|
Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
Link
Excerpt: " When former college professor, and alleged terrorist, Sami al-Arian was unexpectedly acquitted Tuesday on eight counts and received a hung jury on the other nine, many leading Muslims could barely contain their glee. “People are just jubilant,” Ahmed Bedier, the Tampa chapter director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), told the New York Times. The not guilty verdicts were a “wonderful and a tremendous victory,” according to a statement released by Muslim-American Society (MAS) President Mahdi Bray. While in many cases it might be reasonable to forgive a defendant acquitted by a jury of his peers, it is not with al-Arian. Regardless of whether or not the jury believed his actions constituted a specific legal violation by acting “in furtherance of” terrorist attacks, there is no mistaking what is in al-Arian’s heart. As a result of the trial, al-Arian has been forced to admit that he did, in fact, have an intimate working relationship with Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Why? Because he was caught on tape coordinating with them, again and again and again. Al-Arian also admitted that he wrote a letter—which he allegedly attempted to send, but could not do so successfully—to a Kuwaiti legislator urging him to support the families of suicide bombers in order to provide “support of the jihad effort in Palestine so that [suicide] operations such as these can continue.” He wrote the letter just weeks after President Clinton had signed an executive order banning financial and material support of PIJ. Again, this is only known because the government introduced it as evidence during trial. Support for al-Arian, though, has long pre-dated the six-month trial. Then again, so has the evidence against him." This type of thing IMO gives the lie to the public statements by such groups in the US that they really don't support terrorism by fellow Muslims. Black Americans should not have been happy to see OJ get off, and patriotic American Muslims shouldn't be happy to see this guy get off. They tried to paint that trial as racist when the evidence was ample, despite his not getting convicted. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
The acquittal of this terror supporter was disgusting.
The only consolation is that this scumbag will be getting a one-way ticket back to some islamic sh*thole very shortly. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
The acquittal of this terror supporter was disgusting. The only consolation is that this scumbag will be getting a one-way ticket back to some islamic sh*thole very shortly. [/ QUOTE ] Where he can help terrorists without our being able to hinder him. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
Well they do have the option to retry him on the charges on which the jury was deadlocked.
|
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
Well they do have the option to retry him on the charges on which the jury was deadlocked. [/ QUOTE ] Only if the DA thinks he/she can do something different next time around and get a conviction. Or, if he/she thinks the jury was screwy and can get a better one. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
Or, if he/she thinks the jury was screwy and can get a better one. [/ QUOTE ] How could he not think that, or that he couldn't find a better one? |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
This part bothers me, a lot...
[ QUOTE ] While in many cases it might be reasonable to forgive a defendant acquitted by a jury of his peers, it is not with al-Arian. Regardless of whether or not the jury believed his actions constituted a specific legal violation by acting “in furtherance of” terrorist attacks, there is no mistaking what is in al-Arian’s heart. [/ QUOTE ] Our system doesn't allow for juries figuring out what is in someone's heart. They do, I'm sure, but juries are charged with rendering a verdict based on evidence - nothing else. If I'm on a jury and "know in my gut" someone is guilty, but the prosecution did not prove it, beyond a reasonable doubt - I've got no choice but to acquit. Supposedly. A juror who decides to vote "guilty" because of his "feelings" or "suspicions," is no different than a cop who renders "street justice." Actually, I'd trust the cop's gut before the juror's. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
How could he not think that, or that he couldn't find a better one? [/ QUOTE ] Sometimes the prosecution doesn't do the best job they might have. They presented something wrong or didn't present something. A witness they thought would testify and come across to the jury one way, does the opposite. It happens. They don't always walk into the courtroom with their "A" game. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
The key part of the statute and what is seems the jury didn't find him guilty of, was the "in furtherance of" clause. Although I am sure he argued free speech, his promotion of terrorism is the same as verbally inciting any other crime.
|
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
While I have only cursorily followed the facts of the case -- when it first came up it appeared to be much ado about nothing except fear mongering and perhaps racism on the part of those who opposed the professors speech -- I would give more weight to the opinion of the sworn jury, than to the opinion of some internet "pundit" writing on some website of dubious provenance.
