« islam teaches me that i must defend myself & my fellows against the depredations of islam, and that i may kill in order to do so ... . | Main | no muslims to refute my assertions ... no takers ... »

June 27, 2010

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e54fcb708388340133f1e4a774970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference an open invitation & challenge to islam ... refute my contention that islamic doctrines of self defense oblige me to defend myself from islam ...:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

GM Roper

John, you really expect a coherent answer from anyone? My my, ever hopeful are we?

Seriously, I really like your reasoning but I doubt the mullah's will.

john jay

george:

laughing.

i expect a "deafening" silence from islam.

oddly enough, i think that i have them right by the short hairs.

the position set out w/ regard to self defense by the learned whatever he is sayyed muhammed hussein fadlallah has been the unchanging position of islam for many years.

that is the nature of immutable. you don't get into the "fatawa" business by being novel.

so, no one is gonna come by and say the learned fadlallah is wrong. ain't gonna happen. not except by the most brazen of liars, regarding which there is no shortage in islam in the usual sense, but they are sort of limited in their manuevering on this one.

about the only place they have to attack me is by saying that i, as an infidel being in opposition and apposition to islam do not express the will of allah by turning islam's "theology" against itself, and using it as a rationale for defending against islam's aggressions.

in short, what is good for the gander is not good for the goose.

and, i don't think that they are capable of carrying that argument off.

on what basis? says who? on what authority? and, who deigns speak the will of allah?

venturing into these areas is just the sort of thing, just the sort of "stretching out of the neck," that has gotten muslims into trouble before.

a muslim theologian (hey, now there's a thought) cannot get into matters that smack of free will. hey, it is all pre-ordained, and there is no questioning of it, and pretending to speak for allah without a long line of tremendously accepted precedent is a "no no," and likely to get the stretching neck "severed," theologically and literally.

nope, i think they will ignore me, small voice that i am.

but, i think that i have them nailed on their own petards, hung by their own petards, and without capability of responding to my points and assertions.

we'll see. smiling.

but, i don't think that islam is going to want to stir this kettle of fish.

they ain't gonna agree, and give an infidel license to exercise the right of self defense as set out by the learned sayyed muhammed hussein fadlallah, ... , now, are they.

and, i expect that they ain't gonna disagree, either. they cannot disagree with the learned fadlallah's arguments and conclusions, because by this time, they are carved in stone by islam.

and, i don't think they are gonna touch with a ten foot poll my position that an infidel can ethically and morally operate for his own benefit in accord with islamic teaching, as against islam.

this i expect, and expected when i wrote and posted.

now, let us see if the "biggies" in the anti-jihad movement have the good sense and the cajones to pick up on my arguments and broadcast them. as you know, i have circulated the post amongst them, and so far, am linked and acknowledged by theo spark, and that is about it.

turf to be protected w/in the blogosphere as well, not true? laughing.

but, i have made my point, and i don't very damn much if it is going to be materially refuted, by anyone.

john

john jay

correction:

"but, i have made my point, and i doubt very damn much if it is going to be materially refuted, by anyone."

Howard Towt

Mr. Jay:

Nice argument, and you are right about your audience: Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religion. The guiding principle is the increased authority of Islam, not the elevation of individual human rights.

As long as we humans are attracted to emotional arguments, and elevate belief systems over logic, we tend to end up being ruled by a centralized elite. (And not always to our benefit.)

It's always good to think of that mouse with his middle finger raised toward a bird of prey as the mouse is about to become lunch. Your post brings that image to mind.

Thanks for excellent exposition.

Jewel

I would suggest that Islam isn't a political movement, but rather a criminal organization with a criminal code. Having said that, however, doesn't change the premise of your argument. Muslims can't answer it. All you have to do is assert that they shouldn't be surprised that the infidel would defend himself and he goes apoplectic. Logic isn't one of the Muslim's stronger suits. How can it be, since they are governed solely by their emotions? Once they see the futility of fighting against a stronger enemy, it's all insha'allah from that point.
Moshe Dayan made a brilliant point when explaining Arab strategy to a western reporter who lamented that Israel was outnumbered by Arab aggressors in the 1967 war:
"Yes, but they're Arabs"....meaning that their numbers didn't matter since they were incompetent in battle.
When the reporter pointed out that they now possessed Soviet artillery and planes, Dayan responded, "Yes, but they're still Arabs"....and that has proven true time and time again.
At least in conventional wars. When Israel gets to the point of not caring what the paper tiger of world opinion is growling, then they can properly defeat the Arabs and their converts.

john jay

jewel:

yes.
yes.
yes. and,
yes.

just over to "tasty infidelicacies," and tears were rolling from my eyes.

delicious. delightful. d'lovely. and, very, very funny. and, very, very smart. very.

a wonderful aesthetic.

so, i am very happy you visited to read, and quite delighted that you commented.

and, we are in agreement. wonderful points in your comment.

in all such matters, i am never very far from "the river war" by winston churchill. he saw first hand, and he understood. completely, i think.

john

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment