How dumb does Alan Colmes have to be? Why do Leftists seem totally immune to retaining knoweldge?

He has to hear about this stuff all the time, yet none of it seems to soak into that emaciated skull of his.

The root causes of terrorism.. JIhad

JIhad, I have two items. The first is a description of how the Muslims moved into Persia.. notice the similarities to the crime they commit in Europe today.. Then after that , I show how Islam in its core teaching obligates the Muslim to do this. It’s a religious obligation and an eschatological requirement. Oh and let me already state what the responses are going to be.. 1 - Taking it out of context 2 - Using a bad translation 3 - English doesnt have the same meaning as Arabic 4 - (My favorite) Billy did it too!!! (Comparing to other religions… this tactic is designed to prevent Islam from being discussed)

1 - Persian Conquest Example
“More Moslems came, and soon a small mosque was built, which attracted yet others. As long as Zoroastrians remained in the majority, their lives were tolerable; but once the Moslems became the more numerous, a petty but pervasive harassment was apt to develop. This was partly verbal, with taunts about fire-worship, and comments on how few Zoroastrians there were in the world, and how many Moslems, who must therefore posses the truth; and also on how many material advantages lay with Islam. The harassment was often also physical; boys fought, and gangs of youth waylaid and bullied individual Zoroastrians. They also diverted themselves by climbing into the local tower of silence and desecrating it, and they might even break into the fire-temple and seek to pollute or extinguish the sacred flame. Those with criminal leanings found too that a religious minority provided tempting opportunities for theft, pilfering from the open fields, and sometimes rape and arson. Those Zoroastrians who resisted all these pressures often preferred therefore in the end to sell out and move to some other place where their co-religionists were still relatively numerous, and they could live at peace; and so another village was lost to the old faith.”

Boyce, A Persian Stronghold of Zoroastrianism, pp. 7-8;

2 - Islam 101

Shortly before Muhammad fled the hostility of Mecca, a new batch of Muslim converts pledged their loyalty to him on a hill outside Mecca called Aqaba. That Muhammad’s nascent religion underwent a significant change at this point is plain. The scholarly Ishaq clearly intends to impress on his (Muslim) readers that, while in its early years, Islam was a relatively tolerant creed that would “endure insult and forgive the ignorant,” Allah soon required Muslims “to war against all and sundry for God and his Apostle.” The Islamic calendar testifies to the paramouncy of the Hijra by setting year one from the date of its occurrence. The year of the Hijra, 622 AD, is considered more significant than the year of Muhammad’s birth or death or that of the first Quranic revelation because Islam is first and foremost a political-military enterprise. It was only when Muhammad left Mecca with his paramilitary band that Islam achieved its proper political-military articulation. The years of the Islamic calendar (which employs lunar months) are designated in English “AH” or “After Hijra.”

Muhammad’s greatest victory came in 632 AD, ten years after he and his followers had been forced to flee to Medina. In that year, he assembled a force of some ten thousand Muslims and allied tribes and descended on Mecca. “The Apostle had instructed his commanders when they entered Mecca only to fight those who resisted them, except a small number who were to be killed even if they were found beneath the curtains of the Kaba.” (Sira, p550)

Volume 3, Book 29, Number 72;
Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah’s Apostle entered Mecca in the year of its Conquest wearing an Arabian helmet on his head and when the Prophet took it off, a person came and said, “Ibn Khatal is holding the covering of the Kaba (taking refuge in the Kaba).” The Prophet said, “Kill him.”

Following the conquest of Mecca, Muhammad outlined the future of his religion.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177;
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “The Hour {of the Last Judgment} will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24;
Narrated Ibn Umar: 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, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah.”

It is from such warlike pronouncements as these that Islamic scholarship divides the world into dar al-Islam (the House of Islam, i.e., those nations who have submitted to Allah) and dar al-harb (the House of War, i.e., those who have not). It is this dispensation that the world lived under in Muhammad’s time and that it lives under today. Then as now, Islam’s message to the unbelieving world is the same: submit or be conquered.

VinceP1974 on May 16, 2007 at 10:31 PM

Vince,

Did you just type all of that off the top of your head?

Cause, like if you did, Wow!

JayHaw Phrenzie on May 16, 2007 at 11:02 PM

At least he consistent in Blaming America First (BAF)

Excellent recap. So, how do we fight them?

stonemeister on May 16, 2007 at 11:02 PM

Nuke em and take their oil?

Kini on May 16, 2007 at 11:30 PM

VinceP1974 on May 16, 2007 at 10:31 PM

Nice post VinceP1974, very informative.

Maxx on May 16, 2007 at 11:34 PM

Even if 9/11 was “caused” by our geopolitcal activities, all that means is that we have to kill those who oppose our geopolitical activities.