The jury system works well, IMO. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
The jury system works well, IMO. [/ QUOTE ] Yea, OJ is proof that all the undereducated jurors who otherwise would be sitting at home watching soaps, are so very capable of logically judging the facts of any case and rendering a true verdict. This is in fact just an indictment of the jury system. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
It is odd that you would go against one of the pillars of our free society (being judged by a jury of ones peers) apparently in favor of being judged by opinions offered by unknown internet writers.
When I weigh these two choices, I must say the jury system comes out way on top. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] While in many cases it might be reasonable to forgive a defendant acquitted by a jury of his peers, it is not with al-Arian. Regardless of whether or not the jury believed his actions constituted a specific legal violation by acting “in furtherance of” terrorist attacks, there is no mistaking what is in al-Arian’s heart. [/ QUOTE ] Our system doesn't allow for juries figuring out what is in someone's heart. They do, I'm sure, but juries are charged with rendering a verdict based on evidence - nothing else. If I'm on a jury and "know in my gut" someone is guilty, but the prosecution did not prove it, beyond a reasonable doubt - I've got no choice but to acquit. Supposedly. A juror who decides to vote "guilty" because of his "feelings" or "suspicions," is no different than a cop who renders "street justice." Actually, I'd trust the cop's gut before the juror's. [/ QUOTE ] OK, but there the author isn't talking about the jury convicting or not based on what is in al-Arian's heart--the author is talking about others forgiving al-Arian or not, regardless of the jury's verdict. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
The key part of the statute and what is seems the jury didn't find him guilty of, was the "in furtherance of" clause. Although I am sure he argued free speech, his promotion of terrorism is the same as verbally inciting any other crime. [/ QUOTE ] Well, maybe that's what the DA needs to correct if he re-tries. I'm not a lawyer and have only read and watched a few accounts of Sammi. Based on those, I'd vote guilty. But (here it comes), if they couldn't vote guilty on the "in furtherance clause," the way I understand it, they weren't presented with something they could vote guilty on. Am I getting you as confused as I am me? Charges were drawn up. Specifics were set forth. And, again, the way I understand it, that's what the prosecution argues in trial. Point by point. What I'm saying is, the DA didn't spell it out in the best way. btw, I've never been on a jury. I've always shown up and done the waiting thing (for 30 days once, Federal Grand Jury), but the defense just never seemed to cotton up to me or my answers. Go figure. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
OK, but there the author isn't talking about the jury convicting or not based on what is in al-Arian's heart--the author is talking about others forgiving al-Arian or not, regardless of the jury's verdic [/ QUOTE ] It is unlikely that those who prejudged his guilt are likely to forgive him -- regardless of the facts, the juries opinion or any other internet writer offering an opposing opinion. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
OK, but there the author isn't talking about the jury convicting or not based on what is in al-Arian's heart--the author is talking about others forgiving al-Arian or not, regardless of the jury's verdict. [/ QUOTE ] Ooooops, did I mis-read or simply not understand? OK, back to the blog (and maybe a remedial reading class on the way?) Crap, I hate when this happens! [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
It is odd that you would go against one of the pillars of our free society (being judged by a jury of ones peers) apparently in favor of being judged by opinions offered by unknown internet writers. When I weigh these two choices, I must say the jury system comes out way on top. [/ QUOTE ] Fine, but one main issue under discussion isn't whether or not al-Arian is technically guilty--it is that he has proclaimed his wishes aloud in his own words, and those words show he is a terrorist supporter, with terrorists' goals. Therefore, the legitimate American Muslim community should shun him and condemn his views and words, rather than cheer him. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
The point MMMMMM was making, was that these domestic Moslem groups who claim not to support terrorism, are hailing his acquittal despite the amount of evidence. Even if the jury system did work and there wasn't sufficient evidence to convict, they should not be supporting someone who has been proved to support terrorism just by his own words and actions in the evidence presented.
|
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
If he was a terrorist supporter with terrorists goals he would have been convicted. THe govt has vast resources and a strong political motivation to obtain a conviction.
