Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

I suppose the obvious needs to be pointed out for those who do believe in anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.

The author's quip that Jews had/have some influence in dividing the world between Good and Evil should have rang the first alarm bells:

But one would like to ask in this connection where does this division of the world’s peoples into Evil and Good come from? The first source that comes to one’s mind is the Jewish doctrine that divides humanity into those who are Chosen and those who are Gentiles.

Imagine the rant and rave from useless Leftists if the obvious was pointed out that Islamic doctrine divides the world into two hemispheres, belief and unbelief. House of war and house of Islam. But to go one step further and claim that the source for this is Talmudic Judaism, as if Rabbinic Jews managed to have an influence over 99% of the rest of the world's population, is entirely absurd, to say the least.

This [Jewish] doctrine seems to have imprisoned the world in its grip. The Gentiles now are the Muslims in Afghanistan, in India, in Iran, in Iraq, in Libya, in the Sudan and, above all, in Palestine.

Does the seething Antisemitism in this sentence really need to be pointed out ?

Really ?

The author also suffers from classic victim-merchant syndrome. Only Muslims suffer perceived injustices. In fact, the author mentions India at the expense of its non-Muslim inhabitants. Perhaps we are also to believe that Hindus in Pakistan are living in paradise as they surely are in India ?

Perhaps North Korea will be spared, because, I suppose, it is not Muslim. This is how matters stand in the modern world: no justice and no morality.

More loon beliefs. Those wild eyed Jews are out for Muslim blood.

-- Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:45 pm --

eh believed a totally fabricated account (fabricated on JihadWatch) of an Imam condoning rape was true and not a peep when this was exposed:
dubai-politics-talk/fox-news-let-down-t42289.html

I reported a story I found on the first page of google, not JihadWatch, that was a Fox news story. In other words, apart from your loon fantasy world, the seemingly incorrect story had no connection to Jihad Watch.

I wonder if you see Robert Spencer in every shadow ?

Secondly, the part about the Imam condoning rape was not highlighted in my quote about the Imam and I never mentioned it myself. What I did actually highlight was the part about the Imam claiming that non-Muslims are guilty for being non-Muslims and need to be 'punished'. Strange how you fixate so much about rape.

When the historical fact is of Israel breaking the Gaza truce, you both go into denial:
dubai-politics-talk/gaza-truce-who-broke-t40269.html

No denial there. What I said was 100% correct. Hamas, not Israel, called the truce off. That Hamas ended the truce well over a month after an alleged Israeli violation of the truce should show that Israel did not break off the ceasefire.

-- Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:58 pm --

Rather than replace Jews with 'Muslims' why not put in 'Apartheid-era Boers' - that would be more apt, as I pointed out this is actually based on evidence.

Who's taking comments out of context ?

So you would claim that Boers are responsible for giving birth to "prejudice, schizophrenia, hypocrisy, double talk, double standards, double think, created a split between “us” and “them”, and resulted in dividing mankind into poor and rich, weak and strong, and into master and slave." ?

Wow, those must have been some pretty successful Boers.

But your point is neither here nor there. The author *didn't* say Boers. He said Jews. Jews are primarily responsible, somehow, for "giv[ing] birth to prejudice, schizophrenia, hypocrisy, double talk, double standards, double think, created a split between “us” and “them”, and resulted in dividing mankind into poor and rich, weak and strong, and into master and slave".

Seriously, is your brain so fried that you don't see the blatant Antisemitism and loon beliefs in the author's post ?

Of course it is. Silly question.

See what I mean - no embarrassment at all. Now you're blaming Google for your post. It doesn't excuse the fact you didn't acknowledge you that you presented as fact something that was made up by your friends!

And why are you having a go at FD in your opening line above? I would have thought you'd have supported him in his imagined anti-Semitism in the articles quoted.

And I particularly love the fact you still fantasise about Hamas breaking the truce when even Mark Regev admits the truth on TV. But hey, we can all go and see your incisive arguments in the relevant threads... oh wait, what's that ? No arguments there, just- 'all mouth no trousers' again.


But anyway, you should congratulate FD for his tenacity - I just wonder who he will quote next to justify the first allegation about nazism and this author's article!

Cheers,
Shafique

How have Jews managed to do the following:

prejudice, schizophrenia, hypocrisy, double talk, double standards, double think, created a split between “us” and “them”, and resulted in dividing mankind into poor and rich, weak and strong, and into master and slave

Wow. I think we found our loon of the year !

LOL - the articles are there, why don't you read them and then argue against the ideas expressed rather than relying on snippets?

Do all you guys think that just by searching for the word 'Jewish' in an article you'll understand what is written?

If you take the time to read the articles, you won't make schoolboy errors like claiming there is anti-semitism in an article which is a positive one about Islam (the first one) or in one about Palestine (the second one).

What is extremely funny too, is that the accusation of anti-semitism is levelled against a scholar who was less anti-semitic than his English neighbours (the non-Jewish ones - as he lived in Golders Green!).

I'm starting to feel sorry for you guys.. you sure know how to lose an argument!

Cheers,
Shafique

I think your response in not addressing what was said is what speaks volumes.

I read what you posted on the third page of this thread in full, several times.

Apart from the loon fantasies of his article (Islam does not promote aggressiveness, Judaism does - get real), I'm shocked that someone could be arguing that what the author wrote is not blatantly Antisemitic.

Well, not really. But for anyone with common sense I would be.

Huh?

I merely stated that the answer to your question is in the articles by Hasan Karmi. Let me know if you're still confused after you've read them.