Especially when they kill us for them.

Or are we supposed to surrender to those who want a global theocratic tyranny?

profitsbeard on May 17, 2007 at 12:01 AM

And look, taking on Ron Paul in the debate on this one point is like taking on the Army of Monaco, alright. This is not like that big of a deal. Yeah, it was a cute exchange,

Wow. I’ve been pretty hard on her and here she goes trying to get along with me by echoing exactly what I said about Rudy’s “smack down” of the stupidest candidate of the ten.

Knock it off Laura. I’ll give you a second chance.

hee hee hee

csdeven on May 17, 2007 at 12:16 AM

Because Colmes and the hate-America first crowd are always looking for those “root causes” which really cause bad things to happen, they end up skewered by the fallacy of origins, which is that if you can explain how something started, you mistakenly imagine you’ve explained it completely.

Another thing. Didn’t that whole root cause thing have it’s origin in psychology? You know, I have a hard time relating to women because my mother wouldn’t let me watch Howdy Doody sort of thing? Can anyone tell me which brilliant intellect it was that demonstrated that what is true for an individual’s psyche is true for geopolitics? Do we understand nations as having some kind of national psyche? Seems like a pretty archaic concept to me–kind like when they used to talk about nation’s as being a race, e.g. “the French are perplexing race”–unless I’m missing some nuance or other.

Man does Laura rock my world.

smellthecoffee on May 17, 2007 at 12:46 AM

I have a hard time relating to women because my mother wouldn’t let me watch Howdy Doody sort of thing?

Your mom wouldn’t let you watch Howdy Doody?

You poor, sick bast@rd.

Come on folks, we all know Colmes is a moron. Laura is too clever to get trapped by him. Actually she was too cordial. He deserved a bitch slap.

BacaDog on May 17, 2007 at 7:08 AM

It seems to be that most people supporting the idea that 9/11 was our fault keep quoting Osama’s 1998 fatwa against the United States. My question is, since when did we start believing what a crazy person says. The Son of Sam said his neighbors dog told him to kill. So it was the dogs fault? If I was to build a time machine, go back in time and kill that damn dog, David Berkowitz wouldn’t have killed all those people? Or is it more likely that, with the dog out of the picture, he would now start taking direction from the neighbor’s cat. Now we have to get back in the time machine and kill every dog, cat, hamster and guinea pig in a half mile radius of Dave’s house, only to come back to our modern time and now see that he is claiming the lampshade made him do it.

BohicaTwentyTwo on May 17, 2007 at 8:35 AM

Your mom wouldn’t let you watch Howdy Doody? You poor, sick bast@rd.

I thought that by using such an outlandish example that it was be obvious it was merely hypothetical. So, for the literal-minded out there, I should have written, “One has a hard time relating to women because one’s mother wouldn’t let one watch Howdy Doody sort of thing?” Sheesh.

smellthecoffee on May 17, 2007 at 9:34 AM

My memory is sketchy on this detail, but didn’t Osama bin Laden say that one of the reasons for the Al Qaida attack on the USA was because of American troops on sacred Saudi soil during the original Iraqi war in the 1990s.

archon2001 on May 17, 2007 at 10:43 AM

Wait, wait, wait. I thought Osama bin Laden hated Saddam Hussein. So he launches 9/11 because we’re bombing Saddam Hussein? When are these goons going to get their talking points straight? Ever?

Seixon on May 17, 2007 at 11:33 AM

VinceP1974 on May 16, 2007 at 10:31 PM

Thank you, that was extremely interesting.

4shoes on May 17, 2007 at 12:50 PM

There is NO reason for religious fanaticism, in Islam or Christianity in america. Please look at the taliban. Do you want america like that. I man Stone Gays and adulterers. YEA!

Ingraham, I think her response was pretty lame, “we should not listen to the terrorist”. Yea brilliant. Let make it up like they hate us because of jealousy of our Freedom. Please they love their oppressive societies and religion.

However if all you don’t think ALL politicians are BIG BAGS OF WIND, especially a New Yorker like Rudy, you are kidding yourself. He is going to use 9/11 and his self appointed I’M THE WORLDS EXPERT IN SECURITY AND TERRORISM ALL HE CAN. If it was not for 9/11 HE WOULD BE NOTHING. Why because HE DID NOTHING to protect the city or improve the fire and police response to large scale emergencies in 8 years. He ignored advice and put the command and control center in the WTC, even after he was told that was a bad idea. It turned out to a bad thing on 9/11. RUDY WAS JUST A MAYOR OF A CITY THAT GOT THE GREATEST BLUNT OF 9/11. He does not deserve any awards or to be president because of that.

He was a marginal figure before 9/11 and that is where he belongs.

gmcjetpilot on May 17, 2007 at 10:29 PM