Wonderful.
So, when's World Swastika Day?
Verbum diaboli Manet in Episcopis Calvinus et Mahometus
Showing posts with label Hijab. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hijab. Show all posts
Sunday, February 2
World hijab day?
From the quill-pen of your friendly, neighborhood
Amillennialist
Themes
Hijab,
Islamic propaganda,
The truth about Islam
Monday, November 16
New site, same tired logical fallacies, historical revisions, and outright falsehoods in defense of jihad
Offered in response to a "rebuttal," from here.* I hope Ms. Siddiqi is sincere but misinformed.
So much for that "Golden Age of Islam in Al-Andalus."
Hello, Maheen,
“freedom does not protect you from looking ignorant when you quote sacred text out of context.”Please, show me where I’ve misrepresented the Islamic texts I posted. It should be easy to do, since I am so “ignorant.” (Didn’t Mr. Appel say we were supposed to be nice?)
“I encourage you to educate yourself on the sacred tradition of hijab and follow it through its heritage in all of the Abrahamic faiths, including Christianity.”What “sacred tradtion” has hijab outside of Islam?
It is true that propriety in worship in the ancient church included clear gender
distinctions, but that was completely devoid of the tyranny in Muhammad’s
“revelation” and practice.
“Christianity too has quite a violent past but one should not blame the religion for the work of the ignorant. I do not attribute the savage crusades to the peaceful Christian friends that I have, and likewise, you should not attribute the evil works of some Muslims to the beautiful faith of Islam and other Muslims.”[At least she admits Islam's "violent past." Now, to address the Source and Sustenance of that bloodshed!]
That’s a false moral equivalence and a false tu quoque, two “arguments” offered often by jihad’s apologists in response to the genocidal content of their own authoritative texts.
Where have I blamed “other Muslims”? Where did I “attribute the evil works of some Muslims to . . . Islam”?
I quoted Allah and his apostle.
Ironically (and tragically, for non-Muslims) enough, so do those Muslims practicing the “evil works.”
How are you going to convince them that they too are “ignorant” and taking passages “out-of-context”?
How will you persuade ["]all four Sunni schools of jurisprudence, Sahih Muslim, Sahih Bukhari, Sunan Abu Dawud, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Juzayy, Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Khaldun, Muhammad Muhsin Khan, S. K. Malik [. . .] Averroes, al-Ghazzali, numerous Shi’ites,[" (credit Robert Spencer)] etc. of their grievous error?
Are you honestly unaware of Islam’s traditional understanding and practice of offensive jihad against non-Muslims? If not, will you engage in honest discourse? If you are unaware, how can you engage in intelligent discourse?
Christians did commit great sins during the Crusades. (Do you know why the first was called by Pope Urban II? It was for the defense of Christians under siege by . . . Islam.)
When Christians murder, do they do so in fulfillment of Christ’s commands and in accord with His example or not? Since you are expert enough in Christian theology to claim that the hijab is a sacred tradition in Christianity, you must know the answer.
Produce one verse that has Christ commanding believers to enslave or slaughter non-Christians.
Since you are so well-versed in Islamic theology that you can say that I am “ignorant” and taking passages “out-of-context,” when Muslims slaughter innocent non-Muslims in Allah’s name, is that in fulfillment of his commands and Muhammad’s example, or not?
When, “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror . . . ’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220), did he really mean, “I’ve succeeded by love and good deeds”?
“If you go so far as to denigrate the Prophet Muhammad”“denigrate”?
Muhammad married little Aisha when she was six and began raping her when she was nine. What “context” makes that okay? Does that not deserve “denigration”? Are you aware that one of Khomeini’s first acts when he came to power was to lower the marriageable age of girls in Iran to nine? Why is that?
What about Muhammad’s assassinations of those who mocked him — Asma bint Marwan, Abu Akaf? The beheading of the 600-900 bound prisoners of the Banu Qurayza? Muhammad and his followers raping women whose brothers, fathers, and husbands they had just slaughtered? The attack on the innocent Jewish farmers, tilling their fields in the Khaybar Oasis [(credit Hugh Fitzgerald)]? What decent person should not feel rage at such evil?
That is the “Perfect Man,” “uswa hasana[,]” you defend.
If someone who commits theft, slavery, rape, pedophilia, genocide, and blasphemy — and commands others to do the same, calling it “divine” — does not deserve to be denigrated, who does?
More importantly, how can any decent person aware of what Muhammad said and did not condemn his words and deeds?
