Patterico's Pontifications


Charlie Hebdo Commemorates Anniversary of Attack By Smearing All Religions

Filed under: General — JVW @ 1:08 pm

[guest post by JVW]

One year ago today, Islamofascist terrorists attacked the Paris offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo killing eleven magazine staffers and one policeman. Today, the magazine has published an issue commemorating the massacre:


If you are confused by the cover, please try to understand the reigning progressive mindset: When radical jihadists kill innocent people it is entirely unfair to place the blame on the peaceful religion of Islam, but when whackadoodles from a religion historically prone to violence kill innocent people then it is completely appropriate to blame all religions for the violence.

But I still think it’s really racist and sexist of them to portray the Almighty as a white male.


55 Responses to “Charlie Hebdo Commemorates Anniversary of Attack By Smearing All Religions”

  1. I’m sure this made Bill Maher’s day.

    JVW (d60453)

  2. I’ll quote Ian Tuttle over at NRO:

    After what the staff of Charlie Hebdo has been through, it’s difficult to criticize them. But that cover is a dodge, isn’t it? It wasn’t some undifferentiated “God” who was responsible for the murders of 12 people last year, and the Kouachi brothers were not Buddhists or Sikhs or Huguenots. Similarly, it wasn’t an Episcopalian who shot up a kosher supermarket in Porte de Vincennes the next day, it wasn’t French Catholics who slaughtered 89 people at the Bataclan in November, and the knife-wielding man shot and killed outside a Paris police station this morning wasn’t toting the flag of Charles Martel.​

    If Charlie Hebdo were never to lampoon anyone ever again, I’m not sure I could blame them. But there is a specific, nameable threat facing the West — and this cover only obscures it.

    JVW (d60453)

  3. Should’ve been another Let’s Draw Muhammed Day…

    Colonel Haiku (467f23)

  4. I read as far as Charlie Hebdo Commemorates, and decided bacon sammiches tonight.

    mg (31009b)

  5. God as “Old man with a beard” isn’t that sophisticated an idea of God. Kind of a StrawGod, actually.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  6. steyn who likely will be targeted by prime minister zoolander for his effrontery of bringing the point up,

    narciso (732bc0)

  7. Steyn would be the greatest press secretary of all time.

    mg (31009b)

  8. Steyn would be the greatest press secretary of all time.

    Oh sure, outsource yet another jobs that “Americans won’t do.”

    JVW (d60453)

  9. We could have a Canadian-American Press Secretary for a CANADIAN-American President!

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  10. I never cared about nor read Charlie Hebdo. Last year I even scoffed something on the order of “who is this Hebdo guy?”. But I did feel sorry for the eleven magazine staffers and one cop who were killed. Now that they’ve shown beyond a doubt that leftists are piss-scared cowards by not doing Mohammad on their cover but making it look like a caricature of a Christian God I think the cops got there too soon. I still feel bad about the cop who died but as far as I’m concerned anyone as shallow and afraid as the people who work there are perfect targets for the religion of peace. Finally, something a moslem and I can agree on.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  11. I agree with Hoagie. (And it does not bother me a bit, Milhouse.) Charlie Hebdo is extreme left, extreme anti-religion. Its anti-Christian cartoons were far more disgusting than its anti-Muslim cartoons. To hell with them. I’m sorry for the cop and the security guard and the people at the deli.

    Hey, Hoagie, why are the streets of Paris lined with trees? Give up? So the Germans can march in the shade.

    nk (dbc370)

  12. I don’t mind criticizing these people. It is a tasteless magazine cover.

    But this is a magazine I have never read, never purchased and never will.

    And I don’t plan on going to their offices and shooting up the place. And I would protect them if I were present and they came under attack.

    I’m a Christian and believe in free speech even if I find it offensive.

    Morons have the right to be Morons. In France, it seems practically a requirement.

    Live long and prosper….

    WarEagle82 (44dbd0)

  13. Is that the full cover? Looking at it I didn’t see the figure as being G0d.
    If anything a pale Arab and mostly due to the rifle and sandals.

    seeRpea (181740)

  14. Yeah, that’s Charlie Hebdo’s idea of God and the Holy Sprit (the triangle with the eye in it). At least the pédés français don’t have Him in a three-way with Christ like one cover they did before the attack.

    nk (dbc370)

  15. And the caption is “The Assassin is still running”. Cheese-eating monkeys!

    nk (dbc370)

  16. MARK STYEN ON THE GHOSTS OF CHARLIE HEBDO, ONE YEAR LATER: “The weepy passive candlelight vigils — the maudlin faux tears and the Smug Moral Preening overdose — aren’t enough. If you don’t want to put out the fire, it will burn your world to the ground.”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  17. The NKVD were all atheists.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  18. ….caricature of a Christian God I think the cops got there too soon.

