Ali Eteraz equates Geert Wilders -- a man documenting Islamic men preaching Islamic words and carrying out Islamic carnage -- with those very same malevolent monsters.
And when Eteraz mentions the Dutch Parliament to legitimize his desire to censor Wilders, either he doesn't realize that that august body is teeming with cowards and appeasers who make Chamberlain look like Churchill (unlikely), or he hopes that his readers are too ignorant or lazy to do anything other than swallow what he's implying: If Wilders own government opposes him, he must be bad (and you are too, if you don't join the program).
Such an argument tells you all you need to know about on whose side Ali Eteraz and his ilk are in this civilizational struggle.
In response to more logical fallacies and half truths in defense of Allah from a promising practitioner of Islamic Newspeak:
Ali Eteraz still deceiving and hoping no one will notice, I see.And in response to a comment by one of Eteraz's coreligionists:
The author has conceded previously that Qur'anic verses requiring offensive violence against non-Muslims exist, but rather than address that fact in this forum and offer his "remedy" (his empty assertion that those commands were only for Mohammed; how can a mandate addressed to Muslims be only for Mohammed?), he employs an embarrassingly transparent ad hominem attack against Wilders.
Even if one or two of the passages in Fitna do not specifically apply to the carnage carried out in Allah's name with which they were connected (for example, burning is Allah's punishment, not for Muslims to use), the truth is that Wilders could have used so many others, for Qur'an and Sunnah demand slavery or death for all who refuse the "invitation" to Islam.
But again, just as in his misleading and stupidly disingenuous "refutation" of OBL's alleged misapplication of The Verse of the Sword," Ali Eteraz hopes that his charges of "Islamo-xeno-arabo-phobia!" and other red herrings will prevent non-Muslims from noticing that his god and prophet require the conversion, subjugation and humiliation, and death of all non-Muslims "until all religion is for Allah."
If only Muslims venerated Charlie and the Chocolate Factory rather than the word of Allah and the example of Mohammed. I'd trade "Oompa-Loompas" for "Allahu Akbars!" any time.
Here is what Ali Eteraz hopes to obfuscate:
Some of the Source and Sustenance of 1350 years of Allah's War Against Humanity:"the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: 'Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them . . .'" (Muslim Book 19, Number 4294).[. . .]
"fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) . . . " (Qur’an 9:5).
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).
"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle . . . '" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).
"Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone (in the whole of the world). But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do" (Qur'an 8:38; ayah 39 from Noble Qur'an).
There is much more to be found on th[is topic] (and others) from Islam's own "sacred" texts.
04/20/08 4:40 am
I see Ali has brought along at least one of his hatchet men.
Let's look at Buzz Kill's "arguments," shall we?Intelligent open free societies must constantly struggle to find theEquating the reporting of the preaching and practice of religious texts with 1) lying and 2) a threat to public safety is accurate only when those texts are Islamic. But that's not what he meant, is it?
right tension between absolute free speech and limited free speech.
Anyone that thinks American or European socities are built on the
bedrock of the first amendment or absolute free speech, which must be
doggedly protected, have never apparently heard of a libel suit, Bong
Hits 4 Jesus ( Morse v. Frederick ) or yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater."
The blame lies not with the person reporting those facts, but with those commands and those who preach, defend, and seek to fulfill them today.There are limits to free speech. Not every piece of grandstanding hateWilders opposes hate in his cities and towns, which is why he is exposing the word of Allah and the example of Mohammed.
speech deserves a soapbox in town hall. Sometimes, people must use the
judgement and exercise their free will to not allow hate into their
cities and towns.
In accord with Mohammed's example, Buzz Kill seeks to silence criticism of the pedophile prophet.
To demonize those exposing malice is perverse. He should be ashamed.This has become particularly difficult with the internet andFree speech is a problem only for tyrants and those with something to hide.
something of a puzzle to solve.in this incident, at a time when anti-Muslim emotions have not been whipped up to the point of genocide, we can sit quietly and debate what we would and should do in times when political or religious hatred has become dangerously manipulated.That's the pot calling the china "black." Nice try at "manipulating" the discourse.
Wilders exposes the genocidal impulse foundational to Islam, but Buzz Kill accuses those who would defend themselves against that impulse of harboring one!
Typical Muslim apologist: Blame the victim!
Apparently, Buzz Kill's shame knows no bounds.Wilders is a Hitler with bad timing.Ridiculous ad hominem.
I have an idea: Rather than libel someone exposing and denouncing the threat to humanity posed by the command of Allah and the example of Mohammed, why don't Ali Eteraz and Buzz Kill join him?Some free speech doesn't promote freedom.Not when it obfuscates for evil, as AE's column and BK's post do.