You claim respect for the Prophets of YHWH and His Christ — how then can you defend Muhammad? For he stated that whoever claims Allah has a son is a blasphemer. If Allah is YHWH (He is not), then Muhammad is calling Jesus a “blasphemer,” since Christ called Himself the Son of God.
“Just look at Spain. Muslims, Christians, Jews, and agnostics/atheists all lived peacefully under the Muslim rule of Spain for hundreds upon hundreds of years; however, the moment Christians overthrew the Muslims, they slaughtered every Muslim man, woman, elderly and child.”If things were so peaceful, why did the Spaniards slaughter “every Muslim” as soon as they regained their freedom? Why did they overthrow them in the first place?
So, is that what you’ve been taught, or is that what you’ve been taught to offer as a rebuttal to non-Muslims who discover Islam’s texts and history?
“Do a little more reading with the aid of understanding of what you read in a historical context, and you will find a lot of your false notions answered.”You’re going to have to show from Qur’an, ahadith, and sira that:
-When Muhammad commanded, “Invite . . . demand the jizya . . . then fight,” he really meant, “Invite . . . make small talk . . . befriend.”Here’s a final quotation for you; perhaps [Moses ben Maimon] didn’t really mean what he said, just like Muhammad:
-When Muhammad told some Jews, “accept Islam and you’ll be safe,” he really meant, “Let’s have a potluck! How ’bout those Greeks?”
-When Muhammad began raping little nine-year-old Aisha, he was really only giving the local kids a puppet show.
-When Muhammad commanded that whomever leaves Islam should be murdered, he really only meant to exclude him from Bingo.
Remember, my coreligionists, that on account of the vast number of our sins, God has hurled us in the midst of this people, the Arabs [Muslims], who have persecuted us severely, and passed baneful and discriminatory legislation against us … Never did a nation molest, degrade, debase, and hate us as much as they . . .
[Although we were dishonored by them beyond human endurance, and had to put up with their fabrications, yet we behave like him who is depicted by the inspired writer: “But I am as a deaf man, I hear not, and I am as a dumb man that openeth not his mouth (Psalm 38: 14).
Similarly our sages instructed us to bear the prevarications and preposterousness of Ishmael in silence . . .
We have acquiesced, both old and young, to inure ourselves to humiliation . . .
All this notwithstanding, we do not escape this continual maltreatment which well nigh crushes us.
No matter how we suffer and elect to remain at peace with them [Muslims] they stir up strife and sedition . . .]
-Maimonides, victim of Islam in conquered Spain[, Iggeret Taiman (Epistle to Yemen), edited by A S Halkin; translated by B. Cohen, New York, 1952]
Al-Andalus [or any other Muslim-dominated land] was no paradise for non-Muslims. It was — to varying degrees — just what Allah requires (Qur’an 9:29). Pact of Umar, anyone? You know what that requires, right?And here is how Maimonides ended up in Cairo:
Again, please show from the Islamic texts where I’ve erred. Show me where I’ve been false or unfair.
I encourage you to put your faith in Christ, the Son of God, Who reconciled you to His Father in His body on the cross. True religion is in Him alone.
Moses was only thirteen years old when Cordova fell into the hands of the fanatical Almohades, and Maimon and all his coreligionists there were compelled to choose between Islam and exile. Maimon and his family chose the latter course, and for twelve years led a nomadic life, wandering hither and thither in Spain.
In 1160 they settled at Fez, where, unknown to the authorities, they hoped to pass as Moslems. This dual life, however, became increasingly dangerous. Maimonides' reputation was steadily growing, and the authorities began to inquire into the religious disposition of this highly-gifted young man.
He was even charged by an informer with the crime of having relapsed from Islam, and, but for the intercession of a Moslem friend, the poet and theologian Abu al-'Arab al-Mu'ishah, he would have shared the fate of his friend Judah ibn Shoshan, who had shortly before been executed on a similar charge. These circumstances caused the members of Maimonides' family to leave Fez. In 1165 they embarked, went to Acre, to Jerusalem, and then to Fostat (Cairo), where they settled.Death or Islam? Wandering for twelve years? Trying to pass as Muslims? Shared the fate of his friend, executed for "relapsing from Islam"?
So much for that "Golden Age of Islam in Al-Andalus."
*Updated November 16, 2009 a.D. Originally posted 05/11/09 at 12:28 AM
A visit to Ms. Siddiqi's site shows that she never had the decency to post my incisive and irrefutable rebuttal.
