“Oy Bay,” blogging from the San Francisco Bay Area (hat tip – Alan), is sounding the alarm to be careful, you just might be a colonialist!Next time you ask where the moderate Muslims are, be careful, you may be a Colonialist ™. In case you had the …

“Oy Bay,” blogging from the San Francisco Bay Area (hat tip – Alan), is sounding the alarm to be careful, you just might be a colonialist!Next time you ask where the moderate Muslims are, be careful, you may be a Colonialist ™. In case you had the …

He tries to paint himself as a moderate, and we Americans are eager to embrace him, but…. I believe he is doing it for his own fame and fortune.

Granted, he is critical of CAIR and stands up for the “John Does” and says some things Americans need to hear but… He is very unclear and uncertain in his answers about the treatment of women and what he calls “occupied territories”.

To say that Islamic terrorism will end when muslims embrace Islam and get to the Allah – sounds good, but will probably never ever happen. Muslims needs to consider a complete change away from Islam.

The genuine Muslim moderates will be those who condemn Mohammad and Islam and demand that muslims clean their own house and turn in the terrorists amongst themselves, within their mosques, workplaces, neighborhoods, etc.

This article by Patrick Poole is 10 days old, but important and well worth reading. The Muslim American Society is closely tied to the Islamic Society of Boston. Cover-up and……

Yesterday, Hot Air posted its interview Dr. Zuhdi Jasser who is featured in ‘Islam vs. Islamists’ that PBS has finally agreed to release. Dr. Jasser, a devout Muslim and former U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander, strongly opposes the politicali…

I’m not sure I’d call him all that smart………

Those who do not interpret the violent suras of the Koran literally are apostates according to devout Muslims.

Who will be killed by the fanatical jihadists… with “divine” sanction.

Islam needs to work out its own homicidal doctrinal mess on its own.

I wish they would all return to Mecca and fight it out.

Because, until there is a clear “Islam” (either pacified of the murderous dogmas or openly terroristic and imperialistic), the rest of the world will have to suffer their birthpangs/death throes.

And, with modern WMD technology, a lot of us infidels are going to get killed in this Great Muslim Wrestling Match for ultimate control of their faith.

Meanwhile, I wonder why anyone would want to follow the plagiarized teachings of a pedophile warlord.

Seems a bizarre choice, considering the other, more serene visions available.

How does Jasser reconcile the poltical aspects of Islam with his views? How does he explain the directives in Islam’s texts to conquer others who do not believe as they do? What is his definition of a “moderate” Muslim and how does this “moderate” Muslim differ from the garden variety “conquer all who do not believe in Allah” Muslim?

Bottom line is that Islamic doctrine is clear in it’s directive to convert, conquer, or kill the “unbeliever”, and treatment of others (such as women) in a way that is not consistent with our values or laws. How does he reconcile the difference?

It seems that if a “moderate” Muslim appears with answers to these questions that are compatable with democracy and American values they are no longer Muslims but apostates. I have yet to see a Muslim reconcile the difference between the tenants of their faith and fundamental values inherent in democracy.

Your strikethru is a little annoying. – BillINDC on May 24, 2007 at 3:24 PM

Sorry. I was trying to agree with you on this point. I chose a poor way of doing so.

But “fundamentalism” shifts over time.

Except that fundamentalism is the term we use to describe those who don’t shift. I also disagree with your example regarding Jews. Razing and killing unbelievers is not “enshrined in verses of” Jewish doctrine.

1. Incorrect in a significant sense: the ability for Islamofascists to operate with impunity relies on tolerance in broader Muslim societies.

I agree, but the issue at hand is rewriting their scripture. What you are actually suggesting in promoting moderation and/or secularism is that they abandon their fundamental scripture. I understand, ideologically, how this would solve the problem. Unfortunately, it is just not realistic.

They are losing the ideological battle worldwide, but they exist and deserve our support. this support is undermined by blanket scorn for the religion of the reformers/secularists.

But I scorn apostates and secularists also. It’s just not in my doctrine to kill them for it.

My point is this: It is not realistic to rewrite their Koran. But it is realistic to convert them. Conversion to a different view of Islam and/or Secularism is what you are really advocating.

They get threatened by head-chopping maniacs on one side, and told that their book needs a rewrite before their views are useful or legitimate on the other side. Tough spot.

I’m not the one telling them to rewrite their book. I’m asking them to abandon their broken religion of hate for a peaceful religion of Grace. But neither of us can’t make them change by twisting their arms or shaming them in the media.

2. In the end, verses of many holy books have been deemphasized as the faiths evolve. This is argued to be much easier in Christianity, due to the faith’s focus on logos. In contrast, the Koran is considered immutable, many argue.

Some sects of Christianity do deemphasized parts of the Bible, but on the global stage mainstream Christian beliefs have remained pretty constant over the last 2000 years.

My position is, those who choose Islam yet emphasize secularism and non-violence should be supported enthusiastically.

True. Except that choosing Islam and emphasizing secularism is a very distict contradiction.

