court? Should whites be claiming they deserve 72% representation on the team? I think we as a nation should re-visit the question: SHOULD there be any quotas, preferences, or special allowances, for being a member of some specific group?
Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at January 6, 2008 9:40 PM
Islam is NOT an "Abrahamic religion."
Mohammedans claim that, but it's not true.
Judaism and Christianity are Abrahamic religions. That's all.
Islam is nothing. It's made-up, fabricated, by false prophet Mohammed. On your way, ignorant atheist.
--------------------------------------
Not really, Christianity was born from the jews, which then gave birth to Islam. If you did care to read what it teaches, you will see the mention of Abraham. In reality, Abrahamic religions are in fact based in jewish belief and pagan belief. This includes, Christmas, halos over angels heads or even Jesus himself, the creation of a female person to worship, like Mary.
Unfortunately, as I have described in another post, this is hardly the place to discuss theological subjects, you can do that in other places. While I understand why you are so angry, it is unfounded, since if you want and me, or if WE want to win this "war" or islamization of the world, WE must join forces.
You will see, 99% of atheists know how islam is bad, and if you did care enough to know our opinion better,you wouldn't mention that.
Posted by: Dr.CancerMan at January 6, 2008 9:57 PM
*EDIT: *STOP the* islamization of the world, WE must join forces.
Forgot to add that, as I was busy trying to repair this computer
at January 6, 2008 9:59 PM
So what's the problem with this poster?
I don't see the word Islam anywhere on it.
There is no crime here. Just a jab against stiff necked supremacists who think they should control the entire planet. If they don't like it, they need to loosen up their neck muscles, and turn their heads. That's all.
Posted by: Prickzilla at January 6, 2008 10:40 PM
Could it be FEAR that makes rabbis and nuns spring to the defense of Islam, if it is being not given the respect demanded by Moslems?
No one is afraid of what Jews will do when their religion is defamed. Ditto for Christians as per the examples given by Robert in the post.
So much respect for islam, so little for any other beliefs.
And when are Moslems ever prosecuted or even censured for insulting, defaming, and persecuting Jews, Christians, Hindus, and others they consider kufar.
So it is fear that makes the non-believer in Islam cringe before its adherents and their demands.
Why? Because Moslems (let's say when on jihad as a caveat) will not hesitate to kill non-Moslems, while we hesitate to kill Moslems even when they threaten our and our childrens' lives and deserve it.
Posted by: unicorns62000 at January 6, 2008 10:58 PM
Darcy -
Islam is a made up religion. AMEN
Dear Christians,
The Jesus of the Koran is NOT Jesus. Of all the moonshine in the 'Glorious Koran' nothing tops the 'last minute switch on the cross' story.
NOTHING we can say to insult Mohammed can come remotely near the insult and profanation of Jesus in the Koran. The travesty of the Jewish prophets is almost as bad.
Posted by: poetcomic1 at January 6, 2008 11:11 PM
Sorry if I missed anyone raising this point, but...
Do we KNOW they didn't make this sign themselves? Look how much they have to gain doing this. It would not be a first. Have we forgotten the Qur'an-in-the-Gitmo-toilet, the "extra" Danish cartoons, and for God's sake, the Al-Dura hoax?
Anyone offering "solidarity" before these facts are known is either a convenient fool or a multicultural lapdog.
On the other hand, there is NO REASON to even EXPLORE who did it; it is either funny or not, it either broke some petty ordinance or it didn't, MOVE ON. To act like this is equivalent to yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater or using slanderous language or any other crime of incitement or injurious derogation is ludicrous.
at January 6, 2008 11:20 PM
Could all christian jihadist legal terrorists please realize that you are the same as islamic terrorists and stop sending me hate mail
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at January 6, 2008 11:33 PM
Rather than mock Mohammed, let Mohammed mock himself.
Islam is the religion that keeps on giving, because it boasts about those very texts which reveal its utter depravity.
I understand the visceral satisfaction to be enjoyed at mocking publicly the false prophet, but it would be much more productive to have -- instead of drive-by-derision -- quick, clear, concise citations of Islam's more unpalatable (for non-Muslims) "divine" mandates and statements and actions from and by Mohammed.