    @10 Hoagie

    Really? Care to clarify? From where I sit it looks like you are saying that because of the content of a cartoon you would prefer if more innocents were killed. Sounds like you are sympathizing with terrorists.

    Good job.

    Gil (b846f2)

  19. I think the triangle and the eye is masonic imagery, they aren’t the ones who sprayed the CH offices with buckshot,

    narciso (732bc0)

  20. mostly but by the 30s, even the most confirmed Bolsheviks were in their site,

    narciso (732bc0)

  21. It may be Masonic imagery to normal people, to the Charlie Hebdo Gils it’s the Holy Spirit. They’ve used both those figures before. Go to Google images and search “Charlie Hebdo” if you want to throw up.

    nk (dbc370)

  22. if they are going to be this obtuse, don’t put out an issue,

    narciso (732bc0)

  23. re #14: How did I forgot about that Charlie Hebdo cover. that is when the Roman Catholics burned down the Hebdo printing press.

    re #24: yeah, it does lose a lot its Punch by being so obtuse.

    seeRpea (ab6952)

  24. maybe they should have run a cover of the crime scene, these elaborate metaphors win you nothing on either side,

    narciso (732bc0)

  25. Progressives operate under a handicap. They are pig ignorant when it comes to religion. So they’re under the delusion that all religions preach the same thing. The upshot is that they lie about all religions. They lie about Christianity, Judaism, Jainism, Buddhism in order to falsely portray them as just as bad as Islam. And they lie about Islam in order to falsely portray it as just as decent and good as any other religion.

    This leads to a lot of nonsense. Such as:

    September 14, 2015
    So let me take a few moments to tell you what motivates me in the work that I do as a public servant and as an elected official. I am far, far from perfect human being but I am motivated by a vision which exists in all of the great religions –Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and others – and which is so beautifully and clearly stated in Matthew 7:12. “So in everything, do to others what you would have them to do to you, for this sums up the Law and the prophets.” The Golden Rule. Do to others what you would have them do to you. Not very complicated.

    So, Sanders can cite a Bible verse about the golden rule. You will not find such a verse in the core texts of Islam, the Quran and the Sunnah (or the Shiite equivalents, but since at least 85% of Muslims are Sunni I’ll concentrate on those) where Allah or his prophet taught anything like the golden rule. Instead you’ll find verses such as:

    Surah 3:28 Ali ‘Imran (Family of Imran)

    Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. And whoever [of you] does that has nothing with Allah , except when taking precaution against them in prudence. And Allah warns you of Himself, and to Allah is the [final] destination.

    According to the tafsir (the Arabic word normally translated as exegesis, which means a scholarly and authoritative explanation of scripture) Muslims and non-Muslims are enemies. A Muslim who has sincere friendships with non-believers is an apostate (“has nothing with Allah). The exception is if a Muslim lives in the Dar al Harb (house of war, i.e. the parts of the world not yet ruled by Muslims) they can pretend to be friends with non-Muslims. The idea is expressed in the old saying keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. This is the basis of the practice of taqqiya, deceiving non-believers that the Muslim is on their side by outwardly showing friendship, but never inwardly.

    Surah 4:89 An-Nisa (The Women)

    They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.

    Again, the disbelievers are the enemies of Allah and the Muslims. Muslims can’t even be friends with disbelievers, and they certainly aren’t supposed to treat them according to the “golden rule,” a concept that doesn’t exist in Islam.

    Surah 98:6 Al-Bayyinah (The Clear Proof)

    Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of creatures.

    Islam teaches that pigs and dogs are unclean. It also teaches that Christians and Jews and other unbelievers are worse than pigs and dogs.

    Surah 47:4 Muhammad (Muhammad)

    So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens. That [is the command]. And if Allah had willed, He could have taken vengeance upon them [Himself], but [He ordered armed struggle] to test some of you by means of others. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah – never will He waste their deeds.

