Many Muslims don’t like Robert Spencer.
I can’t imagine why? There is nothing that he says in this clip that is not factual.
from avideditor.wordpressposted with vodpod
If anyone disagrees with the assertion I made above, I request that he or she kindly point out Spencer’s mistake.
I won’t hold my breath.
(BTW, I don’t see any reason why Muslims around the world can’t act reasonably when faced with perceived insults. In fact, I know that most Muslims are reasonable, and that these voices of reason are not heard (at least not heard by me) as often as would be desired. I found this post enlightening and encouraging.)
UPDATE:
I should say, however, that in the link I provide above I am somewhat saddened that more of the commenters on that blog did not view Fitna before deciding that Wilders was an extremist stirring up hatred.
There was no extra inflammatory propositions in Fitna, no new special criticisms. Actually, the criticisms found in Fitna can also be found being made by Muslims who wish to do away with absurdities such as talking trees that call Muslims to slaughter Jews and the like.
But [sigh] for those who still refuse to watch Fitna and would like more explication than was offered in the clip above, here is Robert Spencer’s latest installment of Jihad Watch:
HotAir.com – New Jihad Watch:A fitna over Fitna
(H/T – Connie)
Filed under: Antisemitism, Politics, Religion/Ideology, Terrorism, War , Denmark, Egypt, Iranian Propaganda, Islamophobia, Lebanon, Pakistan, Political Correctness, Robert Spencer, Syria, Turkey, UAE, Yemen
More from Robert:
New Jihad Watch: A fitna over Fitna
Cool, thanks, Connie
I wonder what the Think Progress crowd would think about thid video.
Trajan,
It’s nothing but Neo-Con Islamophobia incarnate.
“If anyone disagrees with the assertion I made above”
You did not make an assertion. You merely posted a series of letters, each of which also appears in the sentence “I love Islam, why don’t Nick Griffin and the BNP?” Any additional meaning a person might see originates with that person.
It is true that most (though not all) of the facts Spencer cites are correct. It is also true that he leaves his conclusion unspoken. Unspoken, however, does not mean unmade. What upsets Muslims is his implicit assertion that the Medieval interpretation of Islam is the correct one; that Islam itself is inherently bad.
It is true that he, somewhat unusually, draws a distinction between radical and moderate Islam. It is also clear that, in regards to which one is correct, he sides with the radicals. This is evidenced by, among other things, his implicit assertion in the opening quotations that the word “infidel” refers to all non-Muslims, when in fact there are those who would argue that the term, in this context, referred specifically to the pagan Arab tribe, an interpretation that is reinforced by Muhammad’s relations with non-Muslim Ethiopia. I realize that he does not claim this specifically, in the realms of semantics and grammar, but he does claim it in what linguists refer to as pragmatics, a field that does not need to be explained in depth; just let your wetware do the work.
It is also evidenced by his choice of sources. Tenth century jurists obviously have tenth century viewpoints. Here’s a sampling of what our cultural forebears were up to back then:
Imagine, a jizya on believers and unbelievers alike.
He also fails to mention the dissenting voices mentioned earlier.
Okay, then, by your logic, when you type “You did not make an assertion,” I will take you to mean “I agree.”
That conclusion is not spoken or made. Have you seen Fitna?
“Okay, then, by your logic, when you type ‘You did not make an assertion,’ I will take you to mean ‘I agree.’”
I was making an analogy. Just as the individual letters are essentially meaningless, so too are the individual facts; what’s important in the interpretation.
“That conclusion is not spoken or made.”
As I said, “I realize that he does not claim this specifically, in the realms of semantics and grammar, but he does claim it in what linguists refer to as pragmatics, a field that does not need to be explained in depth; just let your wetware do the work.”
“Have you seen Fitna?”
What does Spencer have to do with Fitna?
I thought you were referring to the clips above in which he speaks of Fitna. If you were talking about Spencer’s general take on Islam, he specifically states that it is not inherently evil, but rather there are interpretations of the texts which are used to justify violence, murder, and suicide attacks. He thinks that there needs to be a discussion of how these texts are being interpretated and how ideas such as hatred, Islamic supremacism, anti-Semiticism and violence toward non-Muslims are passed along to future generations.
