A Guerra Fria e a Guerra contra o supremacismo islâmico

Amplify’d from www.nationalreview.com

One unfortunate current in the commemorations of the tenth year after 9/11 has been a widely promoted narrative that we lashed out, overreacted, and — through Afghanistan, Iraq, and the war on terror — not only lost our post-9/11 unity and “civility,” but supposedly alienated most of the world while playing into the hands of al-Qaeda.

In truth, the first ten years of the war on terror in eerie fashion resemble the first decade of the Cold War, with all the familiar actors making a return. Then too the Henry Wallace/Adlai Stevenson liberal wing of the Democratic party insisted that we had overreacted to the fear of Communism, clumsily demonized our long-suffering WWII ally Russia, missed out in reaching out to a naturally receptive, but unfortunately alienated Mao’s new China, and in general had thrown away the good feeling and national unity following the end of World War II by committing Americans to a costly, endless, mindless and amorphous war against global Communism while fostering a witch hunt at home. To suggest that Chinese and Russian Communism had slaughtered millions of their own, and might easily do so again beyond their borders, was as blasphemous then as is now the warning about the innate evil of radical Islamism and the dangers of a 21st-century existential enemy that does not require conventional bombers, guided missiles, tanks, and huge armies to kill tens of thousands.

How familiar all that sounds in the current context of decrying our war on radical Islamic terrorism, and how instructive in our present difficulties to marshal the will and sustained sense of purpose are those early Cold War years. And, as in the case of the final implosion of the Soviet-led Communist world, so too the effort to neutralize radical Islamists will take a long time and be constantly caricatured—until the personas of a ranting bin Laden and Dr. Zawahiri are rendered as ridiculous to history as are today the old Communist apparatchiks of yesteryear. Read more at www.nationalreview.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1crhy

Hoje é 11 de Setembro de 2001

Ou o venenoso esquecimento.

Amplify’d from sultanknish.blogspot.com

September 11. A day when we discharge our obligation to remember and honor something very important and move on.

September 11 is the day we lost.

The first loss is what they did to us. The second loss is what we did to ourselves.

But what if you never get angry and stay shocked. Then what happened to you never takes on any meaning. You remain helpless and hurt.

September has become the day of permanent shock and enduring hurt, where we struggle with our pain because the nation has been told not to get angry, warned not to judge or lay blame for the atrocities of the day on its perpetrators. It has become the day we stare at our televisions, at our screens or at the ground in front of us and try to make sense of why we were hit in the back of the head.

The same useless questions go round and round and the same events are relived over and over again in a national purgatory of pain. Unlike Pearl Harbor, Iwo Jima, Belleau Wood, Gettysburg, there is never any sense to it because there is no larger meaning. Only the remembrance of the day when we were attacked by people we shouldn't talk about for reasons that don't bear examining. And there is nothing but the pain.

Endless pain is helplessness which can't be healed, only repressed and eventually forgotten. And so we dedicate one day, one week, to reliving the events to the extent that we are allowed to relive them, and then the wound must be scabbed over and off we go to work, shopping and cheerfully greeting our Muslim neighbors who are in no way associated with the events of the day. "Hi there!" "Salaam Aleikum."

But still there is the ache in the back of the head that won't go away. Someone hit us. Who. Why. What can we do about it? We can line up and take off our shoes and let the nice man grope us in the hope that people whose identities we don't discuss won't find a way to kill us on this flight. It's just another day in another week in the tenth year after our lives changed in ways we don't talk about.

Repression makes healing impossible. It fills us with a poison that turns us against ourselves. To be helpless is to learn self-loathing and then when you are hit on the head, you nod because you know why you were hit. Because you deserved it.

Self-hatred is one answer to the larger questions of pain and evil. If you accept that you are an awful person and deserve everything that is coming to you, then there is no longer any shock, only the slow atonement of pain and suffering. The more you are hit, the more you deserve it for all your support of tyrants and arms sales to Israel, women who walk in front of a man and cartoons that mock prophets. Hit me again, I deserve it.

Another day. Another appeasement. A Ground Zero mosque, what a fine idea. What better way could there be to repress the knowledge of what actually happened than with such glorious constitutional masochism.

The calendar flips, and the shock is still there. It is only when you get angry that the shock lifts and the helplessness goes away with it. It is only when you realize who hit you and get angry over it that you become yourself again. Until then there are tears and bewilderment, grief and sorrow at this terrible tragedy. Why did they have to die? Who knows. We don't talk about it. No one is supposed to talk about it.

Brush away the repression of the political center and the masochism of the political left, and you find the angry heart of a nation beating underneath. It's deeper in Europe, there you have to dig for days to come up with more than clenched teeth of people who have been taught for generations to grit their teeth and grumble quietly about inconsequential things.

Americans though have not learned to be silent. The self-censorship so common in Europe is found here only in a small educated class that has spent too much time sitting through faculty meetings and attending sensitivity seminars. Instead there is the bafflement of people who have been lied to over and over again, and know that they are being lied to,  but still can't quite understand why they are being lied to and how deep the lies go.

Who are you going to believe, your common sense-- or the media and politicians of both parties, academics, writers, poets, pundits, billionaires, CEO's, diplomats, generals, princes, celebrities and everyone else who is important but you've never met in person? Could they all be lying to you? And if they are-- isn't that as big of an attack as September 11. If not even bigger?

