September 16, 2006

But It Certainly Isn't A Call For Violence In The Name of Islam!

After all, we are being assured by those Muslims demanding the Pope apologize for a seven century old quote that Islam is a religion of peace, that jihad is simply an internal struggle, and that violence committed in the name of that faith is unIslamic.

What, then, do they say about this?

Israeli Arab Islamic leader Sheikh Raed Salah told a rally in Jerusalem the "Israeli occupation" of the city will soon vanish.

"With fire and blood we shall liberate al-Aqsa," Salah told 50,000 people Friday at the Islamic Movement's 11th annual rally in Umm al-Fahm, a city in Israel's Haifa district, YNetNews reported.

The Al-Aqsa mosque is part of a complex of buildings in Jerusalem known as the Temple Mount to Jews and some Christians.

"Soon Jerusalem will be the capital of the new Muslim caliphate, and the caliph's seat will be there," Salah said. Caliph is the term or title for the Islamic leader of the Ummah, or community of Islam.

"With fire and blood...."

Nah, that certainly can't be viewed as suggesting violence in the name of Islam, can it.

Either this Muslim leader doesn't understand Islam, or those trying to reassure us that Islam is a peaceful religion are liars.

|| Greg, 08:05 PM || Permalink || Comments (8) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Trackback Information for But It Certainly Isn't A Call For Violence In The Name of Islam!

TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'But It Certainly Isn't A Call For Violence In The Name of Islam!'.

Comments on But It Certainly Isn't A Call For Violence In The Name of Islam!

Well.. the land of his people is occupied by a foreign army. International law recognizes (a) that East Jerusalem is occupied territory unlawfully held by the Israelis and (b) that people have a right to take up arms and resist occupation of their lands. His rhetoric is blustery, but then again look what comes out of Bush's semi-literate mouth.

The United States Constitution, a fine document, also authorizes this sort of jihad. And don't forget-- many of the Palestinians are Christians. Why you fail to support them in their very American struggle for their property and rights and freedom from occupation, I don't understand.

|| Posted by acrobat, September 17, 2006 01:07 AM ||

Gee -- they lost their country, just like Manuel II Paleologus and his family did. Why don't they just shut up and accept it, like you seem to think that long-ago Byzantine Emperor should have.

Could it be that you believe in Muslim conquest (with the rest of the world submitting), yet reject the notion of anybody else taking land away from the Muslims?

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, September 17, 2006 07:59 AM ||

Again, you're inconveniently ignoring the fact that many Palestinian Christians are suffering from Israeli theft and occupation.

You're also forgetting that Muslims adore and respect Jesus, peace and blessings upon him, as the finest of humanity. To the mostly atheistic Zionists, he is nobody important.

You're also forgetting that the current Pope considers the Protestants to "not be proper churches" who are probably destined for the Hellfire.

When earlier conquests took place, it was a change of political leadership-- the Muslim armies were forbidden from attacking women and children; they Christians and others weren't forced off their land-- they were protected. Roger II of Sicily, a minority among Christian leaders, but respected amonst Muslims acted in much the same way. Muslim law, for the most part, looks very favourable upon Christianity. Muslims with Christian parents, for example, are still expected to obey and take care of them respectfully, and it is a clear violation of Islamic law to attack any Christian places of worship. (I would be happy to see the people who firebombed the churches in the West Bank severely punished.) I personally work with one of Pope John Paul II's former advisors on international security; a Knight Commander of one of the Papal orders who has been my mentor for many years, and thanks to him, I can easily recognize that there is beauty within the Christian faith.

If I didn't know any Christians, and your blog was the only exposure I had to Christianity, I would think Christianity to be a bigoted, juvenile, small-minded thing. Think about that for a moment. You have a choice-- you can affirm your fragile ego by continuing to make ugly, juvenile comments about Muslims and thus accomplish nothing except contributing to the enmity in the world, or you can work with Muslims to address the many serious issues -- global warming, nuclear war, consumerism, materialism, the attack on family values -- that threaten us both.