From the quill-pen of your friendly, neighborhood
Amillennialist
Themes
Al-Andalus,
Deceiving non-Muslims,
Defending jihad,
Hijab,
Maheen Siddiqi,
Maimonides,
Obedient Muslims vs. moderate Muslims,
The truth about Islam
Wednesday, May 6
Hijabs on the move
Can you imagine individuals walking American streets, going about their business, proudly displaying swastikas or the Rising Sun of Imperial Japan?
In 1942?
Neither can I.
Something odd occurred this past Sunday. During an Arabian horse show's climactic demonstration, a group of brightly-clad Muslimas wheeled their strollers and hijabs from one side of the stadium to the other directly in the view of the entire audience, paused once they reached the other side of the stadium, and then left.
They were making a statement.
Islamophobic? Not in light of the Muslim Brotherhood's declared intention to subvert the American Constitution from within and subjugate the West to Allah.
Approaching eight years after 9/11, many Americans are ignorant still regarding Islam. How many Muslims are?
A "Christian" who married what I thought was a decent, Muslim-in-Name-Only Muslim once defended the hijab from my charge that it was a symbol of slavery and death by asserting stupidly that "Mary covered her head."
Lots of people cover their head. Only one covering symbolizes fourteen centuries of global slavery, rape, and slaughter.
From here:
In 1942?
Neither can I.
Something odd occurred this past Sunday. During an Arabian horse show's climactic demonstration, a group of brightly-clad Muslimas wheeled their strollers and hijabs from one side of the stadium to the other directly in the view of the entire audience, paused once they reached the other side of the stadium, and then left.
They were making a statement.
Islamophobic? Not in light of the Muslim Brotherhood's declared intention to subvert the American Constitution from within and subjugate the West to Allah.
Approaching eight years after 9/11, many Americans are ignorant still regarding Islam. How many Muslims are?
A "Christian" who married what I thought was a decent, Muslim-in-Name-Only Muslim once defended the hijab from my charge that it was a symbol of slavery and death by asserting stupidly that "Mary covered her head."
Lots of people cover their head. Only one covering symbolizes fourteen centuries of global slavery, rape, and slaughter.
From here:
Mr. Appel,
I disagree . . . kindly, openly, and nicely.
I quoted the words of Muhammad and his allah, yet you call them “cheap shots,” “anger,” and “prejudice.” What does that say about what you believe about those passages?
I was not attacking the author; the fact that my comment was allowed here speaks to her respect for freedom of speech and her generosity. I am attempting to alert all people of good will to the Source and Sustenance of fourteen centuries of suffering and death for billions of non-Muslims and Muslim women, children, and apostates.
With regard to the hijab, I realize that some Muslim women choose to wear it for their own reasons. That does not change the fact that since Muhammad practiced covering his property (wives, concubines, slaves), and Allah calls him “a beautiful pattern of conduct for those who want to please” him, the hijab/niqab/abaya are mandatory for the devout:“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband’s fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex . . .” (Qur’an 24:31).On a related note, I would ask you to produce from any other major religion’s sacred texts open-ended, universal commands to enslave or slaughter all who refuse the “invitation” to conversion. This is unique to Islam.
“Aisha used to say: ‘When (the Verse): “They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms,” was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces’” (Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 282).
“Narrated ‘Aisha: ‘Allah’s Apostle used to offer the Fajr prayer and some believing women covered with their veiling sheets used to attend the Fajr prayer with him and then they would return to their homes unrecognized’” (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 368).
[Explanatory note: Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin in tafseer of this hadith explains: "This hadith makes it clear that the Islamic dress is concealing of the entire body as explained in this hadith. Only with the complete cover including the face and hands can a woman not be recognized. This was the understanding and practice of the Sahaba and they were the best of group, the noblest in the sight of Allah . . . with the most complete Imaan and noblest of characters. so if the practice of the women of the sahaba was to wear the complete veil then how can we deviate from their path?"]
“Narrated ‘Aisha: ‘The wives of the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. ‘Umar used to say to the Prophet “Let your wives be veiled,” but Allah’s Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam’a the wife of the Prophet went out at ‘Isha’ time and she was a tall lady. ‘Umar addressed her and said, “I have recognized you, O Sauda.” He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of “Al-Hijab” (A complete body cover excluding the eyes)’” (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Number 148).
On the other hand, Jesus taught and practiced, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” and, “Love your enemies.”
Muhammad butchered those who resisted him. Christ died for the sins of all people, including Muslims.
There is no moral equivalence between the two.
From the quill-pen of your friendly, neighborhood
Amillennialist
Themes
Hijab,
Non-violent jihad,
Obedient Muslims vs. moderate Muslims,
Resisting Jihad,
The truth about Islam
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)