Choosing between the solipsism of common sense and the consensus of self-deceit is a tough one. It is easier not to choose, to immerse yourself in grief while doing your best to be reasonable about it. And the anger sinks into that porridge of confusion and grief-- the murky waters of the commemorations officiated over by sorrowful politicians who use words like courage and tragedy, who remind us that we can recover from anything. And we have, haven't we?

Sure the Twin Towers aren't coming back. There will be tall buildings there, but they won't be them. Because we're moveon.orging past all that. We don't need the Towers rebuilt and we don't need to smash those behind this. It's enough that we killed some of them and took out their leader. And if we line up when we're told and drop our pants on command and always carry our ID's-- then maybe next time they'll fail. Because that's what courage means, doesn't it?

“To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven,” Giuliani read. And what time and season is it now, and what purpose do they serve?

There was a time when we were angry and we were told not to be angry anymore. There was a time when we went to war, but then we decided it was more important to build nations. And now all we have is an endless craving for peace as we look down into the sight of mass death and come away with nothing but more pain. More shock and sorrow.

"When do we win this?" millions of Americans wonder. When do we finally declare victory. But how can we win when we don't even know who we're fighting? How do we win when we're not even allowed to be angry.

As shock turned to anger, and anger turned to the quiet bafflement of a nation waiting to move on. But where is there to move on to? We have gone to Afghanistan and Itaq, to the holes in the ground at Ground Zero. Over and over again we have laid the wreaths and bodies down in the sand and earth. We have laid our tears down and wept. And where do we go now?

Another day is here. September 12, 2011. Once again we can march away from the memorials and the memories and go back to work, shop in malls and say hello to our friendly Muslim neighbors. "Hi there!" "Salaam Aleikum."

But through all the pain and sorrow, throughout all the remembering and the minutiae of detail, it is not over.

September 11 is every day. Every day that we walk through the security forces of a frightened inept government to board a plane. Every day that a terror alert sends us scrambling to expect the worst. Every day that soldiers come home dead. Every day that another one of our Muslim neighbors plots to kill us. Every day is September 11.

We cannot leave it behind by grieving and remembering for a single day. We cannot escape it in a few years of war. There is no leaving it behind in appeasement or in tears. It cannot and will not be left behind until we deal with it. Until we deal with what it really means. Today is September 11. Tomorrow will be September 11. It will be September 11 every day of every year until we are either destroyed or we wake up. It is the day we repeat over and over again until we wake up. Today is September 11, 2001. Read more at sultanknish.blogspot.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1cqlj

Muros

Amplify’d from pajamasmedia.com

Let me insert here a metaphor for understanding contemporary Arab politics. Arab nationalists have been hitting their heads against a stone wall for 60 years, trying to destroy Israel, defeat the West, and reestablish a great empire. The few moderate pragmatists propose to stop this madness. Instead, the Islamists explain that the way to piety, glory, and total victory is to spend 60 years more battering their heads against that stone wall much harder. Guess who is winning the debate?

One such wall, a flimsy fence actually, marks the Egypt-Israel border. A group of terrorists recently cut through it so they could attack and kill Israeli civilians on a nearby road inside Israel.

Since the terrorists sought to exterminate Israel and stage a revolution in Egypt, this was the kind of event that should bring neighboring countries to work together against a common threat. That would have happened during the Mubarak regime. Now, however, with that government gone, a junta fearful of the mob, partly sharing its views, and denied the tools of repression stands aside.

Well, in Israel’s case that band is located in Egypt, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Lebanon, Iran, and in several other places (including a surprising number of Western university campuses) and is now opening a new franchise in Turkey.

Some other walls and murderous bands are within Egypt itself. These include protective walls built by Christians around churches.  Mobs of Egyptian Muslims attack these walls as police or soldiers stand by and don’t intervene, albeit ready to spring into action to shoot or arrest the Christians defending themselves. There is a word in Jewish history for such situations: pogroms.

The underlying basis of these attacks is Sharia, Islamic law, that mandates no synagogue or church can be built anew or repaired in lands (or, as we are starting to see in Europe, even urban neighborhoods) ruled by Islam. Why? Because the Sharia’s “tolerance” is merely a form of patience: let the non-Muslim places of worship crumble; those people will lose their religion, and eventually become Muslims.

Of course, such Sharia laws have often gone unenforced over the centuries, or were circumvented by bribes. That’s why there are still lots of churches despite the Sharia’s dictates. Why is today different? Not because Islam is eternal, unchanging, and inevitably oppressive. but precisely because a “modern” systematic ideology called Islamism insists that Sharia must be interpreted and enforced in a consistent, intransigent manner. And have no doubt that in an Egypt largely dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood those laws will be enforced. An actual Muslim individual can be flexible due to different interpretations, pragmatism, sloth, liberality, ineptitude, or venality; an Islamist Muslim cannot.

Now, the wall around the Israeli embassy, undefended by the police and security forces, fell to the assault. The mob’s minimal goal, a symbolic target or a preface to what they intend to do to Israel itself — was to tear down Israel’s flag. Americans know something about the significance of such situations. They even incorporated one into their national anthem:

“Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?”