What would Jesus (pbuh) do?

|| Posted by acrobat, September 18, 2006 12:58 AM ||

Hey -- what you call an illegal occupation is simply a "change of political leadership". Or is such a change only allowed to go one way -- namely in favor of Islam?

You are forgeting that Muslims blaspheme against Jesus by calling him a prophet and denying his divinity -- as such the claim that they "adore and respect" Jesus is mendacious.

And you misrepresent the teachings of the Catholic Church and this pope on Protestant Churches.

Ultimately, I choose to affirm the truth of Christianity and to rejectn the falsehood of Islam. If that makes me "bigoted, juvenile, small-minded" in your eyes, I could care less. And if my rejection of the active, ongoing violence committed in the name of Islam around the world contributes to emnity in the world, I guess I'll just have to live with that. After all, Islam has shown for that it is the enemy of Christians and the West since the seventh century.

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, September 18, 2006 04:22 AM ||

Again, you're betraying the plight of the Palestinian Christians... the Christians of Bethlehem, no less... in favour of largely atheistic people of Jewish origin mindlessly driving women and children off their own land.

The gruesome thing about the illegal occupation-- and it is illegal under international law, which even the US Government officially agrees with -- is that it involves ethnic cleansing. It's not merely a change in political leadership, it involved the forced removal of people from their homes and the theft of their property. I would not support such actions in any case, even if they were done by people acting in the name of Islam. If the indigenous Jews has simply grabbed the levers of power but didn't harm the Palestinians, well, it wouldn't be a big issue really.

You are forgeting that many Christians didn't believe in the divinity of Jesus (pbuh) either. That only became a mainstream "Christian" belief hundreds of years later, after Christianity had been subverted by the Greco-Romans (starting with Paul, who never knew Jesus (pbuh)) who did a great job wiping out the many Christians (including Jesus' own brother, head of the Jerusalem Church) who believed Jesus (pbuh) to be the Messiah, but not Divine. This is an agreed upon fact amongst the academic community. See for example, Hyam Maccoby's "Paul the Mythmaker" (excerpt here) which demonstrates very clearly how inconsistencies in the Bible itself prove this claim.

And yes, the Catholic Church does reject Protestant churches as inadequate for salvation. This really isn't surprising, because many Protestant churches reject other Protestant churches as being valid, and many Protestants reject Papal authority as a matter of definition. The historical record shows very clearly that the worst enemy of Christians is... other Christians. Not the Muslim world. There are actually many wonderful examples of Christians and Muslims working together throughout the ages, doing the Lord's work.

The problem is that you reduce things to black-and-while, in a simple-minded cowboy fashion. The West would not be what it is today without Islamic influences, though people are unaware of it. I'm 100% Western and 100% Muslim-- but your simplistic worldview can't comprehend this. I offer you an open hand, in the spirit of Jesus, who we both at least respect, but all you can do is offer spite in return. I think that speaks volumes as to who truly represents the teachings of Jesus (pbuh). You can't stand the thought of a friendly, devout Muslim, because it would shatter your stereotypes.

As for being juvenile-- well, pasting in a cartoon with bacon replacing the face is surely juvenile; I'm sure even Pope Benedict would agree that it's not exactly high-minded scholarship that you're offering on this blog. Your "work" would be considered juvenile at any half-decent American junior high school. It boggles the mind that a fully grown man in his 40s would take the time to make such a silly thing.

Anyhow, since your blog isn't worth reading, I'm going to stop here. If you want to continue doing the online equivalent of masturbating for Jesus, well go ahead and do it alone or in a circle jerk with the other warbloggers. But if you wish to contact me in a true and loving spirit, to make the world a better place, you are most welcome to e-mail me-- you have my address.

|| Posted by acrobat, September 18, 2006 05:04 AM ||

You are right -- the West would not be what it is today wihout the Islamic influences of the Middle ages.