Recently, in the Comments for a MEMRI video at YouTube in which a Muslim scholar discusses the proper Islamic way to beat one's wife, an apparently Muslim poster dared someone to write anything more critical of Islam.
Naturally, I complied.
I posted only statements directly from Islam's "sacred" texts showing the prophet from hell to be a genocidal, enslaving, butchering, pedophile.
(It's hard to call it "abuse" when it comes straight from their own texts.)
There's been no reply yet from that poster.
The effect of distributing such quick, informational blurbs in American cities would be several. Uninformed non-Muslims who are ill-at-ease with Islam but are unable to articulate why will be emboldened to learn and share that learning. Uninformed Muslims will have to decide whether or not such a deity deserves their fealty. Informed Muslims will be put on alert that their nonsense will no longer continue under the cover of multiculturalist ignorance. Dhimmis -- especially in leadership positions in government, media, and academia -- will be able to spread their ignorance freely no longer.
Posted by: Amillennialist at January 6, 2008 11:34 PM
moslems are still living in the 7th century
That's an insult to the 7th Century.
Posted by: Amillennialist at January 6, 2008 11:35 PM
Sister Claire Lepage of Lewiston said she laments the harassment "of our local Muslim community. These are peaceful religious members that have earned our respect."
Maybe, they have earned you're respect, by some
strange and mystical way, but have you earned theirs? You are a shirker, the greatest crime against Allah is shirk, the ascribing a partner(s) to Allah. Jesus as God is shirk, Jesus as Prophet is not. 'In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God'(John 1-1), is an example of Biblical shirk. Jesus as the 'Word', and son of God, who is God, is shirk of the highest order. If you think Sister, that you are respected, you better think again...
at January 6, 2008 11:37 PM
Amillenialist -
good point, re distribution of quick informational blurbs.
Concerned citizen - also a good point - how do we *know* they didn't do it to themselves?
Whatever works, to advance Islam. And in this case, they would have already known that the local rabbi and clergy were nicely bamboozled and would react pretty much as they have done.
In any case, for the information of any first time visitor for whom this article is their 'introduction' to the topic of Islam, I will cite the relevant portions of Robert Spencer's "The Truth About Muhammad", which describe Mohammed's ruthless response to poetic mockery of himself.
In chapter 7, 'War is Deceit', on pages 115-116, Robert describes how Muhammad authorised the assassination of the Jewish poet Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf,
"who, according to Ibn Ishaq [Mohammed's earliest official biographer] 'composed amatory verses of an insulting nature about the Muslim women.' [Ibn Ishaq," The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah", trans. A Guillaume, 1955, p. 367].
The assassination party went to Ka'b, pretending to be discontented with Muhammad and to be wanting to strike a deal with Ka'b. They gained his trust and then killed him.
Then, in chapter 9, 'Victorious Through Terror', on pages 162 and 163 Spencer relates how Mohammed arranged for the assassination of two other poets "who had mocked him and his prophetic pretensions in their verses". One, Abu Afak, who was a very old man, was murdered in his sleep by Mohammed's assassin.
The other, Asma Bint Marwan, a young pregnant mother and poet who had protested against Mohammed's evildoing and called for the men of Medina to deal with him, was dispatched by another Mohammedan assassin - as she lay in bed suckling her infant child. [These two assassinations, of two poets, an old man and a young mother, are celebrated by Ibn Ishaq - pages 675-76 of Guillaume's translation].
So: in the Life of Mohammed, which is seen as *the* model for all pious Muslims, mockery of Mohammed, and of Islam, by non-Muslims, is seen as grounds for the critic to be murdered out of hand.
There is no free speech in Islam.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 7, 2008 12:18 AM
I think it is insulting that the Prophet said that Allah told him that dogs were unclean and haram. Also, the ignorance of the other religious leaders in Lewiston is astounding. They really are totally unaware of what life is like for Christians and Jews in Muslim lands - and for 1,400 years at that!
Posted by: FredIsinglass at January 7, 2008 12:29 AM
Attacking a religion that is attacking you is called:
SELF-DEFENSE!