If the flag had come down over Fort McHenry, the British could perhaps have conquered America entirely, the treaty of recognition they had signed a quarter-century earlier might have been torn up. But Egypt is not at war with Israel. Under international law, the Egyptian authorities are responsible for defending the embassy but didn’t do so because that is unpopular with the mob. After the elections, the mob will be in charge.

As part of their attack on Israel’s embassy, the demonstrators broke pieces from the nearby statue “Egypt’s Awakening.” The symbolism is perfect. Egypt’s Awakening is equated with killing the Jews, yet it is in fact Egypt’s Awakening being sacrificed in the obsessive, ultimately suicidal, hatred against Israel.

This reminds me of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the 1857 Dred Scott case upholding the legality of slavery. The chief justice explained that those with black skin were “So far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.”

Unfortunately, that is how Jews and Christian minorities are seen in Egypt and the other lands in the region: they have no rights that a Muslim or Arab is “bound to respect.” Those who make peace with Israel, and the agreements themselves, are by definition illegitimate, to be overturned as soon as possible, with any gains used legitimately to wipe Israel off the map. The land must always remain Muslim and Arab.

Such views are not completely inevitable but they are extraordinarily powerful. Moderate Arabs or Muslims can reject that view — as King Hussein of Jordan and Presidents Sadat and Mubarak did — but moderates nowadays are few in number and even fewer in power.  And no matter what their pretense or Western gullibility, no populist regime or Islamist can defy the lynch mob.

As Egyptian mobs assault the walls protecting Christian churches and Israel’s embassy, the “international community” assaults the  borders and policies protecting Israel. How can anyone still seriously claim that there will be a two-state solution, all strife will end, and everyone will live happily ever after? The dream of prosperity, social progress, peace, or better lives for one’s children — none of these things can withstand the demand for revenge, raw hatred, denial of any rights to the “other.” What you in the West think matters nothing — look with your eyes, listen with your ears, and see what the reality is. Read more at pajamasmedia.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1cqat

Não esquecer os que cairam

No dia 11 de Setembro de 2001, as televisões que acompanhavam em directo e retransmitiam periodicamente nos noticiários as consequências dos atentados terroristas decidiram não mostrar imagens dos desesperados que caiam ou se atiravam das Torres Gémeas em brasa. Porque eram muito violentas, dizem.

Eu prefiro saber como foi.
Para que não seja esquecido o desespero dessas almas, alguns videos:

Requiem aeternam dona eis Domine et lux perpetua luceat eis.

Reino Unido: muçulmanos queimam bandeira americana à porta da embaixada

http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=37788

Amplify’d from vladtepesblog.com

See more at vladtepesblog.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1cpiy

Pearl Harbour e o 11 de Setembro

Descubra as diferenças:

Amplify’d from edgar1981.blogspot.com

If the response to Pearl Harbour had been the same as that of 9/11, the US would have declared a 'war against fighter aircraft that have the potential to attack ships' with a clear statement that 'this in no way linked to the great nation of Japan which, like Nazi Germany, is a nation of peace'. This might  have been followed by a few sorties against Japanese fighter aircraft (and, as a token to prove there was no bias against the Japanese people, some British spitfires would also have been attacked). This would have been followed by years of appeasement of Japan and Germany, plus massive funding of 'moderate' Japanese and Nazi institutions. The media would have devoted most of its time on identifying what the US had done to invite the attacks. For example, it would no doubt have focused on the US refusal to help Germany invade Britain, thus stopping the natural hegemony of Nazi control of the whole of Europe. Indeed Britain (and Singapore) would have become the focus of hatred for provoking the Nazis (Japs) and daring to protect their right to exist. By 1945 America would have been a Japanese colony, and to this day Europe would still be under Nazi rule.

Conversely, if the response to 9/11 had been similar to the actual response to Pearl Harbour then the US would have declared war on Islamic fundamentalism and would not have stopped until it was totally eradicated throughout the world as a supremisist belief. The first targets would have been Iran and Saudi Arabia. The war would only have finished with a prolonged programme of 'de-Islamification' (the de-Nazification  programme for Germany took many years to work even though the people had only been indoctrinated for 10 years. Islamists have been indoctrinating Muslims for 1300 years). Read more at edgar1981.blogspot.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1cowa

Combater os efeitos evitando conhecer a causa?

Amplify’d from pajamasmedia.com

Winning the Battle Against Al-Qaeda, Losing the War Against Jihad Even if al-Qaeda were totally eradicated tomorrow, the terror threat to the West would hardly recede. September 10, 2011 - 12:31 am - by Raymond Ibrahim

So long as the West focuses on names and faces in the so-called “war on terror” — as opposed to focusing on ideas and motivations — so long will it possibly win battles, even as it slowly loses the war.

The unfortunate fact is that, even if al-Qaeda were totally eradicated tomorrow, the terror threat to the West would hardly recede, since al-Qaeda has never been the source of the threat, but simply one of its manifestations.