Not addressing these issues is negligent.
Extremists make up ten percent. That’s 900,000,000 to 100,000,000. The extremists are outnumbered 9 to 1. How come they can’t get that under control all by themselves?
John,
I think it’s because a majority Muslims across the world refuse to address the issues. They’d sooner criticize Bush than Mashaal, they’d sooner slam the Republican party than HAMAS, they’d sooner bitch about ‘Western’ “Islamophobia” than propaganda and real hate speech such as that found in Iranian, Saudi (and let’s say just about every Persian/Arabian Gulf nation), Palestinian, Egyptian, Syrian, Lebanese, Turkish, etc. etc. schools, mosques and airwaves.
Konservo, but, you forgot, there’s you and I simply because we’re alive.
John,
The extremists, to be sure, do hold us to blame in one way or another for their troubles (whether it be because the U.S. had the audacity to give aid to Kuwait and the KSA when Saddam was tearing shit up, or because our Zionist leaders are the Great Satan, etc. etc.). But, it is important to recognize and encourage the efforts of Muslims who speak against extremism.
The post I cite above, for example, recommends that Muslims simply not watch the film and there is very little slamming of Wilders. I think that is a reasonible approach, and then, just today, I saw a comment on that thread:
The reactions and comments on any given topic will be diverse for any large group of people (e.g. a religious group), and the reactions from various Muslims have ranged from the comment I just quoted, to angry mobs burning flags and threating lives in the Middle East.
It is more urgent to expose the extremists, but in order to do Justice to Islam, we have to note the reasonable Muslims who speak out.
It’s the overwhelming silence that bothers me, the voices of reason from within the Islamic faith have to over-power the extremist voices and the deafening silence of the complicit herd following their masters, or waiting for one side to pull ahead of the other.
Mr P,
Sergei raised some valid points.
peace
Spencer knows alot about Islam. He speaks the truth.
vermontdave,
I like Sergei, but he was off point last night. Sergei says:
His analogy assumes that I was working with a theory of atomism in which the meaning of a proposition is found in its constituent words and the meaning of words in letters. This is inaccurate.
Further, let’s look at that again:
Is he saying that “what’s” (i.e. the thing that is) “important in the interpretation” is “essentially meaningless” ?
Or perhaps he is trying to ask me a question “What is important in the interpretation,” it’s unclear.
“It’s the overwhelming silence that bothers me”
Violence tends to get people’s attention more than condemnation.
“His analogy assumes that I was working with a theory of atomism in which the meaning of a proposition is found in its constituent words and the meaning of words in letters. This is inaccurate.”
It can be hard to translate things from linguistics to philosophy. What I was trying to say was that addressing the facts that he adduces rather than his overall point is like addressing the letters of a sentence rather than its meaning. Cf. “Lies, damn lies, and statistics.”
“important in the interpretation”
Oops. “In” should be “is”.
Oh, well, that makes a lot more sense
Spencer doesn’t pretend to be explicating the views of moderates and he is not trying to give definitive interpretations of Islamic text. He’s merely showing how ridiculous it is that the issue can not even be raised without accusations of ‘hate speech’ and ‘Islamophobia.’
This is dangerous for two reasons (and Spencer doesn’t say this, I am):
1) If these issues are not addressed with words, if the ignorant are not informed, if the questions which give rise to fears are not answered, the Islamophobia will only increase.
2) He does not lie, he does not call for violence, he merely cites the Qur’anic justification used by Islamic terrorists (terrorists who are motivated by an interpretation of Islam), and when people call for the truth to be censored, this should raise a red flag.
Yet, far too many see Robert Spencer as a bigger problem than the murderers and terrorists whom he speaks out against.
I agree with the theory but the silence and little conversation gives the impression there is general agreement. Maybe a little less silence and conversing and a little more doing is in order. Otherwise, what are we to think? Actions speak louder than words. People are liable to think they’re “saying” by the silence, ‘they may be terrorists, but they’re our terrorists’.
Fitna is tame. watch Islam what the west needs to know. http://avideditor.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/islam-what-the-west-needs-to-know/ It is just sick that our government is supporting these fascist.