Posted by: alexon at January 7, 2008 12:32 AM
Also, let's not assume that this "hate crime" is real. Undoubtedly some such incidents are real, but others are faked in order to create just the kind of community reaction described above in Lewiston.
Faked incidents are very useful to those wanting to push the agenda of Islamic victim status.
at January 7, 2008 12:43 AM
"Of course, christianity is far from being perfect, and far from being completely peaceful, but it is closer to that than islam." -- Dr.CancerMan
MUCH closer! (this from a default atheist). I think a vast majority of Christians themselves would agree with your statement, Darcy included.
Vast numbers of Muslims, on the other hand, are heavily invested in the absolute, pure, and perfect Islam. Such perfection does not abide contamination (or doubt!) by alternative faiths, ideas, lifestyles, cultures, people. Islam despises "The Other". The Xenophobia is murderous.
Posted by: alexon at January 7, 2008 1:15 AM
The Tommy Tu-Tone phone number does strongly suggest that this was not a fake flyer to create sympathy. Why? Humor! There's very little (if any) humor in Islam.
Posted by: alexon at January 7, 2008 1:22 AM
Islam is nothing. It's made-up, fabricated, by false prophet Mohammed. On your way, ignorant atheist.
Posted by: darcy at January 6, 2008 7:42 PM
Bingo! Also, Islam is a political movement to conquer, subjugate and convert everyting to Islam, masquerading as a religion.
Posted by: Alert at January 7, 2008 1:37 AM
"Could all christian jihadist legal terrorists please realize that you are the same as islamic terrorists and stop sending me hate mail"
LOL , Leon didnt you post your website address and ask them to email you if they had a problem with your silliness! OWN GOAL!
Posted by: David Xavier at January 7, 2008 4:15 AM
al-Khafira: Being somewhat connected to southern China by family ties, you are mistaken about the best way to eat dog. Braised with turnips is the way to go!
Posted by: Kepha at January 7, 2008 7:15 AM
These Somalis should consider themselves lucky, if they drive a cab in Atlanta they could look forward to being shot. There have been three such shootings in recent weeks.
Muslim-on-Muslim crime?
What if the dog had been named Jesus, loves little children?
at January 7, 2008 8:12 AM
"Not really, Christianity was born from the jews, which then gave birth to Islam."
"Which then gave birth to Islam?" What, are you trying to be funny, Dr cancer man? Exactly how did this "birth" happen, Dr cancer man? Please provide details.
Islam is nothing. It's made-up, fabricated, by false prophet Mohammed. On your way, ignorant atheist.
Posted by: darcy at January 6, 2008 7:42 PM
Bingo! Also, Islam is a political movement to conquer, subjugate and convert everyting to Islam, masquerading as a religion.
Posted by: Alert at January 7, 2008 1:37 AM
Thanks Alert. You certainly chose an appropriate nic.
at January 7, 2008 8:29 AM
"Of course, christianity is far from being perfect, and far from being completely peaceful, but it is closer to that than islam." -- Dr.CancerMan
1. That has got to be the understatement of all time. I mean compare the teachings of Jesus to the commands of Allah. Hello!
2. Oh, and btw, Jesus *is* "perfect." Since you are an atheist I don't expect you to agree.
3. You make 2 generalizations. Please provide specifics explaining how "Christianity is far from being perfect and far from being completely peaceful."
Posted by: darcy at January 7, 2008 8:35 AM
#4 The Koran itself attacks Christianity on several occasions, for example, at the end of Sura 5. Is the Koran therefore, to be classified as "hate literature?"
Posted by: Jimmy the Dhimmi at January 7, 2008 10:08 AM
Someone's had way too much coffee this morning.
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at January 7, 2008 10:22 AM
"The poster depicts a vicious "lost" dog named Mohammed........Hussein Ahmed, the owner of the store, says the phone number on the poster is fake and that the only place it was put up was right near his business."
Pity. They should have been plastered up all over town!
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at January 7, 2008 10:24 AM
"Attacking or making fun of any religion is the same as attacking and making fun of all religions."
So what? Don't we have a RIGHT to make fun of any and ALL religions?
Teach the infidels. Call the recording at (360) 326-6730 to learn how.