To get a better perspective on the overall significance of the latest killing of an al-Qaeda member, consider how at the turn of the 20th century, the Islamic world was rushing to emulate the victorious and confident West — best exemplified by the Ottoman empire itself, the preserver and enforcer of Islam, rejecting its Muslim past and embracing secularism under Ataturk. Today, 100 years later, the Muslim world has largely rejected secularism and is reclaiming its Islamic — including jihadist — heritage, lashing out in a manifold of ways. Consider how many Islamist leaders, organizations, and terrorists have come and gone in the 20th century alone — many killed like bin Laden — only for the conflict between Islam and the West to continue growing by the day.

It’s in this context that the Obama administration audaciously evokes the word “victory,” simply because yet another jihadist has been killed.

This, of course, is to be expected, considering the administration, which has a tendency to censor words — and thus knowledge — concerning the nature of the threat, just released a much vaunted policy paper on countering terrorism that never once uses the word “Islam(ism)” or “radical Islam,” while myopically fixating on al-Qaeda, one of countless jihadist organizations that seek to subjugate the West.

Despite its narrow approach, the administration itself has inadvertently conceded to the existential nature of the threat, as it has begun to acknowledge that lone wolf terrorists — jihadists who have no connection to al-Qaeda other than that they share the same worldview — are a greater threat.

As Attorney General Eric Holder put it, “the threat has changed … to worrying about people in the United States, American citizens — raised here, born here, and who for whatever reason, have decided that they are going to become radicalized and take up arms against the nation in which they were born.”

Note how Holder ignores the most important factor to understanding and ultimately defeating jihadists — their motivation — by dismissing it as “whatever reason.” Even so, the administration’s acknowledgement of the lone wolf jihad proves one thing: it is doctrinal ideologies floating among Muslims around the world — not just the caves of al-Qaeda — that create terror threats.

To conclude, by all means, target and kill terrorists, singly and collectively, and rejoice over it; but keep in mind that even if al-Qaeda were expunged from existence, while that would be a battle well won, it would not be the end of the war, which has been prosecuted in various forms and frequencies for fourteen centuries, and will not end with the elimination of this or that individual or organization.

Raymond Ibrahim, an Islam specialist and author of The Al Qaeda Reader, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum. To receive his articles, sign up on his mailing list. Read more at pajamasmedia.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1coot

O que fazia rir Mafoma?

Mafoma, o profeta do islão, é, segundo o Alcorão, o modelo para todos os muçulmanos piedosos. Como em tudo, também no humor devemos olhar para Mafoma, através dos livros canónicos do islão - o Alcorão, a Sirá (biografia) e as hadith (ditos e feitos de Mafoma) - para compreender o islão e o comportamento dos seus seguidores:

Amplify’d from www.politicalislam.com

It Ain’t Funny, Mohammed

There is a troupe of Muslim comedians who have been touring the South to counter the stereotypical view of Muslims. They contend that these stereotypes are the core of the cancer that is American Islamophobia. All the shows are free and it is a national tour with heavy publicity. Should there be a follow-the-money question about who is paying the hundred thousand dollars for the propaganda tour?

But there is a great deal of truth about the idea of a stereotype. The true stereotype of Islam is Mohammed. He is declared in 91 verses in the Koran to be the divine human prototype, the perfect being and the sacred model of a pious life. We find him in the Sira (his biography) and the Hadith (his traditions). Guess what? There is a doctrine of humor to found in Islamic doctrine. This should be no surprise, given that the Islamic doctrine is the basis for their civilization.

Here are some of the moments of laughter in Mohammed’s life take from the Hadith and the Sira: Muslim 031, 5932: … [At the battle of Uhud]… Mohammed said to Saed: Shoot an arrow, may my mother and father be taken as ransom for you. Saed drew an arrow and shot a featherless arrow at the Meccan’s side and he fell down and his private parts were exposed. I saw Mohammed’s front teeth when he laughed.

Muslim 019, 4450: … I said: Mohammed, let me select from our people one hundred men and I will follow the marauders and I will kill them all. Mohammed laughed so much that his molar teeth could be seen in the light of the fire, and he said: Salama, do you think you can do this? I said: Yes, ….

Bukhari 8, 74, 299: ... Mohammed woke up with a smile. 'What makes you laugh, O Allah's Apostle?' He said, 'In my dream some Muslims were displayed before me as jihadists sailing over this sea, like kings on thrones.’

Umayya: 'Now I had bound my prisoner's thumbs with my bow­string, and when Mohammed looked at him he laughed so that one could see his back teeth. He asked my news and when I told him how I had killed a Kafir by pushing my bow through his eye into his brain, he blessed me.' [1]

By God, we only met some bald old women like the sacrificial camels who are hobbled, and we slaughtered them!' The apostle smiled and said, 'But, nephew, those were the Kafir chiefs.' [2]

‘Mohammed, what makes the Lord laugh with joy at His servant?' Mohammed answered, 'When he plunges into the midst of the enemy without armor.' Auf drew off his armor and threw it away: then he seized his sword and fought the enemy till he was slain. [3]

A common phrase from both the Koran and Mohammed is: Bukhari 8, 76, 492: Mohammed said, "If you knew what I know you would laugh little and weep much."

We can see that what makes Mohammed laugh a little, makes us weep much. And what makes Mohammed laugh in these quotes? Brutality and cruelty to Kafirs made Mohammed laugh and smile.