Perhaps in this case the system worked as intended to control out of control government machinations. A far more plausible scenario, IMO. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
OK, but there the author isn't talking about the jury convicting or not based on what is in al-Arian's heart--the author is talking about others forgiving al-Arian or not, regardless of the jury's verdict. [/ QUOTE ] <ul type="square"> What we have here is a failure to communicate.[/list] The author wrote... [ QUOTE ] ...there is no mistaking what is in al-Arian’s heart. [/ QUOTE ] From that, I took it that his opinion, not the jury's, was that Sami should have been convicted because of what was in his (Sami's) heart. I was saying that I didn't want jurors making decisions based on what they thought was in the accused's heart. My interpretation of the author's opinion is that he feels the opposite. Since he (author) "knows" what Sami thinks, feels, believes, he (author) doesn't need facts or a properly presented prosecution. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
The point MMMMMM was making, was that these domestic Moslem groups who claim not to support terrorism, are hailing his acquittal despite the amount of evidence. Even if the jury system did work and there wasn't sufficient evidence to convict, they should not be supporting someone who has been proved to support terrorism just by his own words and actions in the evidence presented. [/ QUOTE ] Proved? Many on this forum who are likely to consider that he is proved to be a terrorist supporter are likely those who accuse Chris Alger of being Anti-American or who think I am a liberal. They have much to understand about proper thinking. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
Things like this lead to riots - like the ones in Australia.
|
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
Fine, but one main issue under discussion isn't whether or not al-Arian is technically guilty--it is that he has proclaimed his wishes aloud in his own words, and those words show he is a terrorist supporter, with terrorists' goals. Therefore, the legitimate American Muslim community should shun him and condemn his views and words, rather than cheer him. [/ QUOTE ] Could not possibly agree more. Well put. The American Muslim community, IMO, has had their collective heads in the sand and must have some of the worst advisors/PR people, this side of GWB. I said long ago that they should have been out front with an anti-extremist campaign. Look at how the Saudi royal family gets the PR folks working whenever they need to put a positive spin on something. The few Muslims I've known were all kind, humble folks. Not to say I haven't run across a few nutcases, but I don't consider that to be "knowing" them. My thoughts about Islam, pre-Osama, et al, was that it was a very deep, philosophical belief system. The Muslims I've known were all true to their faith, but always accepting of non-believers. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
"As a result of the trial, al-Arian has been forced to admit that he did, in fact, have an intimate working relationship with Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Why? Because he was caught on tape coordinating with them, again and again and again. Al-Arian also admitted that he wrote a letter—which he allegedly attempted to send, but could not do so successfully—to a Kuwaiti legislator urging him to support the families of suicide bombers in order to provide “support of the jihad effort in Palestine so that [suicide] operations such as these can continue.” He wrote the letter just weeks after President Clinton had signed an executive order banning financial and material support of PIJ. Again, this is only known because the government introduced it as evidence during trial. [/ QUOTE ] AC, the above information does prove it, regardless of whether or not it met the standards of a certain statute for conviction. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
...proper thinking... [/ QUOTE ] Who(m) decides what's proper? That phrase sounds like something from Mein Kampf, Joseph Stalin, Mao-baby, or [i]1984[/b]. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
If he was a terrorist supporter with terrorists goals he would have been convicted. [/ QUOTE ] Uh, no, not necessarily. From his words it is clear that he is in support of terrorism--but that in itself does not necessarily mean that he has contributed material support to terrorism, or has incited it. Support can be either ideological, material, or both. I'm not sure what the statutes are, but look: "Al-Arian also admitted that he wrote a letter—which he allegedly attempted to send, but could not do so successfully—to a Kuwaiti legislator urging him to support the families of suicide bombers in order to provide “support of the jihad effort in Palestine so that [suicide] operations such as these can continue.” He wrote the letter just weeks after President Clinton had signed an executive order banning financial and material support of PIJ. Again, this is only known because the government introduced it as evidence during trial." Also: "At the 1990 ICP conference, Al-Arian addressed the crowd of 200 people in St. Louis called for “true armed jihad against the enemy in Israel.”" So he obviously supports terrorism in belief, as his own words clearly show. Whether that also means he is guilty of a crime, perhaps material support or incitement, may be another matter. But as I've said, on the basis of his words, the legitimate American Muslim community should shun and condemn, rather than applaud. [ QUOTE ] THe govt has vast resources and a strong political motivation to obtain a conviction.Perhaps in this case the system worked as intended to control out of control government machinations. A far more plausible scenario, IMO. [/ QUOTE ] The more plausible scenario actually is that you really don't know anything about this case, and are just talking out of your butt. But that is not the issue here: the issue is that al-Arian has clearly made statements in support of terrorism, and the American Muslim community should be condemning that, rather than sympathizing with or applauding him. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
CAIR one of the groups maligned in this forum is particularly inept at condemning terrorism and perhaps PR in general. Of course they view part of their mandate to help defend Arabs who are attacked by American press and/or by the govt (if they feel that the attack is unjust). So, in a sense they are doing their jobs. They are sort of the same as some of the Jewish organizations or perhaps the NAACP and perhaps there are Indian, African and other organizations that are similar.