Posted by: JihadHotline(360)326-6730 at January 7, 2008 10:44 AM
Attacking or making fun of any religion is the same as attacking and making fun of all religions."
So what? Don't we have a RIGHT to make fun of any and ALL religions?
Oh, that's good. Answer: Yes.
Posted by: darcy at January 7, 2008 11:15 AM
Darcy wrote:
You make 2 generalizations. Please provide specifics explaining how "Christianity is far from being perfect and far from being completely peaceful."
----------------------------
--> Wanting to implement superstition in classes, like creationism,
--> Going against gay marriage and the sort
--> Getting a bit violent when someone from a different faith or non-faith criticizes christianity, no where near the same violence as islamics, but in getting very hostile in the answers or making death threats.
Like it occurred in Brazil, in 2006 a evangelical nutter killed an atheists because he said he didn't believe in god. Or like me, getting death threats for poking fun of jesus or criticizing it, but then again, its no where near the same level as the islamics!
Then there is the daughter from Pele, who died from cancer because her Pastor said that she should only trust in god for her cure, so she stopped taking her medicine and chimo and died.
This are the things which makes christianity far from perfect, but it gets closer to that objective than islam will ever be.
ps: Jesus is not perfect, if he has emotion, then I'm sorry to disappoint you, but his teachings does minimizes the "bully" from the old testament.
-----------------------
Darcy wrote:
Exactly how did this "birth" happen, Dr cancer man? Please provide details.
-----------------------
If I'm not mistaken, in Robert Spencer book does mention it, but I'll mention it anyway, Mohammed got expelled, then he got jealous from the traders religion, then got angry..
Read his book, its more detailed, and it will avoid me to type a lot. One bit of the explanation is located in the "Politically Incorrect guide to Islam and the Crusades".
Besides, there are parts of the Qu'ran and islamic teachings that references christian history and jewish history.
at January 7, 2008 11:16 AM
To put this poster dispute in context one has to understand the immigrant history of Lewiston / Auburn, Maine. I’ve lived and worked in this community most of my life and have a pretty good idea of what most residents are thinking but not saying for fear of appearing insensitive. I can’t use the term racist since Islam is not a race. There are a few local wannabe “white” folks who have converted to Islam because of the Islamic Somali residents. The local bastion of liberal group think and political correctness is Bates College. Lewiston’s blue collar textile mill past stands in sharp contrast to Bates, which sits just a few blocks away from the Somali neighborhood. Most, if not all the pontificators blustering about in the media are just trying to get their fifteen minutes of fame so they can exert more political, social, economic leverage in the community. Small fish in a tiny pond. Like most mill towns in New England various waves of immigrants have swept through Lewiston. The Irish, Scottish, French Canadians, Lithuanians, Black Africans, Greeks, Polish, Estonians, Finnish, Hispanics, Jamaicans. All, with the exception of the Somalis, have integrated. Some with more success than others. What is pissing everyone off is the Somali’s feeble attempt to integrate. They continue to define themselves by their difference and use it to insulate themselves from the bulk of the community in the name of cultural diversity. Virtually all the “integration” has been on Somali terms which means the rest of us need to change and adapt, not the Somalis. You will not get the truth from the Sun Journal, the local newspaper, since it is part of the local liberal PC scene and very much concerned about declining circulation to do much more than pander to the local liberal elite.
Posted by: ARAKIS at January 7, 2008 12:05 PM
"this lost-dog sign, while hardly a brilliant sally of wit" ...from Hugh's post
But for the unwashed, uncouth, and vulgar such as myself, a thoroughly enjoyable little prank.
Posted by: Infidel33 at January 7, 2008 12:15 PM
Err...Last time I checked, I have the right as a U.S. citizen to dislike and/or mock any religion, political party or belief system. Hate crime my arse. Time for all of us to speak up.
Posted by: MP at January 7, 2008 2:26 PM
OT - I may thing that YOUR religion is stupid, comical or evil - perhaps all three.
That is all.
at January 7, 2008 2:32 PM
When any religion is attacked, all religions are attacked, Katzir said.