Mohammed found cruelty to Kafirs funny, but we Kafirs had better never find anything about Mohammed humorous. Have you ever heard a Mohammed joke? There are Jesus jokes, Moses jokes, God jokes and Saint Peter jokes, but in 1400 years there has never been a Mohammed joke. Why? Why isn’t Mohammed funny? There are no Mohammed jokes because of the Islamic reasoning or logic. Islamic reasoning is pure authoritarian.

But there is an even better reason that we don’t have any Mohammed jokes. Jokes point out our errors and flaws. There are 91 Koran verses that say that Mohammed is the perfect man to be followed in the smallest detail by all Muslims at all times. If Mohammed is not perfect, then why imitate him? If the joke points out error or flaws, then the keystone of Islam is flawed. The joke performs the logical task of isolating error. If the joke is based on any reality (and they all are, or they would not be funny) then Mohammed has flaws. That would mean that a Muslim has to start using reasoning to sort out Mohammed’s errors. So the joke destroys the entire edifice of authoritarian reasoning and opens up Islam to critical thought. Since Mohammed must remain the perfect pattern, then no jokes may be allowed.

Humor is an excellent acid test for the type of reasoning that is used. Authoritarian systems never allow humor directed at the authorities. Nobody told Stalin jokes. Joke:

An American was visiting a Russian during the Cold War. They fell to arguing about who had the better political system. The American said, “Let me show how good American politics are.” He tore out a photo of Nixon in a magazine and threw it into the trash and said, “To hell with Nixon. Can you do that?” The Russian said, “Sure.” And he took the photo of Nixon, wadded it up and threw it out the window and yelled to the world, “To hell with Nixon.” Then he said, “See, we Soviets can do that better than you!”

Authoritative reasoning systems are based on suppression of thought that is not accepted by the Establishment and always have force and punishment in the background. To see authoritative thought in America, go to any college classroom and try for an open discussion of race. Try talking about minority crime, poverty and classroom failures as being the responsibility of the minority.

The Kafir world has a better thought system—critical thought (also: scientific thought). Critical thought loves humor for the reason that all opinions are welcome in critical thought. The idea may not be provable, but you can bring up for discussion.

We see this in political cartoons. One of the triumphs of America during this Obama presidency is that he gets cracked as hard in political cartoons as Bush.

What about a Mohammed cartoon? Oops! That does not work so well. Remember the Mohammed cartoons? People died in riots. Then Mollie Norris of Seattle, WA came up with idea of “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day”. She is now in hiding from death threats. That’s that the Islamic authoritarian reasoning at work. We got to see Islamic authoritarian reasoning against intellectuals and artists in the death fatwa as Salman Rushdie (author), the murder of: Pym Fortune (an artist and politician), Theo van Gogh (film director and TV personality), Daniel Pearl (newspaper reporter) and other artist/critics for 1400 years. Assassination of artists who criticize Mohammed is pure Islam. Mohammed repeatedly sent out assassins against the artists and intellectuals of his day who criticized and satirized him.

What is the response of the authoritarian media/university/government Establishment today to critical thought about Islam? Those who are critical about Islamic doctrine and history are called immoral bigots, Islamophobes, haters and worse. Why does our Establishment love Islam so much? One authoritarian recognizes another authoritarian. It is a matter of professional courtesy--the same reason that sharks don’t bite lawyers.

The Establishment will not help us, but will only pick up Islam’s complaints and bludgeon us as bigots because we do not agree on an intellectual point. We have to be ideological warriors and bring the truth of Islamic doctrine and political history, which is not funny in any way, to those who have an ear to hear.

But take heart, kind souls, there is at least one form of humor that the Muslim comedy troupe won’t be telling, fart jokes:

Bukhari 8, 73, 68: Mohammed forbade laughing at a person who passes wind, …

So tell me, if you cannot crack fart jokes, how do Muslim males ever get through youth? (For the guys—pull my finger.)

1. The Life of Mohammed, A. Guillaume (the Sira), Oxford University Press, 1982, pg. 675. 2. Ibid, pg. 309 3. Ibid, pg. 301 Read more at www.politicalislam.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1coet

O que fazia rir Mafoma?

Mafoma, o profeta do islão, é, segundo o Alcorão, o modelo para todos os muçulmanos piedosos. Como em tudo, também no humor devemos olhar para Mafoma, através dos livros canónicos do islão - o Alcorão, a Sirá (biografia) e as hadith (ditos e feitos de Mafoma) - para compreender o islão e o comportamento dos seus seguidores:

Amplify’d from www.politicalislam.com

It Ain’t Funny, Mohammed

There is a troupe of Muslim comedians who have been touring the South to counter the stereotypical view of Muslims. They contend that these stereotypes are the core of the cancer that is American Islamophobia. All the shows are free and it is a national tour with heavy publicity. Should there be a follow-the-money question about who is paying the hundred thousand dollars for the propaganda tour?

But there is a great deal of truth about the idea of a stereotype. The true stereotype of Islam is Mohammed. He is declared in 91 verses in the Koran to be the divine human prototype, the perfect being and the sacred model of a pious life. We find him in the Sira (his biography) and the Hadith (his traditions). Guess what? There is a doctrine of humor to found in Islamic doctrine. This should be no surprise, given that the Islamic doctrine is the basis for their civilization.