    Surah 9:14 At-Tawbah (The Repentance)

    Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them and satisfy the breasts of a believing people

    Surah 9:74 At-Tawbah (The Repentance)

    They swear by Allah that they did not say [anything against the Prophet] while they had said the word of disbelief and disbelieved after their [pretense of] Islam and planned that which they were not to attain. And they were not resentful except [for the fact] that Allah and His Messenger had enriched them of His bounty. So if they repent, it is better for them; but if they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And there will not be for them on earth any protector or helper.

    Not only is there no golden rule in Islam, the Christian notion that “vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord. I shall repay” also doesn’t exist. Muslims are supposed to be the tools of Allah’s vengeance on the non-Muslims in this world. Muslims have not only the right to make non-Muslims’ lives a living hell in order to disgrace and humiliate them, it is a religious duty. Muslims that don’t do so have failed Allah’s test as explained in Surah 47:4. The Hamas-linked Muslim Brotherhood front group CAIR, and all the other unindicted coconspirators in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding trial (read the transcripts and evidence presented by the government, be informed) will say I’m somehow taking those verses out of context in order to misrepresent Islam.

    This is of course ridiculous. They say that because the whole reason those MB front groups were created is to lie and deceive non-Muslims about the true nature of Islam (see verse 3:28 again if you still haven’t grasped the concept). There are five extant schools of Sharia in Sunni Islam. There used to be a lot more, nearly a hundred, but now the only madhabs that remain are the Hanafi, the Hanbali, the Shafi’i, the Maliki, and the minor school of Zahiri. On the Shia side there are the Jafari, the Ismaili, and the Zaidi shools. Every single one of the them teaches there is no golden rule, no peace, and certainly no equality between Muslims and non-Muslims. Google the name, Asia Bibi. She’s a Pakistani Christian on death row for the crime of being a Christian in Pakistan, and not knowing her place. In other words, not accepting her inferior status in a Muslim society as one of the “worst of creatures,” lower than a pig or a dog.

    This is how it is in every Muslim-majority country. In no Muslim-majority country do non-Muslims enjoy equal rights or are non-Muslims equal before the law. Even when Ataturk tried to secularize Turkey, because he recognized the retrograde influence the political aspects of Islam had on his country, non-Muslims were never the equals of Muslims.

    But then CAIR would have you believe that I’m misrepresenting “true” Islam. If I am, that’s only because the governments in every single Muslim majority country don’t understand “true” Islam, apparently. Neither does any recognized school of valid Islamic jurisprudence or nearly all of the Islamic scholars over the past 14 centuries. Because ultimately if we are to believe CAIR Muhammad and the first four “rightly guided” Caliphs, whose example Muhammad ordered the Muslims to follow, didn’t have a clue about “true” Islam either. Because from the time of Muhammad until now every single Islamic authority had gotten Islam wrong in exactly the same way I am getting Islam wrong.

    That is, if you are inclined to blindly believe the practitioners of taqqiyah you see on TV defending Islam. It’s amazing how no authority in the Islamic world has never understood Islam since its inception, according to Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the West.

    Then there’s Prom Queen and his unlimited torrent of nonsensical false moral equivalencies. Don’t get on your high horse about ISIS, Christians, because…

    …the Crusades!

    The Vatican has apologized for them. So has every major Protestant denomination. And a great many Christian authorities at the time condemned them, and advised Christians not not to answer the Pope’s call. After all, Jesus said His kingdom is not of this world. There is nothing in the New Testament that says or implies that it is OK to kill human beings to acquire territory. No Islamic authority, on the other hand, has ever apologized for the 400 years of jihad and cruel subjugation of non-Muslims that caused the Christian west to launch the Crusades in the first place. Had the Muslims not waged four centuries of merciless jihad, there would have been no Crusades in response. It is the universal opinion of every Islamic religious and legal authority that conquering and harshly ruling ruling over non-Muslims is their holy duty, so as far as they’re concerned there’s nothing to apologize for. Allah’s kingdom is very much of this world, as his commandments in the Quran attest to. And Muslims never owe the filthy kuffar an apology for anything in any case.

    But despite Tiger Beat’s claims to the contrary, he isn’t a Christian. He’s a typical secular leftist pol. Recall how when was arguing for what was essentially gay marriage he tried to claim that an “obscure” verse in Romans couldn’t outweigh Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.

    How typical of the man-child. Any Christian knows that there is nothing in the New Testament that conflicts with itself. If your understanding of a part of the scripture is that it’s at odds with the rest of the scripture, then the problem is your misunderstanding of the scripture.