That's pretty funny, but I don't think it was intentionally so.
a recurring theme of the Beatles' movie "Help!" was the absurdity of treating the religion of the human-sacrificing Thugs (worshippers of Kali, though she was called "Kaili" (pronounced "Ka-i-li") in the film) as fundamentally no different from Western religion. There is a hilarious scene where Leo McKern, playing the high priest of the Thugs, is sitting in what appears to be the garden of Lambeth Palace, with various other clergymen of different religions sitting at tables throughout the garden. McKern is chatting with what appears to be a comatose Anglican vicar, explaining the need for "sacrifice" to get the young people interested in religion--a subject that he assumes the vicar is equally concerned about.
Posted by: Seamus at January 7, 2008 3:59 PM
To call a dog "Muhammad" is an insult to dogs, which are man's best friend, and "Rabbi" Katzir is an insult and a source of shame for real God-fearing Jews.
Posted by: US_infidel at January 7, 2008 6:28 PM
cancer man - your reply is ridiculous. Your (unsubstantiated) "examples" are from MEN. Not from the teachings of Jesus, who *is* perfect, btw, but, you wouldn't know about that.
The Qur'an's plagiarisms and untruths and lies about Christianity and Judaism - please. You are so uninformed it's funny. Plus, you're an atheist. Sorry, but I have no respect for that. You don't know what you are talking about.
Posted by: darcy at January 7, 2008 6:35 PM
Perhaps the posters were just "taken out of context."
at January 7, 2008 7:33 PM
cancer man - your reply is ridiculous. Your (unsubstantiated) "examples" are from MEN. Not from the teachings of Jesus, who *is* perfect, btw, but, you wouldn't know about that.
The Qur'an's plagiarisms and untruths and lies about Christianity and Judaism - please. You are so uninformed it's funny. Plus, you're an atheist. Sorry, but I have no respect for that. You don't know what you are talking about.
Posted by: darcy [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 7, 2008 6:35 PM
------------------
I wonder why you are so angry . Anyway, if you did follow the teachings of Jesus by the letter, then I'm afraid that you just sinned, because the way you are acting, you are judging a person and using profanity to offend. So you are saying that you don't love yourself? Ohhh the humanity, I will quote Jesus that, quoted something else. In
matthew 22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
So, if you have no respect for me, I understand, the only thing that makes me worried is that, with that, besides the sin you are committing, you don't respect yourself!
The examples I gave are in fact what your belief did, that is what it makes imperfect, including the violence and cruelty found in the bible. But, thanks to the French Revolution and the christian reform, christianity is much closer to perfection than Islam is.
But, what makes christianity an Abrahamic religion is that it took its teachings from jewish belief like mohammed did with christianity, but of course, Mohammed stripped most of the stuff and messed a little bit more, while christianity still kept most of its jewish origins.
Have you tried looking for the history and the creation of christianity? You will see that the myth of Jesus is highly similar to Apollonius of Tyanna, which in fact did exactly the same things jesus did, but earlier than jesus. So in fact, part of what you know or read about Jesus is made up by...well man! I won't disagree that Jesus teachings are good, but he was a simple man who went against the local government. And people romanticized it. Besides, christianity needed a Messiah, so, why not take a bit of Hercules, Horus, Apollonius and mix it up and use the most common name of that time andcall it Jesus?
If you study history and learn about mythology and pagan religions you will see.
Again, christianity is not perfect, nor entirely good, its far from it, but it is much closer to them than islam will ever be!
Posted by: Dr.CancerMan at January 7, 2008 10:06 PM
dr cancer man
Don't blame Christianity, or Judaism, or the Zoroastrians, for Islam ('Muhammad', or whoever or whatever created the Quran, borrowed - and, usually, bizarrely inverted or distorted - persons and/or ideas from all three, as well as from local Arabian pagan religion).
If you want to argue that Christianity, say, is responsible for Mohammed's bizarre borrowings and inversions of its teachings and holy persons, then you also have to hold J K Rowlings responsible for whatever piece of puerile and pornographic foefic - featuring characters called 'Hermione' or 'Ron' or 'Harry' - gets circulated on the internets.