Here are some of the moments of laughter in Mohammed’s life take from the Hadith and the Sira: Muslim 031, 5932: … [At the battle of Uhud]… Mohammed said to Saed: Shoot an arrow, may my mother and father be taken as ransom for you. Saed drew an arrow and shot a featherless arrow at the Meccan’s side and he fell down and his private parts were exposed. I saw Mohammed’s front teeth when he laughed.

Muslim 019, 4450: … I said: Mohammed, let me select from our people one hundred men and I will follow the marauders and I will kill them all. Mohammed laughed so much that his molar teeth could be seen in the light of the fire, and he said: Salama, do you think you can do this? I said: Yes, ….

Bukhari 8, 74, 299: ... Mohammed woke up with a smile. 'What makes you laugh, O Allah's Apostle?' He said, 'In my dream some Muslims were displayed before me as jihadists sailing over this sea, like kings on thrones.’

Umayya: 'Now I had bound my prisoner's thumbs with my bow­string, and when Mohammed looked at him he laughed so that one could see his back teeth. He asked my news and when I told him how I had killed a Kafir by pushing my bow through his eye into his brain, he blessed me.' [1]

By God, we only met some bald old women like the sacrificial camels who are hobbled, and we slaughtered them!' The apostle smiled and said, 'But, nephew, those were the Kafir chiefs.' [2]

‘Mohammed, what makes the Lord laugh with joy at His servant?' Mohammed answered, 'When he plunges into the midst of the enemy without armor.' Auf drew off his armor and threw it away: then he seized his sword and fought the enemy till he was slain. [3]

A common phrase from both the Koran and Mohammed is: Bukhari 8, 76, 492: Mohammed said, "If you knew what I know you would laugh little and weep much."

We can see that what makes Mohammed laugh a little, makes us weep much. And what makes Mohammed laugh in these quotes? Brutality and cruelty to Kafirs made Mohammed laugh and smile.

Mohammed found cruelty to Kafirs funny, but we Kafirs had better never find anything about Mohammed humorous. Have you ever heard a Mohammed joke? There are Jesus jokes, Moses jokes, God jokes and Saint Peter jokes, but in 1400 years there has never been a Mohammed joke. Why? Why isn’t Mohammed funny? There are no Mohammed jokes because of the Islamic reasoning or logic. Islamic reasoning is pure authoritarian.

But there is an even better reason that we don’t have any Mohammed jokes. Jokes point out our errors and flaws. There are 91 Koran verses that say that Mohammed is the perfect man to be followed in the smallest detail by all Muslims at all times. If Mohammed is not perfect, then why imitate him? If the joke points out error or flaws, then the keystone of Islam is flawed. The joke performs the logical task of isolating error. If the joke is based on any reality (and they all are, or they would not be funny) then Mohammed has flaws. That would mean that a Muslim has to start using reasoning to sort out Mohammed’s errors. So the joke destroys the entire edifice of authoritarian reasoning and opens up Islam to critical thought. Since Mohammed must remain the perfect pattern, then no jokes may be allowed.

Humor is an excellent acid test for the type of reasoning that is used. Authoritarian systems never allow humor directed at the authorities. Nobody told Stalin jokes. Joke:

An American was visiting a Russian during the Cold War. They fell to arguing about who had the better political system. The American said, “Let me show how good American politics are.” He tore out a photo of Nixon in a magazine and threw it into the trash and said, “To hell with Nixon. Can you do that?” The Russian said, “Sure.” And he took the photo of Nixon, wadded it up and threw it out the window and yelled to the world, “To hell with Nixon.” Then he said, “See, we Soviets can do that better than you!”

Authoritative reasoning systems are based on suppression of thought that is not accepted by the Establishment and always have force and punishment in the background. To see authoritative thought in America, go to any college classroom and try for an open discussion of race. Try talking about minority crime, poverty and classroom failures as being the responsibility of the minority.

The Kafir world has a better thought system—critical thought (also: scientific thought). Critical thought loves humor for the reason that all opinions are welcome in critical thought. The idea may not be provable, but you can bring up for discussion.

We see this in political cartoons. One of the triumphs of America during this Obama presidency is that he gets cracked as hard in political cartoons as Bush.

What about a Mohammed cartoon? Oops! That does not work so well. Remember the Mohammed cartoons? People died in riots. Then Mollie Norris of Seattle, WA came up with idea of “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day”. She is now in hiding from death threats. That’s that the Islamic authoritarian reasoning at work. We got to see Islamic authoritarian reasoning against intellectuals and artists in the death fatwa as Salman Rushdie (author), the murder of: Pym Fortune (an artist and politician), Theo van Gogh (film director and TV personality), Daniel Pearl (newspaper reporter) and other artist/critics for 1400 years. Assassination of artists who criticize Mohammed is pure Islam. Mohammed repeatedly sent out assassins against the artists and intellectuals of his day who criticized and satirized him.

What is the response of the authoritarian media/university/government Establishment today to critical thought about Islam? Those who are critical about Islamic doctrine and history are called immoral bigots, Islamophobes, haters and worse. Why does our Establishment love Islam so much? One authoritarian recognizes another authoritarian. It is a matter of professional courtesy--the same reason that sharks don’t bite lawyers.