    And nothing about St. Paul’s writings are “obscure.” He is the one man most responsible for our understanding of Christianity. But then, as I said earlier, President Selfie isn’t a Christian. He attended a black liberation theology church, and only because as a young community organizer black leaders told him he wouldn’t have any “cred” unless he was a member of a church. So he chose exactly the right “church” that would serve his cynical, self-serving political purposes. All liberation theologies are cynical, self-serving political movements masquerading as Christianity. That’s why Obama thinks some parts of the New Testament are “obscure.” Because liberation theologians such as James Cone, the inventor of black liberation theology, put it any God that doesn’t serve his earthly political purposes is of no use. Liberation theologians cherry pick Bible verses that serve political ends, in order to make their Marxism appear as a mandate from God. The parts of the Bible that don’t conform to their Marxist ideology aren’t mentioned, hence the very un-Christian Obama is under the impression that those parts are “obscure” and unimportant.

    Secular leftists simply know nothing about any religion, even those they pretend to profess. And they think it’s ridiculous that anyone could take that stuff seriously since they don’t, and consequently they can not grasp that Islam could possibly play a role in shaping the jihadist threat we face. King Putt exemplifies this willful blindness. He insists on projecting hispolitical ideology on the jihadists; they simply want universal day care, single payer health care, free tuition, and government jobs.

    Basically, while these leftists are vile excuses for human beings who will lie and cheat and otherwise use any means necessary to gain and hold power, they’re also complete idiots.

    Steve57 (17e737)

  26. Not a fan, but when you’re right, you’re right…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  27. From where I sit it looks like you are saying that because of the content of a cartoon you would prefer if more innocents were killed. Sounds like you are sympathizing with terrorists.

    I’m saying that if you poke a bear with a stick and it tears you apart it’s your own fault. And any time anti Christian bigots are eliminated by anti Christian moslems who are also killed I consider it a win-win. Throw in a few dead commies and I’ll have a hat trick.

    From where you’re sitting you just accused a person who did two tours in Nam, engaged in 33 firefights, had 79 confirmed kills, was wounded twice, was awarded a Bronze Star with a “V” and two purple hearts of being an enemy sympathizer. Not only are you Godless you are classless. And you’re lucky it’s not my blog because I’d ban you for life for calling another blogger a traitor, especially a decorated/wounded veteran.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  28. Charlie Hebdo is extreme left, extreme anti-religion. Its anti-Christian cartoons were far more disgusting than its anti-Muslim cartoons.

    And this is news to you how? When was this ever a secret? But it’s meant to be a free country, where people are entitled to publish such cartoons no matter whom they insult, and they did not deserve to be killed for it. That’s why everyone was rallying for them, despite their extremely offensive and not very funny style. So what has changed?

    I’m sorry for the cop and the security guard and the people at the deli.

    Supermarket, not deli. Just for the sake of accuracy. And because the only other person I’ve ever heard refer to it as a deli was 0bama, and I thought that showed that he wasn’t paying attention because it was so unimportant to him.

    Milhouse (8489b1)

  29. Now that’s the kind of Steve57 posts I love!

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  30. it’s not unlike the ranks of anti Volodya dissidents in and out of Russia, first Litvinenko, Politskayava, Berezovsky and Nemtsov, Kasparov is perhaps the last man out,

    narciso (732bc0)

  31. Speaking of freedom of speech,
    Hey Rev.,
    Have you heard rumblings about things being said back and forth in one of Philly’s high schools?

    MD in Philly (not in Philly) (deca84)

  32. rogressives operate under a handicap. They are pig ignorant when it comes to religion. So they’re under the delusion that all religions preach the same thing. The upshot is that they lie about all religions. They lie about Christianity, Judaism, Jainism, Buddhism in order to falsely portray them as just as bad as Islam. And they lie about Islam in order to falsely portray it as just as decent and good as any other religion.


    In complete agreement there, the amount of false equivalence we see is horrible.

    Gil (b846f2)

  33. in the house of mil
    I know that I’ve had my fill
    of this asshole gil

    Colonel Haiku (467f23)

  34. Off topic but Chris Kyle’s widow schooled Barcky at his gun wingding…

    Colonel Haiku (467f23)

  35. @Haiku 37

    Hoagie is wishing for the murder of more innocents in post 10, yet I’m the asshole?
    Nice moral position.