Or, to employ a different metaphor: the relationship between Judaism and Christianity, on the one hand, and Islam, on the other, is like the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator of an identity fraud.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 7, 2008 10:13 PM
dr cancer man
Sorry mate, I just don't buy the 'Christianity is really just another Greco-Roman paganism/ mystery religion-attached-to-a-Jewish rabbi' line.
I suggest some homework.
1. Tom Cahill, "The Gifts of the Jews", which makes it crystal clear that there is *NO* POSSIBLE CONGRUENCE between the core biblical assumptions, and those of 'the world of the wheel', which is where everybody else lived, before Abraham, and where a great many people still live. Including Muslims - since Islam is in fact nothing other than a monotheistic paganism.
2. David Bentley Hart, "The Beauty of the Infinite". Read the chapters called "The Will To Power", "The Covenant of Light", and 'The Consolations of Tragedy, The Terrors of Easter".
Hart, by the way, in note 19 on pages 22/23, referring to Bultmann's 'Jesus Christ and Mythology', remarks:
"Bultmann reproduces the error of Harnack and others by suggesting that the story of the incarnation obeys the dramatic morphology of certain pre-existing gnostic saviour myths; this is, at best, however, extremely speculative: not only is there no evidence of such myths in existence prior to Christianity [what real evidence do *you* have for your 'Apollonius'?], the only gnostic systems in which such myths do appear (and they are fewer than one might imagine, are those that have been demonstrably influenced by Christian thought."
3. G K Chesterton, "The Everlasting Man" and "Orthodoxy" - also his novel, "The Ball and the Cross".
4. Rosenzweig, "The Star of Redemption".
5. Abraham Heschel, "God in Search of Man'.
6. Auerbach, "Mimesis" (read his chapter on the difference between classical Greek, and Christian, literature, in the depiction of persons and situations).
I say this to you. Israel is hated because the Powers *hate* that which inhabits Israel, which inhabits Jerusalem. The furious desire to annihilate Israel, which is expressed by the nations in Psalm 83, is triggered by the mortal challenge which YHWH poses to all the Gods of This World. Hitler who - following the same impulse as Nietzsche - sought to revive a pre-Christian heroic paganism, obsessively sought to annihilate, indeed to ritually sacrifice, every last Jew he could find.
Far from being some sort of pastiche or mere revision of pagan mystery religion, Christianity - centred absolutely on the deeds, words, and person of the Jew Yeshua in the land of Israel, as recorded in those profoundly Jewish texts, Hebraic through-and-through, the four gospels - presents the same unendurable offence to the Pagan worldview, as does Israel.
The first Christians were accused, by the Greco-Roman world around them, of being "atheists" (I understand the same charge was levelled at Jews).
In the book of Acts, they are accused of "turning the world upside-down".
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 7, 2008 10:46 PM
dumbledoresarmy ;
Huh? I didn't imply that! Try and read it again!
Christianity, in its dark ages time, were, in fact more peaceful than islam is today!
Posted by: Dr.CancerMan at January 7, 2008 10:46 PM
dr cancer man
sorry - re my 10: 13 posting - I must have got you wrong.
On reflection I think my above postings to you may come across too harshly or aggressively - if so, I apologise. It is a bad habit of mine to jump in boots and all.
We non-Muslims need to think before we post, so as not to present openings for 'Divide the Camp of the Infidels' troublemakers to exploit. I am sure that such are lurking and eavesdropping here, just waiting their chance.
(By the way: I'm used to the arguments of atheists - my younger brother is one).
In light of your posting at 10.46 pm - you may find Tom Cahill's "How the Irish Saved Civilisation" [which should perhaps be called 'how the Irish saved western latin civilisation', to be quite accurate, but never mind], of interest. He devotes a fair bit of time trying to get an idea of what kind of world the pre-Christian Irish inhabited, before he looks at 'Holy Ireland'.
The first half of David Bentley Hart's book - on the modern nihilistic French philosophers and on Nietzsche - is extraordinarily illuminating if read in conjunction with Ibn Warraq's thesis that Islam is an ur-fascism.
One will then understand exactly why so many French intellectuals of the mid-late 20th century became so enamoured of Islam. The surprise would have been if they had not.