However, IMO, they could do it better -- and so could a lot of others. However, those on this forum who are ready to wipe out the Jury's opinion need to reconsider. As far as I can tell, this is based on half knowledge, internet opinions and emotion. Your thoughts on Islam are a refreshing and welcome change from some of the misconceptions offered by some on this forum as facts. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
I don't know enough about CAIR to comment on what they've done or not done.
The real "push" should have come from the US leaders of Islam, IMO. Sorry to say I can't even tell you if they're called Ayatollah here, but those men acknowledged to be the leaders. Those are the men the average US citizen would listen to. I know Islam doesn't have a "pope," but maybe they should consider the office. It certainly would help clear a lot of foggy, smelly air if they had one "true" spokesman. Again, IMO. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
Unfortunately, Islam was set up as a personal religion without a formal structure (like the Pope). This has led to many interpretations including some extremist interpretations. A religion should really be personal rather than come with a political structure. Unfortunately, for Islam, this has created a PR problem in modern society as there is no single voice. The Mullah with the biggest loudspeaker is picked up by some to be the true voice of Islam and the silence on the part of the many is considered to be acceptance of the terrorist activities.
|
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know enough about CAIR to comment on what they've done or not done. The real "push" should have come from the US leaders of Islam, IMO. Sorry to say I can't even tell you if they're called Ayatollah here, but those men acknowledged to be the leaders. Those are the men the average US citizen would listen to. I know Islam doesn't have a "pope," but maybe they should consider the office. It certainly would help clear a lot of foggy, smelly air if they had one "true" spokesman. Again, IMO. [/ QUOTE ] A formal religious heirarchy will never arise in Islam. It would go against the direct word of the Koran. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
If you reread what I have written in this thread it is not in support of him. I actually said that I have only a cursory following of the case.
However, I also said, that our system has acquitted him of being a terrorists supporter as defined by our laws. I also said that I would be more willing to go by the verdict of the jury than the, likely, out of context opinions offered by an unknown Internet writer. Now, if you would rather take the words of an internet opinion monger than that of the jury who has been offered all the facts in context by a zealous prosecutor -- then that is your way of thinking through an issue. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, Islam was set up as a personal religion without a formal structure (like the Pope). This has led to many interpretations including some extremist interpretations. A religion should really be personal rather than come with a political structure. Unfortunately, for Islam, this has created a PR problem in modern society as there is no single voice. The Mullah with the biggest loudspeaker is picked up by some to be the true voice of Islam and the silence on the part of the many is considered to be acceptance of the terrorist activities. [/ QUOTE ] So, ACPlayer, then why not look to what the Prophet Mohammed himself did, how he followed the Koran, how he interpreted it. Look to the words of Mohammed (Peace be upon Him) in the hadiths, look at his many military campaigns of conquest, look at his slaughter of 600 surrendered Jews at Medina. Do you want to know how to interpret a Koranic passage? "Sura 8:67 It is not for any Prophet to have captives until he has made great slaughter in the land" Well, Mohammed, Allah's Messenger (Peace be upon Him!), knew exactly how to interpret it: he made slaughter before taking captive slaves from amongst the women and children of the conquered. If you are unsure what is meant by the Koran, O ACPlayer, and are confused by opinions of any mullahs or imams, there is no need for such confusion on your part: just look to the blessed example of Mohammed! Sura 9:73 "O Prophet! Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites. Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end." Following this command of Allah, Mohammed the Last Prophet (Peace be upon Him!) waged many great battles upon the infidels, leading over 20 such military campaigns himself! So you see, ACPlayer, there is no need at all for your confusion. The blessed example of Mohammed the Last Prophet (Peace be upon Him!) makes all things clear. As Sura 2:193 says, "Fight against them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme", and as Sura 9:5 says "When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them.". But have no fear, O ACPlayer! For surely, as Sura 47:5 says, "Those who are slain in the way of Allah - he will never let their deeds be lost. Soon will he guide them and improve their condition, and admit them to the Garden, which he has announced for them" and as Sura 44:51-57 says, "Lo! Those who kept their duty will be in a place secure, amid gardens and water-springs, attired in silk and silk embroidery, facing one another.... And we shall wed them unto fair ones with wide, lovely eyes. They call therein for every fruit in safety. They taste not death therein, save the first death. And He hath saved them from the doom of hell, a bounty from thy Lord. That is the supreme triumph. " |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
[ QUOTE ]
Now, if you would rather take the words of an internet opinion monger than that of the jury who has been offered all the facts in context by a zealous prosecutor -- then that is your way of thinking through an issue. [/ QUOTE ] I'm NOT taking the words of an "internet opinion monger": rather it is the words of al-Arian himself. And he has clearly stated his belief in the campaign of jihad and suicide bombing against Israel. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
Please don't forget that Muslims aren't the only religious group to commit atrocities in the name of their religion in the past or in the present.
|
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
>>The American Muslim community, IMO, has had their collective heads in the sand<<
Agreed. No pun intended, I'm sure. |
Kudos, but
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] While in many cases it might be reasonable to forgive a defendant acquitted by a jury of his peers, it is not with al-Arian. Regardless of whether or not the jury believed his actions constituted a specific legal violation by acting “in furtherance of” terrorist attacks, there is no mistaking what is in al-Arian’s heart. [/ QUOTE ] Our system doesn't allow for juries figuring out what is in someone's heart. They do, I'm sure, but juries are charged with rendering a verdict based on evidence - nothing else. <font color="white"> . </font> If I'm on a jury and "know in my gut" someone is guilty, but the prosecution did not prove it, beyond a reasonable doubt - I've got no choice but to acquit. Supposedly. <font color="white"> . </font> A juror who decides to vote "guilty" because of his "feelings" or "suspicions," is no different than a cop who renders "street justice." [/ QUOTE ] VNH, sir. So far. [ QUOTE ] Actually, I'd trust the cop's gut before the juror's. [/ QUOTE ] Ooops! Blunder. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
This always happens. Same thing with that Chinese nuclear scientist who snuck back into the office at 3:00 a.m. on Christmas Eve to sneak out more tapes, and then "lost" them. The prosecution did a lousy job and the judge censured them, but that doesn't change the fact that the guy was pulling all kinds of crap left and right and with no reasonable defense. Suddenly he became a racial hero just because he was accused and of a certain race.
It will ever be thus. What surprises me is that we have to pretend otherwise, when it has never been any other way and never will be in virtually any conceivable reality. Well, maybe not on Star Trek. |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
I said I would respond to some of BluffThis's Quranic quotations a few weeks back but never got round to it, so I'll do it in response to this post, as you quote similar/some of the same passages. Both of you quote verses out of context, which often skews their meaning, and sometimes translations that seem designed to bring out the most belligerent possible meanings (in that there are other translations that give rise to less agressive, and often openly anti-agressive, meanings).