    Gil (b846f2)

  36. failmericans have a giddy lust for silencing opposing views mr. gil

    you don’t like it move somewhere else

    happyfeet (831175)

  37. Ah, nothing says cutting edge comedy like “Let’s make fun of religious groups who won’t threaten to kill us.” Hebdo would fit right in with Hollywood. Remember when the Hollywood liberals defended Comedy Central censoring South Park because Trey and Matt wanted to, gasp, depict Muhammad standing in a doorway? Cheese-eating surrender monkeys can be found on both sides of the Atlantic.

    top116 (d094f8)

  38. you don’t like it move somewhere else

    Remember when Alec Baldwin threatened to leave the country if Dubya became president. 15 years later, and he’s still here. Why? Because a lot of liberals know that other countries wouldn’t tolerate the way they mouth off. (And in Baldwin’s case, other countries would probably have him institutionalized for his crazed public behavior. “HOW DARE YOU BRING A CAMERA TO A PUBLIC PARK THAT I WAS AT?! GIMME THAT!”)

    top116 (d094f8)

  39. “I’m the asshole”

    Gil (b846f2) — 1/8/2016 @ 1:13 am

    On this we agree…

    Colonel Haiku (467f23)

  40. I’m always kind of amazed at the cognitive dissonance of those who blame generic religion for violence but never seem to notice how hostility toward religion creates even more violence. Communist torturers used to specifically appeal to God’s non-existence, the absence of any ground for moral right and wrong, and the absence of any ultimate punishment for evil or reward for good (hell and heaven) in order to justify their acts and demoralize their victims.

    Jim S. (d465f1)

  41. #28: Glad to see you’re back, Steve! We had a discussion a couple of days ago about mass delusions … their purpose and methods. The counter was to keep telling it like it is. So you’re doing your part.

    It’s amazing that the MB/CAIR propaganda is still given such reverence by the LHMFM. As these lies are propagated into the future, the lies needed to reinforce the initial statement diverge farther and farther from observable truth. But if no one is looking, nothing is observed. Everything you said can be observed today, in every muslim country. But our “opinion makers” choose not to look.

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe)

  42. Gil @36, I’m pleasantly surprised. Yes, the false moral equivalence is horrible. But more to the point, not all moral principles are universal, as people like Bernie Sanders and Barack Obama insist. For instance, when Imam Obama preaches that no god advocates the killing of innocents, this is true. But not all religions have the same definition of who is and who is not innocent.

    I’m going to have to be very precise here, as I realize I’ll be walking something of a tightrope. I think one advantage religious people bring to this sort of analysis is that since they take their own religion seriously they can understand how someone else can take another religion seriously. So, since the Islamists claim to be acting in the name of their religion, we tend to take them at their word. So we look at the core texts of their religion. If someone adheres to a particular stated understanding of a religion, what sort of things would such an adherent believe, and what sort of things would an adherent do to put their religion into action? This is a general rule, though. It isn’t as if atheists or agnostics aren’t capable it.

    The problem is that people like Bernie Sanders and Obama who are incapable of taking religion seriously think such analysis is somehow dishonest. That a Christian, for example, can’t honestly analyze Islam because the Christian will be somehow determined to prove the superiority of Christianity over Islam. Leaving aside the fact that a Christian is supposed to be committed to speaking the truth, and that any goal other than being scrupulously honest about what the core texts of Islam have to say to an individual who proclaims a certain understanding of those texts (Salafist, Wahhabist), and that doing otherwise would be a betrayal of our duty to our nation to get inside our enemies heads, this is classic liberal projection.

    While they accuse Christians of dishonestly skewing their analysis, the secular leftists demand that counterterror analysis have no other goal than to tell the world how wonderful they are. That it arrive at no other conclusion than the one that proclaims to the world they’re not “islamophobes.” Which of course requires assigning to Islam values that are not in fact Islamic.

    I suppose the best historical example would be a study of Shinto during WWII. People who were capable of taking Shinto seriously would and did examine exactly what Shinto taught. But can you imagine if Obama or Sanders were involved? They would demand we ignore all that, and instead skew our analysis to proclaim that as “one of the world’s great religions” Shinto taught the golden rule and all that. Which of course it didn’t.

    As a practical matter, having an accurate knowledge of Shinto made convincing the Japanese to surrender and the subsequent occupation much, much easier. The Potsdam Declaration actually conceded conditions to Japan while demanding Japan’s unconditional surrender. Among these concessions, the declaration demanded that the heads of the “militaristic advisers” must roll but left the fate of Emperor unstated. And indeed we left Hirohito on the throne. This understandably angered a great many victims of the Japanese empire, but the fact of the matter was that to the Japanese people he wasn’t just a ruler but a descendant of the sun-goddess Amaterasu. He was a divinity, and when he said fight the Japanese would fight to the death. But as their god, as the Japanese were in the habit of believing although by 1947 he would be reduced to a mere mortal by the occupation authorities, when he said “stop fighting” he also demanded their unconditional obedience. We needed him in 1945 to command the Japanese to stop fighting. I shudder to think how many lives would have been lost if Barack Obama would have been around. He would have demanded, as he is doing now (although it’s not only him, and GWB was guilty of this too, but to a lesser but still harmful degree) that we not speak ill of our enemies religiously inspired doctrine for war lest we be thought intolerant. Even if we are speaking accurately.

    Ultimately it’s the dishonesty of it all that really chaps my hide. I think one of the best examples of this dishonesty is the utter hypocrisy of Muslim apologists such as CAIR. If you’ve ever watched one of those yelling and shouting cable TV shows where the Hamas-linked MB front group CAIR defends Islam from a non-Muslim critic, one of CAIR’s standard fall-back positions is that a non-Muslim who can’t read Arabic is incapable of understanding the Quran. This is ridiculous. What makes it more ridiculous is CAIR itself. Scroll down to the “our current campaigns” section on CAIR’s website.

    What campaign is prominently featured? Explore the Quran! The English transliteration of the Quran CAIR wants you to read.

    This campaign was a product of CAIR’s strategic approach to reshaping perceptions about Islam and Muslims. In 2005, a CAIR survey confirmed earlier findings that 60 percent of Americans are not knowledgeable about Islam. However, a significant percentage welcomed the opportunity to learn about Islam. Nearly 1 in 5 Americans said that they would like to receive a free copy of the Quran.

    Since the campaign was first launched, nearly 28,000 people have requested a free copy of the Quran. This report presents the current status of the campaign and identifies additional resources needed to continue the project to reach more Americans.

    Mission Statement for “Explore the Quran” Campaign

    In order to promote mutual understanding and educate others about Islam, CAIR will provide a free copy of the meaning of the Quran in English to Americans of other faiths

    See, you can learn about Islam from an English language version of the meaning of the Quran (all we need is the meaning). Except when you can’t learn from an English language version of the Quran. When’s that? When you learn something CAIR doesn’t want you to know. Then, all of a sudden, you can’t understand the meaning of the Quran unless you can read Arabic. While CAIR spokesweasels continue to say out of the other side of their mouths that as long as you agree with CAIR you can learn everything you need to know about Islam from their English transliteration of the Quran.

    Steve57 (17e737)

  43. Let’s be real honest here — the deity actually smeared there is the Christian God. The tip-off is the triangular halo, which is a traditionally trinitarian symbol in Christian iconography.

    Rhymes With Right (da71f4)

  44. I stumbled across this earlier today. It’s a complete, though older, version of The Reliance of the Traveler available online.

    This is a standard Sharia reference guide of the Shafi’i school; sort of “Sharia 101.” I wanted to bring it to everyone’s attention for a couple of different reasons. If you scroll down to the “Documents” section (beginning at page viii, or 9 of 1251 in your browser and ending at xxi or 17 of 1251 pages) you’ll see it has the stamp of approval from the leading Sunni authority of Syria, the Mufti of the Jordanian armed forces, the President of the International Institute of Islamic Thought (as well as a member of the fiqh [Islamic jurisprudence] council of Jedda, as in Saudi Arabia, and the President of the fiqh council of North America), and most importantly perhaps Al Azhar university. All of which affirm that it is an accurate transliteration of the Arabic original.

    This means several things, as I’ve been trying to say.

    1) Those who say you can’t understand the Quran unless you can read Arabic are full of crap. If one can accurately transliterate this book from Arabic to English, or a contract, one can do that with any document. No one makes the same claim for Japanese or Russian to English, because it’s a stupid claim.

    2) No one can claim this basic Sharia manual is “extremist” as we constantly hear that Jordan is a moderate country and Al Azhar is the leading centrist authority in Sunni Islam. Which is why Obama chose it as the site for his historically and theologically illiterate 2009 speech.

    3) The difference between moderate and extremist Islam ain’t all that great, as Muslim apologists would have us believe.

    How so?