We've gone off topic.
But having just read three years' worth of jihadwatch comments I will say this - nearly all the spats that occur on the comments floor, between the various species of Infidel, as, for example, between Christians and atheists, are more civil and rational, however clumsily argued and occasionally heated, than the exchanges between identifying Muslim dawa artists/ apologists, and everyone else. In those exchanges, for the Infidel side of the equation, sooner or later, mostly sooner, it's like trying to talk with invading aliens from another planet.
It's a practical illustration of Ali Sina's insight: that Islam does not teach the Golden Rule, 'do to others as you would they should do to you'. As a Christian I may differ with people about all kinds of things; but wherever an adherent of some other faith, or of none, sincerely attempts to practice that Rule, together with the principle of Agreement (or Oathkeeping/ promise-keeping), then I can communicate with that person. But it's well nigh impossible to communicate with an Islamic supremacist who's been taught that 'those who follow the prophet are merciful toward one another but harsh toward the Unbelievers'.
I wonder if that rabbi and the Christian clergy in Lewiston have yet suspected that unpleasant little detail - that in Islam 'love your neighbour' is only really supposed to apply to fellow-Muslims? Have they realized, yet, that their eager defence of Muslims under perceived attack, might be getting taken for granted, as nothing more than the due deference owed by inferior Infidels to superior Muslims? And that if the tables were turned, they might get cold comfort - even indifference - from their Muslim neighbours?
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 8, 2008 2:53 AM
I wonder why you are so angry . Anyway, if you did follow the teachings of Jesus by the letter, then I'm afraid that you just sinned, because the way you are acting, you are judging a person and using profanity to offend. So you are saying that you don't love yourself? Ohhh the humanity, I will quote Jesus that, quoted something else. In --from the droolings of dr cancer man.
I wonder why you're such an idiot. Plus, I think you are somewhat evil.
What "profanity?" I didn't use any "profanity." In addition to being an idiot, you're a liar.
I'm through dealing with you. Others - go right ahead! Enjoy yourself with the droolings of this cancer! I can't take the imbecility. Plus, sometimes he sounds like a Muslim with the ad hominems. Can't take that either.
Posted by: darcy at January 8, 2008 8:57 AM
I wonder if that rabbi and the Christian clergy in Lewiston have yet suspected that unpleasant little detail - that in Islam 'love your neighbour' is only really supposed to apply to fellow-Muslims? Have they realized, yet, that their eager defence of Muslims under perceived attack, might be getting taken for granted, as nothing more than the due deference owed by inferior Infidels to superior Muslims? And that if the tables were turned, they might get cold comfort - even indifference - from their Muslim neighbours?
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 8, 2008 2:53 AM
-----------------------
I don't think they realize half of it!
You don't need to apologize! Everyone is human, and we make mistakes, it's our nature. :)
Posted by: Dr.CancerMan at January 8, 2008 10:42 AM
I wonder why you're such an idiot. Plus, I think you are somewhat evil.
What "profanity?" I didn't use any "profanity." In addition to being an idiot, you're a liar.
I'm through dealing with you. Others - go right ahead! Enjoy yourself with the droolings of this cancer! I can't take the imbecility. Plus, sometimes he sounds like a Muslim with the ad hominems. Can't take that either.
Posted by: darcy [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 8, 2008 8:57 AM
MY bad, but the main point is, you are judging, and offending. Going completely against on what you believe.
You act like a muslim, who thinks is too superior to discuss anything with an un-believer, so the person resorts in judgemental comments and in offence.
One man's theology is another man's belly laugh. -- Robert A. Heinlein
Posted by: Dr.CancerMan at January 8, 2008 10:47 AM
Luckily Islam is no religion. It's a barbarically intolerant form of government.
Posted by: pythagoras at January 8, 2008 7:32 PM
My suspicious mind wonders whether this is a hoax designed to elicit sympathy, much like the female professor out here in california who reported being the victim of a "hate crime," and was then busted for lying about damage to her car, etc.
Read about her here: http://www.discriminations.us/2004/04/claremont_fake_hate_indictment.html
at January 10, 2008 2:32 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(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.)