koala-1

koala-1
The Pen is mightier than the sword, but the Pen must sometimes move the sword against corruption if the corrupt are not moved by the pen.. An idea without an implementer is useless. "The Rulers do not carry the sword in vain"Rom 13:4

Thursday, July 2, 2015

Criticial Scrutiny of the flawed thinking in the Brisbane Courier Mail about Islam.

Th article begins with a straw man headline.  (1 July 2015)

Saying all Muslims and Islam are to blame for extremists’ actions can only divide our community

Comment:
This is a very skilful example of basic propaganda technique. "some truth, and some lie/fiction"... it is the grain of truth that provides some credibility for the lie.  I cannot find any place in Bolt's article where he identifies "all Muslims" in the way that this headline suggests. (That's the 'lie' part)...but I can find Bolt claiming that "Islam has everything to do with the atrocities"  and that is the 'truth' part.  To claim that Bolt said "All Muslims" is very misleading and is a deliberate attempt to trigger the predictable reaction that Bolt is 'picking on' the Muslims.
But to say that "Islam" in the sense of what Muhammad/the Quran/Hadith/Histories/4 rightly guided Caliphs etc did, said and permitted, is absolutely correct! That is "Islam".    Even in Muhammad's day there were Muslims who believed Muhammad was the Apostle of Allah but did not want to pay the zakat tax. The response of Abu Bakar, Muhammad's father in law was to quickly put an armed force together and attack them.


Hadith Muslim book 1 number 29
It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) breathed his last and Abu Bakr was appointed as his successor (Caliph), those amongst the Arabs who wanted to become apostates became apostates. 'Umar b. Khattab said to Abu Bakr: Why would you fight against the people, when the Messenger of Allah declared : I have been directed to fight against people so long as they do not say: There is no god but Allah, and he who professed it was granted full protection of his property and life on my behalf except for a right? His (other) affairs rest with Allah. Upon this Abu Bakr said: By Allah, I would definitely fight against him who severed prayer from Zakat, for it is the obligation upon the rich. By Allah, I would fight against them even to secure the cord (used for hobbling the feet of a camel) which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (as zakat) but now they have withheld it. Umar b. Khattab remarked: By Allah, I found nothing but the fact that Allah had opened the heart of Abu Bakr for (perceiving the justification of) fighting (against those who refused to pay Zakat) and I fully recognized that the (stand of Abu Bakr) was right.

The highlighted text in red, contextualizes the rest of the hadith. It shows that the dispute between Umar and Abu Bakar related to how far people had to submit to be called true "Muslims"... Umar seems to think it was enough for them to confess Muhammad as the Prophet..but Abu Bakar believed they should also pay the obligatory zakat tax and if they would not, they were 'apostates' and must be...fought and beaten into submission! Umar then 'sees' that Abu Bakar is right.  Note carefully though, that this (as do the next few hadith) refers to a fundamental calling to Muhammad (as he believed it) to fight people until they worshipped Allah alone. This theme continues and the reader is advised to check it themselves in the succeeding hadiths numbered 30, 31, 32 and 33



Back to the Courier Mail.

However, the problem is most people in the West who have very little to do with Muslims or Islam, buy the interpretations of ISIS and other terrorist groups. Such elucidations help them reinforce their preconceived belief that Islam is inherently violent. I agree with Bolt that these terrorists justify their actions on the basis of some interpretations within Islamic jurisprudence. However, to argue that the overwhelming majority of 1.6 billion Muslims live by the same interpretation is ludicrous.

and...with that I cannot find a syllable of Bolts article where he argues 1.6 billion Muslims live by the same interpretations... if anything he argues the opposite, but in so doing he is demonstrating that true Islam is different from 'popular' Islam.  The popular interpretations are not at issue... the REAL intepretations are! Who better to explain that true/real/correct interpretation of Islam than the man who founded it and his close circle of followers?