Iranian directors had made an movie replying to “Fitna”. Download “Beyond Fitna” in this link:
http://www.thepureislam.wordpress.com
It just tryis to express the truth about Islam.
…
I’m waitint to read your coment about it…
مرحبا
Very important>arabi message translated please
إذا أذنتم لي بسؤال أوجهة الى كل مسيحي في العالم من خلاال موقعكم هذا وهو ماذا أيها المسيحيون لو ثبت لكم أن الرجل الموجود في العربية السعودية والمضطهد طوال حياتة وعلى مرأى وعلم ومسمع الكثير من المسيحيين في العالم ماذا لو ثبت أنة هو عيسى إبن مريم فعلآ مقارنة بتجاوز أحد الصحفيين بحق الرسول الكريم محمد صلى اللة علية وسلم علما بأن لة في ألاامة ثمانية واربعون عاما . القصد هومعرفة رد الغالبية من المسيحيين في العالم على هذا السؤال وليس طلب العون إن ثيت أنة عيسى وفي هذة الحالة سيشكركم على بركم وإحسانكم بة علما بأنة لايعرف هويتة حتى الآن ولا يعرف سوى إسمة الاول أما الحكومة السعودية فهي على علم تام بهويتة الحقيقية . شكرا
المرسل
عبدالعزيز
السعودية الرياض\الملز\المسافر للاجنحة المفروشة غرفة 207
ت\4783135=207\\\موبايل 0544926790
Okay, here’s the translation:
Translated by google: http://www.google.com/translate_t?sl=ar&tl=en
بسم اللة الرحمن الرحيم
السلاام عليكم ورحمة اللة وبركاتة وبعد : نسبة الى الخطاب من 30 فقرة + 10 ممااود قولة المرسل اليكم سابقا بخصوص قضيتي مع القيادة السعودية وهو بعنوان من جرائمهم بواسطة الجن وذكرت بة الطلبات وهي إمكانيات لديهم وثمن تشغيلها المادي والاجرامي وهو الضرر الفردي بكل أنواعة ويصل الى القتل والضرر *والضرر العام وهو إرتكاب الجرائم عالميا ومنة الحوادث التي تحدث في العالم بمختلف أنواعها الجوية والبحرية والبرية وحرائق وأعتيالاات غامضة والكثير منها* وطلبت منكم متابعة مراقبة زمن الحوادث ومكان وأشرت لكم الى توقفها وبدءها عدة مرات والآن ألا تلااحضون توقفها بعد ذاك الكم من الحوادث المختلفة في العالم * في إشارة لكم عن صحة ماورد بخطابي مع العودة إلية والمتابعة مع جزيل شكري علما بأني لازلت اعاني منهم حتى الساعة أكرر شكري والسلاام
الاسم المتعارف علية عبدالعزيز الشريف
الرياض \ الملز \ المسافر للاجنحة المفروشة غرفة 207
ت \ 4783135 = 207
موبايل = 544926790
Name of God the Merciful
Damage to you and God’s mercy and blessings and after: the proportion of the speech, paragraph 30 of + 10 Mmaaod saying the sender to you previously about the issues with the Saudi leadership is the title of their crimes by the jinn said the requests which have the potential for physical and eighth operation and criminal damage which all kinds of individual and up to the killing and injury * General and the damage is committing crimes worldwide and from accidents that occur in the world of various kinds of air, sea and land fires and Aotaialaat vague and many of them * and requested follow-up observation of you time and place of accident and I have you to stop and start several times and now only Tlhoudon halted after that amount of separate incidents in the world * In reference to you about the health Concurs with letters of return and follow up with profound thanks to note that I still suffer from it so am I repeat my thanks and Damage
Name customary Abdulaziz al-Sharif
Riyadh \ Malaz \ traveller of the 207 suites furnished room
T. \ 4783135 = 207
Mobile = 544926790
I must admit, this is the first time I’ve ever seen “السلاام عليكم” translated as “Damage to you”.
Give me a bit, I’m going to see if I can figure out what on Earth he’s talking about.
Thanks, the WindowsLive translator wasn’t very helpful.
He appears to have absolutely atrocious spelling. I could probably manage to decipher it, given enough time, but I’ve already got my hands full with the work I’ve been doing on Thracian.
No problem. I think it might be spam anyway.