One is doctrinally right and one is doctrinally wrong.

A Muslim becomes a naval aviator and serves honorably for 18 years and becomes a squadron commmander, and some still find it occasion to criticize him for his religion.

The question is, should we expend energy telling Muslims like CDR Khan how fundamentally crappy their beliefs are and how such beliefs preclude their being truly American?

Or should we maybe figure out how to get more Muslims to embrace American values like CDR Khan?

Erick Stakelbeck’s talk with him is a must see. It’s also edited well. The interview focuses on what Dr. Jasser has to say. A similar interview on an MSM network would intercut between the subject and lingering closeups of Brian……

Key phrase, Bill; “… intolerance for infidels may be is enshrined in verses of the Koran”, which completely explains the basis for the virulent anti-Semitism and cultural racism.

Your strikethru is a little annoying, as it does not change the meaning of the sentence. “May be” was not used as a possibility, it was used as an de facto acknowledgment. “May be” did not indicate equivocation.

Problem is these types of interpretation are rarely substantial enough to garner the support needed to ‘convert’ the fundamentalists who hold to the traditional literal interpretations of their respective religions.

No disagreement here in the short term. And admittedly, the short term is our desired/needed time frame. But “fundamentalism” shifts over time in proportion to mainstream religious interpretation. I don’t know many Orthodox Jews that raze the homes of and kill unbelievers, for example.

In the end, the only way that people like Dr. Jasser could hope to have any measurable effect against Islamofascist terrorism is to rewrite or remove these verses from the Koran. And I just don’t see this happening.

1. Incorrect in a significant sense: the ability for Islamofascists to operate with impunity relies on tolerance in broader Muslim societies. In addition, intolerance of Muslim societies for Islamofascist rule – a painful lesson learned in Algeria and, lately, Iran – is a key element to moderating the power and prevalence for Islamic extremism. Living under religious nutters loses its appeal. In this sense, outspoken Muslims like Dr. Jasser can have an impact by promoting secularism.

They are losing the ideological battle worldwide, but they exist and deserve our support. this support is undermined by blanket scorn for the religion of the reformers/secularists.

They get threatened by head-chopping maniacs on one side, and told that their book needs a rewrite before their views are useful or legitimate on the other side. Tough spot.

2. In the end, verses of many holy books have been deemphasized as the faiths evolve. This is argued to be much easier in Christianity, due to the faith’s focus on logos. In contrast, the Koran is considered immutable, many argue.

But tabling the degree to which fundamentalists can be swayed by changing interpretations of the Koran (let;s assume “not at all”), ask yourself another question: if Dr. Jasser has limited to no influence on fundamentalists who let’s assume have a naturally disproportionate tendency towards violent interpretation …

… conversely, what impact do non-Muslims maligning Islam entirely have on the others who identify as Muslim, but renounce violent jihad?

This is an important question, revolving around practically defining the scope of your enemy and how to address the problem of Islamic extremism, tabling any pc cultural impulses.

My position is, those who choose Islam yet emphasize secularism and non-violence should be supported enthusiastically.

The folks at Hot Air have a fine interview with retired Naval officer & Muslim Zuhdi Jasser. Lots of people should see it.

(Thanks …

Intolerance for infidels may be enshrined in verses of the Koran, but Islamic justification for the anti-semitic virulence of the Middle East is merely one component of a systemic political and cultural racism. This is explained very well in discussions by Walid Shoebat.

BillINDC on May 24, 2007 at 12:54 PM

Key phrase, Bill; “… intolerance for infidels may be is enshrined in verses of the Koran”, which completely explains the basis for the virulent anti-Semitism and cultural racism.

This should come as no surprise to any of us, because the Muslim terrorists clearly articulate this through our own media on a regular if not daily basis. But it is our own media that is striving to articulate these ideas in ways other than what the terrorists themselves are saying. So, do I believe the media spin, or do I believe what the terrorist themselves are actually saying?

In the end, the only way that people like Dr. Jasser could hope to have any measurable effect against Islamofascist terrorism is to rewrite or remove these verses from the Koran. And I just don’t see this happening.

But it’s interesting that that is how he has chosen to interpret his religion.

BillINDC on May 24, 2007 at 12:34 PM

“Chosen to interpret”, indeed.

This is a liberal interpretation of the Koran, almost a secular interpretation in many respects. Not much different in context than any number of liberal and/or secular interpretations of the Bible and of Christianity.

Problem is these types of interpretation are rarely substantial enough to garner the support needed to ‘convert’ the fundamentalists who hold to the traditional literal interpretations of their respective religions.

My point is that, while people like Dr. Jasser may be able to limit the support of Islamic-Jihad terrorism, it is foolish to look to him as a means to elminiate said terrorism.

There are only two ways to eliminate a terrorist who has already decided to martyr himself:

One is to let him carry through with his murderous plot.

Two is to find him and kill or imprison him before he carries through with his plot.

Which option do we think will cause the least number of innocent injuries and deaths?

Profound …

If he can also get them to incorporate Women into society that would be great.