The Establishment will not help us, but will only pick up Islam’s complaints and bludgeon us as bigots because we do not agree on an intellectual point. We have to be ideological warriors and bring the truth of Islamic doctrine and political history, which is not funny in any way, to those who have an ear to hear.

But take heart, kind souls, there is at least one form of humor that the Muslim comedy troupe won’t be telling, fart jokes:

Bukhari 8, 73, 68: Mohammed forbade laughing at a person who passes wind, …

So tell me, if you cannot crack fart jokes, how do Muslim males ever get through youth? (For the guys—pull my finger.)

1. The Life of Mohammed, A. Guillaume (the Sira), Oxford University Press, 1982, pg. 675. 2. Ibid, pg. 309 3. Ibid, pg. 301 Read more at www.politicalislam.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1coet

Egípcios atacam embaixada de Israel (2)

Depois do sermão de 6ª feira:

Amplify’d from www.jihadwatch.org

Egyptians break into Israeli embassy, dump documents from windows, desecrate flag again as police stand aside

"Cairo: Protesters break into Israeli embassy, destroy flag," from the Jerusalem Post, September 9:

Egyptian protesters on Friday night broke into the Israeli embassy in Cairo and succeeded in removing the flag from atop the high-rise after they destroyed a protective wall surrounding the building.

No Israelis were injured as Egyptian activists demolished the wall around the Israeli embassy in Cairo during angry protests. Egyptian newspaper Al Masry Al Youm reported late Friday night on their Arabic-language website that four Egyptians had been detained after entering the building where the Israeli mission is located.

Israeli embassy workers were not located in the building while the protests were taking place.

After Friday prayers, thousands had converged on Tahrir Square, the epicenter of the protests that toppled former President Hosni Mubarak, for what was billed as "Correcting the Path" protests.

Some of the demonstrators later marched to the other side of the Nile in Giza, where they used hammers and large metal rods to destroy the wall, erected this month by Egyptian authorities after daily protests over the killing of five Egyptian border guards in Sinai.

"This action shows the state of anger and frustration the young Egyptian revolutionaries feel against Israel especially after the recent attacks on the Egyptian borders that led to the killing of Egyptian soldiers," Egyptian political analyst Nabil Abdel Fattah told Reuters.

Egyptian police stood aside as activists tore down the concrete wall to the cheers of hundreds of demonstrators.

"It is great that Egyptians say they will do something and actually do it," Egyptian film director and activist Khaled Youssef said, standing among the protesters outside the embassy.

"They said they will demolish the wall and they did ... the military council has to abide by the demands of the Egyptian people," he said.

Citing Foreign Ministry sources, Israel Radio said the ambassador was safely at his official residence and that Israel was in contact with Egypt, the United States and European powers about the incident.

"Police will not do anything to the protesters and they will be left unharmed to continue demolishing the wall," one security source said.

Protesters also demonstrated outside the Interior Ministry, near Tahrir Square, where some hurled stones at the building. Read more at www.jihadwatch.org

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1codk

Egípcios atacam embaixada de Israel

Os leitores deste blogue percebem por que acontecem coisas destas: a permanente demonização do judeu na cultura mediática egípcia, respaldada no anti-semitismo islâmico, leva a que os mais zelosos dos muçulmanos queiram fazer justiça pelas suas próprias mãos, especialmente depois de um inflamado sermão de 6ª feira!

Amplify’d from www.jihadwatch.org

"Egyptians tear down Israel Embassy's security wall," by Aya Batrawy for Associated Press, September 9

CAIRO (AP) — Hundreds of Egyptian protesters, some swinging hammers and others using their bare hands, tore down parts of a graffiti-covered security wall outside the Israeli Embassy in Cairo on Friday. Thousands elsewhere protested for the first time in a month against the country's military rulers.... Outside the Israeli Embassy, protesters for the second time in less than a month pulled down the Israeli flag from atop the 21-story building. Egyptian security forces did not intervene as crowds climbed up the embassy's security wall, pummeling it with sledge hammers and tearing away large sections of the cement and metal barrier, which was recently put up to better protect the property from protests.... Read more at www.jihadwatch.org

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1cod7

Reacções ao 11 de Setembro no mundo islâmico

Video e mais via MEMRI:

Amplify’d from www.memrifilms.org

"When the twin towers collapsed... My lungs filled with air and I breathed in relief, as I had never breathed before." 'Ali 'Uqleh 'Ursan, Syrian Arab Writers Association chairman Al-Usbu' Al-Adabi (Damascus) September 15, 2001 Since the attacks on September 11, 2001, The Middle East Media Research Institute has monitored, translated, and recorded what was said in the Arab and Iranian press about that day. Prominent journalists, members of academia, leading religious figures, and even Arab government officials helped shape conspiracies about what "really" happened. The carefully documented collection is now available as a PDF and includes a compilation of articles and editorials from the mainstream Arabic and Persian language press, as well as transcripts from television programs. A documentary film about the Arab and Iranian reaction to 9/11 incorporates footage from various TV and satellite stations in the Middle East. It was made with Interface Media Group and narrated by acclaimed actor Ron Silver.