For example, you quote: ""Sura 8:67 It is not for any Prophet to have captives until he has made great slaughter in the land" ". I’m not sure where you got this as I can’t find any online transcript that has exactly the same wording, but never mind, there are very similar ones out there. First of all there’s the issue of the translation: my translation of the Quran, the recent Abd al Haleem translation (which I strongly recommend; published by OUP), has this verse reading: “It is not right for a prophet to take captives before he has conquered the battlefield”, which is markedly less aggressive – no inducement to “slaughter” first, take prisoners later. This version has “It is not fitting for an apostle that he should have prisoners of war until he hath thoroughly subdued the land.” Meanwhile this version has “It does not behove a prophet that [he] should have captives until he engages in regular fighting”, and comments : “This verse lays down the general rule that captives should not be taken unless there is regular fighting and the enemy is completely overpowered. It cuts at the root of slavery. Only those who take part in war to destroy Islam and are defeated can be made prisoner. . Thus while your interpretation of the verse is “Prophets must kill people before they can take prisoners”, these Pakistani Muslims’ interpretation, based on a different translation, is “Prisoners can only be taken [by Prophets] in regular battle” ie don’t resort to kidnapping or slavery. Neither of us have the knowledge of the text or classical Arabic to settle which interpretation is right, but clearly you should be wary of making generalisations about the entire religion based on out of context excerpts of contentious verses that are open top various translations and interpretations. “Sura 9:73 "O Prophet! Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites. Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end."” First of all, this says “O Prophet”. It doesn’t enjoin anyone else to do this (note also that the previously discussed verse also refers to "Prophets", not people in general). One of your criticisms of the Quran has been that it makes general timeless commands to all Muslims, while you claim for example that the excesses of the Old Testament are only one-off messages to historical characters that don’t necessarily apply in general. Well note here that clearly isn’t the case (and often isn’t; many verses are addressed to the Prophet or refer to specific occasions). Also note that my translation says “strive against” rather than “make war”, which given the Arabic is jahada is certainly a plausible translation given that jahada (from which jihad comes) means to struggle or strive. The Hell reference is hardly much different from what most religions claim. So while you would presumably argue that this is an injunction for Muslims to make war on unbelievers, it is more plausibly a call specifically to the Prophet to strive against them in an undefined manner. Note also that this verse is from Sura 9, as are the next two you quote, and as were most of BluffThis’s quotes if I recall correctly. The context here is absolutely key. You both quote the verses as if they were general, timeless commands to fight against/subdue/dhimmify all infidels or what have you. In fact, it refers to a specific historical context. The Haleem version presents it as referring to an occasion where God allowed the Muslims to break their pledges, although giving them four months notice first, to some non-believers because those non-believers had broken a treaty with the Muslims (by supporting others against them) and continued to fight against them. He uses some Arabic grammar to show that the reference to idolaters in 9:5, which you quote, refers specifically to those who broke the treaty. Neither of us have the knowledge of Arabic to know whether he’s right or wrong but given that he is a professor of classical Arabic, I think we’d have a hard time finding a reputable refutation of his point. Now you can say that the Quran is timeless for Muslims and always valid. True, but what’s the lesson from this verse? You would presumably argue that it's “Always fight the unbelievers until they submit” as was permitted in this context. I think a more tenable one is “It’s legitimate to fight people who break treaties or fight you; but always be ready to be merciful (mentioned in the next verses).” Indeed much of the sura consists of specific condemnations of people who break their word rather than "unbelievers". The point of all this is not that the translations and interpretations that I use are definitely right and your are wrong, although I do think the total lack of context perverts the meanings of your quotes. The real point is that the meaning, even the correct translation, of these verses are highly contested and depend on correct interpretation of an ancient language as well as a detailed knowledge ot textual and historical context - and even then how these should be applied to other contexts and situations is not going to be solved in a manner that would convince all people. As the Quran says: “Some of its [ie scripture] verses are definite in meaning – these are the cornerstone of the Scripture – and others are ambigious. The perverse at heart eagerly pursue the ambiguities in their attempt to make trouble and pin down a specific meaning of their own: only God knows the true meaning.” (Haleem, 3:7). |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
If that is what he said, then it is hardly worth condemning. We have two groups of terrorists duking it out in the middle east -- let em. Although I doubt if he said this as I suspect that would put him afoul of the ghastly patriot act and he would have been convicted.
If he said something against America, well he would have been punished for sure. His words and opinions are not worth my time, except to defend his right to say what ever he wants. His actions have been scrutinized and pass muster (at least that of the jury). |
Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism
I will let nickyG -- far more articulate than I -- discuss the Koranic interpretation.
I will say that quoting scripture out of context is foolhardy at best. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:06 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.