See how the Courier Mail 'blames you' ? The view as espoused by Bolt is not based on evidence..no.. it's based on 'your' prejudice and preconceived belief.   Obviously the Courier Mail's theological pundits are misguided and information impoverished because the facts are there in black and white for all who care to read them.  The next red herring is "some interpretations".  No one is saying that the whole Muslim community is living by those interpretations, but what IS being said is that 'if' they follow Islam as it was practiced by their own Prophet and his companions...they would be acting the same as the 'terrorists.'

In other words, as the cop shows say "see where the evidence takes us".  The first port of call for that ship is.. that "Islam" itself is violent, and that those '1.6billion' that the Courier Mail tries to ram down our throats is how many 'terrorists' would be beating down our doors and enslaving our families IF they simply followed truly to their faith as lived by their prophet.  This leads directly to the issue of "why are they not doing that now?"  This is partly a geographic and political question. Geographic in the sense that where Muslims are a demographic minority, they will not be stupid enough to try to enforce their true religion on a dangerous majority.  However where they do have the numbers and political clout, the religion becomes clearly manifest.

Not satisfied with vilifying all clear thinking reasonable people..the Courier Mail does further in its tirade of insults:

The March 2003 decision by the George W. Bush-led Coalition of the Willing to invade Iraq – on the now well discredited pretexts – left what remained of that country’s polity shattered and its society divided, rendering it vulnerable to infiltration by extremists still armed and spreading their perverted interpretation of the Koran. 

For commentators to blithely airbrush this recent history and wash the West’s hands of any responsibility for the rise and practice of extreme interpretations of the Koran is dishonest. Just as it is to blame the actions of an extreme minority on the majority of Muslims who ascribe to and abide by Islam in its complete and non-distorted form.

The person writing this sad copy for the Courier Mail must be one of those marginal dingbat lefties who can only ever see reality through the prism of "It's all, and always America's fault---the great satan".
The transparent and impoverished political angle to this kind of writing is not hard to see. It's code for..."Keep the narrative supportive and positive to ensure the Muslim vote so that we can regain or retain power and continue to feather our economic networks nest!"   Only a dimwit of apocalyptic proportions could misconstrue the plain and obvious teaching of the Quran as violent and aggressive when so many of the Companions of Muhammad (The first 4 rightly guided caliphs) put the plan into violent action relentlessly. They had no problem interpreting verses like 9:29 to mean exactly what it says:

Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled. (9:29)

Muslim apologists who care more about public image than private truth will be adamant that the historical background to this was the 'Eeeeevil Byzantine Empire that was encroaching on Arab territory... and that it was only they who were the focus of this verse.  That bizarre claim falls apart however when you see how Umar himself used the clear 'great commission' tone of 9:29 to justify his invasion of the Persians who didn't even know who the invaders were! Bukhari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386:

Just when you think the Courer Mail could not become any nuttier.. they do"

"Islam" is innocent of the crimes committed by Muslim terrorists in the same way Christianity is innocent of the sexual abuse by some clergy, and not all white people are Neo-Nazis.

Absolute and complete rubbish.
a) Islam- ie..Quran, Hadith and Muhammad's example totally support the violent actions of the 'terrorists'.
b) Christ, and the New Testament condemn the abuse of children specifically!!
c) Not ALL 'white' people are Neo Nazis?  good grief.. this writer is on drugs!  WAIT...nope.. I've just seen it the authors name is... wait for it:

Ali Kadri  

I'm getting the smell of a Camel drifting through my office.....



TRUTH TIME.
1/ "Islam" is violent and dangerous.
2/ Muslims who follow this religion as it was revealed will also be 'violent and dangerous'.
3/ "Muslims" who do NOT follow their religion as Muhammad declared and delivered it will not be dangerous because they are not true Muslims.
4/ When the 'terrorists' are attacking other 'Muslims' they are acting as Abu Bakar did and as Umar agreed in the above mentioned hadith.  If the Sunni are attacking Shia they are (in their minds) attacking hypocrites and apostates, who are a legitimate target for 'true Islam'. 




"guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge"  (1 Tim 6:20)







No comments:

Post a Comment

Please make comments here. Vulgarity or namecalling will not survive the moderator. Reasoned argument alone will survive.