Unfortunately, Islam is stuck there, having contributed nothing of significance to the world since then -- except for terrorism.

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, September 18, 2006 09:44 AM ||

The siteowner purposely forgets the Stern Gang and Irgun Squad initiated terrorism in the Middle East. But since he has sold his political soul to Israel(perhaps the 'Watchers Council 'requires this,the American "political class"certainly does) he will not mention such. And almost all Jews who have contributed to the Western world items of note have been estranged to a substantial degree from traditional organized Talmudism. Let the siteowner fume on, he is on the losing side of current history, as the Jew dominant neocons quagmired Iraq War and Hezbollah's heroic defiance of Israel hints.


The American political class give every sign of needing a severe chastening before it abandons what conservative Mike Scheuer called "Imperial Hubris."

|| Posted by Ken Hoop, September 18, 2006 04:51 PM ||

Actually, Ken, if you read a little history you will find that Arab terrorism against Jews began shortly after teh Balfour Declaration, as Jews moved to the Holy Land and purchased land to set up kibbutz.  They paid the Arab owners fair market value -- and then had to fight for their lives because they refused to live as dhimmi. 

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, September 18, 2006 08:10 PM ||
Post a comment

Remember personal info?




Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards
Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2013 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2012 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2011 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2010 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2009 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Posts by Category

Announcements (posts: 13)
Blogging (posts: 187)
Border Issues & Immigration (posts: 421)
deferred (posts: 4)
Education (posts: 685)
Entertainment & Sports (posts: 483)
Guns & Gun Control (posts: 65)
History (posts: 329)
Humor (posts: 88)
Israel/Middle East (posts: 44)
Medical News (posts: 54)
Military (posts: 273)
News (posts: 1570)
Paid Advertising (posts: 234)
Personal (posts: 108)
Politics (posts: 5261)
Race & Racism (posts: 281)
Religion (posts: 819)
Terrorism (posts: 884)
Texas GOP Platform Reform Project (posts: 4)
The Courts (posts: 310)
Watcher's Council (posts: 482)
World Affairs (posts: 345)


January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
December 0000



Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Powered By

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

Administrative Stuff

Email Me
Syndicate this site (XML)

Advertising Disclosure


About Me

NAME: Greg
AGE: 50-ish
SEX: Male
OCCUPATION: Social Studies Teacher
LOCATION: Seabrook, TX
DISCLAIMER: All posts reflect my views alone, and not the view of my wife, my dogs, my employer, or anyone else. All comments reflect the view of the commenter, and permitting a comment to remain on this site in no way indicates my support for the ideas expressed in the comment.

Search This Site

Support This Site

Recent Entries

Who Is Regan Theiler And Why Was She Allowed To Spend Public Funds On A Sole Source Contract For Her Part-Time Employer?
Not My Idea Of A Stimulating Evening
About Trump's Liberty University Speech
Do Not Place The Secessionist "Texas Independence" Measure On The 2016 Republican Primary Ballot
Conservatives Vs. Liberal On Those Engaged In Violent Political Activity
Tom Mechler Makes His Case Against Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Jared Woodfill Makes His Case For Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Questions About Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Reject The Call To Move 2016 Republican Party Of Texas Convention
It Is Too Bad That Political Parties Cannot Reject Voters Who Seek To Join, Stop Would-Be Candidates Who Want To Run


Watchers Council
  • Ask Marion
  • Bookworm Room
  • The Colossus of Rhodey
  • The Glittering Eye
  • GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD
  • The Independent Sentinel
  • JoshuaPundit
  • Liberty's Spirit
  • New Zeal
  • Nice Deb
  • The Noisy Room
  • The Razor
  • Rhymes With Right
  • The Right Planet
  • Simply Jews
  • Virginia Right!
  • Watcher Of Weasels

  • Political & Religious Blogs