View Documentary Full Version (43 minutes) Part 1 (15 minutes) Part 2 (17 minutes) Part 3 (11 minutes)

Download PDF Entire volume Foreword by Congressman Brad Sherman From the MEMRI archives: September 10, 2002: The 9/11 Attacks Were Perpetrated by the Jews Foreword by Congressman Tom Lantos Read more at www.memrifilms.org

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1coc3

Cristãos egípcios sitiados por muçulmanos exigindo cumprimento da xariá

Amplify’d from www.jihadwatch.org

"Muslims Blockade Christian Village in Egypt, Demand Demolition of Church," by Mary Abdelmassih for the Assyrian International News Agency, September 8:

(AINA) -- Christians in the Upper Egyptian village of Elmarinab in Edfu, Aswan province, have been forbidden to leave their homes or buy food until they remove the dome of St. George's Church, which was rebuilt in its previous location. Village Muslims, backed by Muslim Salafists from neighboring villages, have threatened to demolish the church on Friday September 9 after prayers and use it as a mosque.

Despite the presence of security forces, Muslims have blocked the roads to the village, refusing passage of any Christians under any circumstance.

Yesterday the military governor in Aswan was contacted as Christians were starving in their homes. Security officers were sent and accompanied two Christian youths to buy food for the villagers. Muslims at the entrance of the village tried to stop the two security cars. "Failing that they threatened that this would be the last time," said one villager. "It was heart-breaking to see the elderly running with the children to get a loaf of bread."

On Friday September 2, a "reconciliation" meeting was held under the auspices of security between Muslims and Christians in which the Christians were forced to give in to the Muslim demands of the new church being stripped of crosses, bells and outside microphones (which churches never have).

"For the sake of peace we agreed to their demands," said Father Makarios Boulos, "although the approved permit included crosses, bells and domes."

Another farcical "reconciliation meeting":

On Tuesday evening, the same Muslims who attended the reconciliation meeting started to congregate near the church demanding the removal of the six small domes, which would, according to the church's priest, make the whole church collapse if removed.

Muslims also demanded removal of any signs of it being a church. "It has to be called a 'hospitality home,'" Father Makarios said.

Confronted with escalating Muslim demands, the Bishop of Aswan, Anba Hedra, refused and warned those who incite sectarian violence, pointing to the fact that the church was rebuilt legally, and any concessions on the part of the church was done for the love for the country, which is passing through a difficult phase. The military council was asked to send troops to protect the village against Muslim violence

Early this morning two army tanks arrived at the village, manned by officers. The military governor paid a visit to the village today together with area heads of security to solve this crisis.

They listened to the Muslims, who insisted the previous church was not a church, but a hospitality home. The Coptic side was represented by Father Makarious Boulos, Father Salib Elias of the Aswan Coptic Diocese and lawyers representing the church, who presented all valid documents.

According to Mr. Mikhail, a worker at St. George's Church, who was interviewed by Coptic TV, the Muslims were not represented by any official. "They said they are people who have control over the Muslim youths."

Muslims chanted "Allahu Akbar" (Allah is the greatest) and said they want the church razed. Mikhail said Security tried to calm them down but fearing the situation would turn for the worse, the meeting was recessed with the promise that "the army and security representatives will come to a solution acceptable to both parties before they leave the village."

The authorities demanded that no construction be carried out or services held in the church, and Muslims to refrain from violence.

Muslims have been spreading news that the new church was never a church but a hospitality home. Father Makarios said that the church was always a church and has been protected by the police for twelve years and they already have a hospitality home one block away.

The church of St. George, built a century ago with soft bricks and palm tree branches, was so dilapidated the local council said it would be unsafe to carry out services there. The church was given permission by the Aswan Governor in June 2010 to rebuild, and the authorities had approved the design. In June 2011 the building of the church began and services were held.

Father Makarious said the village Muslims never showed any bad feelings when permission for the rebuilding the old church was issued. "The church was nearly complete when Muslims started to complain."....

Therein lies an opportunity for psychological abuse: wait until the church is nearly finished and the Christians think they are on the homestretch, and there is an investment to threaten with destruction.

Islamic law forbids the construction of new churches, or the repair of old ones. It also forbids the display of crosses or the ringing of church bells. Umdat al-Salik, or The Reliance of the Traveler, a manual of Islamic jurisprudence certified as "reliable" by Egypt's very own Al-Azhar University, explains that non-Muslims are:

... "forbidden to ring church bells or display crosses, recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays, and are forbidden to build new churches" - o.11.5 (6,7)

When we post stories like this, one response we sometimes get from enterprising apologists in the comments section is that they've never heard of this Umdat al-Salik and so we must be pulling it out of the ether to defame Islam. Did we infiltrate Al-Azhar to certify it, too? Al-Azhar should probably know a "misunderstanding" of Islam when they see it. Or was someone asleep at the switch that day?

The other is that this must be a random incident by thugs, because Sharia could never, ever be so intolerant. But the evidence does not lie: similar cases keep cropping up in places far removed from each other. Problems with building churches, ringing bells or singing hymns, or displaying Christian symbols have been reported in Russia, Bosnia, Somalia, Gaza, the Philippines, Indonesia, and even Britain, to name a few.

Funny how that keeps happening. Read more at www.jihadwatch.org

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1cnhd