    Well, Boko Haram is normally translated as “Western education is forbidden.” Actually it’s more accurate to say Boko Haram means “Un-Islamic education is forbidden.” Oddly enough this Sharia manual has a chapter on Sacred Knowledge. And in that chapter it has a section on on unlawful knowledge. Guess what? (Section a.7.2, or page 14):

    Unlawful knowledge includes:
    (1) learning soreery (dis: p3), since according to the most reliable position, it is unlaw-ful, as the vast majority of scholars have decisively stated;
    (2) philosophy (dis: wlO);
    (3) magic (sha’badha, meaning sleight of hand, etc,);
    (4) astrology (dis: p41);
    (5) the sciences of the materialists (dis: wII);
    (6) and anything that is a means to create doubts (n: in eternal truths). Such things vary in their degree of unlawfulness

    Philosophy is simply the love of knowledge. Haram, formbidden. And guess who the “materialists” are, and what our sciences are? It turns out that far from being extremist Boko Haram is pretty much in the mainstream of Islamic thought.

    Salat, or Prayer (section f1.4, or page 109)

    A Muslim who holds the prayer to be obligatory but through lack of concern neglects to perform it until its proper time is over has not committed unbelief (dis: w18.2).

    Rather, he is executed, washed, prayed over, and buried in the Muslim’s cemetery (0: as he is one of them). It is recommended, but not obligat-ory, that he be asked to repent (N: and if he does, he is not executed).

    You see, this is one of those YUUUUGE “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin,” inside baseball issues that mainstream Muslims believe separate them from the extremists. The Islamic doctrine of takfir, or more accurately an accusation of unbelief against someone, which is essentially a form of excommunication, is a YUUUGE point of contention between the groups. ISIS would say this individual who neglected his prayers had apostatized. the Shafi’i school says he hadn’t.

    But either way you’re dead. And not even the Shafi’i school says this guy deserves a second chance at this whole Islam thing. It’s now purely a matter of which graveyard you end up in; the one for the believers or the unbelievers.

    I don’t know about the rest of you, but I wouldn’t be able to find a great deal of comfort in any of this.

    Islam preaches peace and tolerance! (section O, “Justice,” chapter 9, “Jihad,” or page 599):

    09.0 JIHAD
    (0: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad. As for the greater jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self (nafs), which is why the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said as he was returning from jihad,

    “We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad.”

    The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus (def: b7) is such Koranic verses as:

    (1) “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);

    (2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89); …

    Read the entire chapter if you wish. Despite what you might have seen on the side of some bus or on subway car, “My jihad is to lose weight, what’s yours?,” from a legal or Sharia aspect the only jihad that is a personal or communal religious obligation is violent warfare to subjugate the unbelievers.

    Page 600:


    09.1 Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2). When enough people perform it to success-fully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others (0: the evidence for which is the Prophet’s saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

    “He who provides the equipment for a sol-dier in jihad has himself performed jihad,”

    and Allah Most High having said: “Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah’s path with their property and lives. Allah has pre-ferred those who fight with their property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind. And to each. Allah has promised great good” (Koran 4:95).

    But it’s not all drudgery, fighting in the cause of Allah.

    Page 606:


    …010.2 As for personal booty, anyone who. despite resistance, kills one of the enemy or effec-tively incapacitates him, risking his own life thereby, is entitled to whatever he can take from the enemy, meaning as much as he can take away with him in the battle, such as a mount, clothes, weaponry, money, or other.

    Guess what falls into the category of “other,” little Yazidi girls? Mm hmm, that’s right. We need to back up a little bit.

    09.13 When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.

    Why is the slave woman’s marriage annulled? As the Quran says:

    Surah 4:24 An-Nisa (The Women)

    And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess. [This is] the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are [all others] beyond these, [provided] that you seek them [in marriage] with [gifts from] your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse. So for whatever you enjoy [of marriage] from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation. And there is no blame upon you for what you mutually agree to beyond the obligation. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

    Those whom your right hand possess is an Arabic idiom for captives and slaves. And they are sexually available to Muslims, according to Allah, because their marriages don’t matter.

    The Preezy would like you to believe that GITMO is a YUUUGE recruiting tool for the Islamists. As if the jihadists care where the Blind Sheikh is being imprisoned, as opposed to the fact he’s imprisoned in the first place. More to the point, which does anyone imagine is the bigger draw? Abu Ghraib, or the chance to have unlimited sex slaves?

    I don’t mean to be flippant, cruel, uncaring, what have you. Indeed, I’m quite the opposite. Which is why honesty and compassion compels me to point out what should be obvious, if it were not against administration policy and maybe will soon be illegal to say. ISIS main recruiting tool is that it has finally shaken off the shakles of the opinion of the filthy kuffar and has instituted true Islam. They can make a very strong case, so strong that those whom we are told are our moderate allies generally shut up when confronted with it.

    This is the reality of the situation. We need to face up to it.

    Steve57 (17e737)

  45. 47. Let’s be real honest here — the deity actually smeared there is the Christian God. The tip-off is the triangular halo, which is a traditionally trinitarian symbol in Christian iconography.

    Rhymes With Right (da71f4) — 1/8/2016 @ 2:31 pm

    It’s safer that way. Thus have decided the bold speakers-of-truth-to-power. Alternately known as the “please don’t hurt me crowd.”

    We can expect another play about Mormons any day now, so they can pat themselves on the back and give themselves awards.

    Steve57 (17e737)

  46. I’m saying that if you poke a bear with a stick and it tears you apart it’s your own fault. And any time anti Christian bigots are eliminated by anti Christian moslems who are also killed I consider it a win-win. Throw in a few dead commies and I’ll have a hat trick.

    From where you’re sitting you just accused a person who did two tours in Nam, engaged in 33 firefights, had 79 confirmed kills, was wounded twice, was awarded a Bronze Star with a “V” and two purple hearts of being an enemy sympathizer. Not only are you Godless you are classless. And you’re lucky it’s not my blog because I’d ban you for life for calling another blogger a traitor, especially a decorated/wounded veteran.

    Thank you for your service, but still, you’ve doubled down on an idiotic position that happens to align with what motivated the terrorists who attacked Charlie Hebdo. You are calling it a win win when people who merely print cartoons you find offensive to Christianity are murdered.

    Gil (4e1585)

  47. Steve57 (17e737) — 1/8/2016 @ 1:39 pm

    See, you can learn about Islam from an English language version of the meaning of the Quran (all we need is the meaning). Except when you can’t learn from an English language version of the Quran.

    It’s actually a very strong principle in Islam, that they can only understand the Koran accurately in Arabic. This is really the reason Arabic became the spoken language of all the territories conquered by Islam in the first century or so of its existence, except to the east, where it hit a barrier in Persia (and Kurdistan, where a version of Persian is spoken) and in all places to the east of Kurdistana dn Persia, the spoken language did not change, and they developed a version of Islam where the vast majority of the people did not know Arabic. I am not sure exactly what happened in Spain.

    This is borrowed from a Jewish idea – which is why we never switched languages – but taken to an extreme. There is almost an absolute prohibition on translating the Koran in Islam. Christianity, on the other hand, is very comfortable with translations. So you may not see that when they say it can’t be translated actually they are correct, especially according to their religion. Where CAIR is really lying is in telling people that (according to their own thinking) people can know what Islam is about by reading an English version.

    They, and others, do get around the prohibition of translating it, I think, by always printing it two languages – so the Arabic version is the “real” version and the English is only to help people learn the meaning of the Arabic. But, of course when they are distributing it in the United States, practically nobody, except maybe a would be convert, pays attention to the Arabic version.

    By the way, there is also the Italian saying, Traduttore traditore, but the 19th-century writer Giuseppe Giusti. who probably originally coined this, may not have had difficulties in accurately translating things in mind. He actually maybe meant they were deliberately being inaccurate.

    There is another problem. There is not all that much content in the Koran, and it may not be clear too, and have contradictions. So to develop a system of laws, they have to use sayings and actions of Mohammed and schools of thought and theer’s more room for dispute there.

    Sammy Finkelman (dbec95)

  48. Re: Unlawful knowledge.

    It is kind of an irony that the big hero of ISIS is Harun al-Rashid (786–809) who actually was someone who drank, and who was responsible for translating a lot of things into Arabic. It was in the 750-850 period more or less that Arabic replaced Aramaic as the spoken language in those parts. All because the Koran couldn’t be translated.

    There came an Islamic scholar, al-Ghazali al-Ghazali, who around 1890 wrote a book that inveighed against secular knowledge, and it was very influential in the east, and in Spain about 200 years later. That’s why it declined.

    Boko Haram has what to stand on in opposing book [Boko means book = modern western] education. It doesn’t have what to stand on in murdering male students and enslaving female students. They are not simply following a religion.

    Sammy Finkelman (dbec95)

  49. * who around 1090 wrote. End of the 11th century.

    Sammy Finkelman (dbec95)

  50. Here is something where a Turkish Moslem writes that certain Koranic versions are misinterpreted to justiofy hatred of Jews.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 2.3004 secs.