You'll probably share a chuckle with me that notion that what he wrote is anti-semitic, given the facts I've also given above.

Cheers,
Shafique

The article you copy/pasted is clear.

According to the loon author, there is no aggressiveness in Islam, all aggressiveness comes from non-Muslims.

Couldn't get anymore 'Us vs Them' than that.

FD was absolutely correct in spotting this dude's Antisemitism.

Your copy-paste only confirmed his Antisemitism and his other loon beliefs.

By copy-pasting the piece in 'defense' of the author seems to show how fried your brain is.

Seriously.

How could the article you quoted, especially what you chose to highlight, not be considered Xenophobic and Antisemitic ?

Just incredible.

Edit: Found another loon passage from the site you copy/pasted your article from:

The sporadic acts of protest against injustice as done by Muslims here and there, even when they are violent in nature, should not be called terrorism. The Jews, for instance, practiced terrorism through Irgun and Stern gangs and through their fanatic groups for their religious national cause, and got away with it. But Muslims, fighting for self-determination, in the Balkans, Cyprus, Palestine, Kashmir, the Caucasus, the Phillipines and other parts of the world are labelled as terrorists. Self-determination is still denied to them, but the Christian eastern Timor has been given self-determination.

http://www.isesco.org.ma/english/public ... ne/CH1.php

The sporadic acts of protest against injustice as done by Muslims here and there, even when they are violent in nature, should not be called terrorism.

This so called loon passage must be a response to self proclaimed vanguard of democracy in America..
Couse they can keep firearm in self-defense/determination to shoot and not called terrorist?
http://gunowners.org/nws9702.htm

event horizon wrote:The article you copy/pasted is clear.

Well, Berrin posted the article - FD quoted a snippet from another article, and all I did was quote the full context to that second article. We have to thank FD for the second one about Palestine.

event horizon wrote:According to the loon author, there is no aggressiveness in Islam, all aggressiveness comes from non-Muslims.

Sorry, are reading the same articles here? Hasan Karmi is hardly a loon - or is it perhaps that some of the words and concepts he uses confused you?

Which particular passage says that there is no aggressiveness from Muslims. In fact you've quoted him above saying that some Muslims do commit violent acts against injustices and in liberation struggles. You also quote him stating the fact that Jewish terrorists 'got away' with their terrorism (a historical fact). I would disagree with him if he stated that clear terrorist acts shouldn't be labelled as such, but I don't disagree with him that armed attacks against military, for example, are routinely mislabelled as 'terrorist acts' by many - notably Israel and her fanbois. (I challenge you to refute this point - I double dare you.)

He's right that Islam's teachings emphasise unity and social justice and he contrasts that with the separatism that exists in Judaism - his theme is a strong railing against the discrimination of 'choseness' that manifests itself in injustices. He's also right to point out the religious tolerance inherent in Islam too.

I know that pointing out these facts makes him a heretic in your view - but facts are facts.

event horizon wrote:Your copy-paste only confirmed his Antisemitism and his other loon beliefs.

Which leads me to think you didn't actually read the articles. C'mon 'fess up - did you read and understand what Karmi was saying in the two articles?

Cheers,
Shafique

Sorry, are reading the same articles here? Hasan Karmi is hardly a loon - or is it perhaps that some of the words and concepts he uses confused you?

His words, not mine:

It never advocated segregationism, conformity, compulsory conversion, colonialism, oppression of religious or ethnic minorities, or racialism.

It never condoned injustice, aggression, despotism, dictatorship, tyranny or terrorism in its various forms, visible and invisible.

Don't worry guys. There is no radicalism or aggressiveness in Islam. Also, no oppression of religious minorities or intolerance.

Those ancient Islamic scholars who advocated offensive Jihad warfare against non-Muslims must not have been Muslim after all.

And perhaps you can ask your Qadiani friends in Indonesia and Pakistan if they're feeling oppressed or segregated (and, of course, Islam does not segregate between the sexes) ?

In fact you've quoted him above saying that some Muslims do commit violent acts against injustices and in liberation struggles.

Right, which he says are not acts of terrorism. So, that grenade attack against a Filipino church the other day was an act of protest against 'injustice', not terrorism. And yeah, fighting to establish a theocracy is a liberation struggle.

Must remember, you don't consider that a loon statement.

He's right that Islam's teachings emphasise unity

Really ? Which teaching of Islam emphasizes unity between non-Muslims and Muslims ? The whole house of war and house of belief ? Jihad warfare ? Islamic supremacism ?

Do tell. I'm interested.

he contrasts that with the separatism that exists in Judaism

Well, actually he says that this supposed 'Us vs Them' attitude originates from Judaism. Perhaps, since you agree with him, you could explain that for us ???

I personally thought his whole essay was to blame anyone else but Islam and Muslims and dripped with Kuffarophobia, Antisemitism and conspiracy theories and loon beliefs.

He's also right to point out the religious tolerance inherent in Islam too.

Islam is very intolerant. Compare any fundamentalist Islamic nation - Pakistan, Gazastan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran, even Indonesia, to any Western nation and there's no question which group of nations uphold tolerance, human rights, free speech, etc.

Which leads me to think you didn't actually read the articles. C'mon 'fess up - did you read and understand what Karmi was saying in the two articles?

I've already quoted numerous passages from the article you copy/pasted. Why not address what's quoted ?

Hey, a simple 'no I didn't read and understand the articles' would have sufficed!

Karmi indeed makes very good points about Islam being inclusive and not segregationalist. I challenged you to refute his specific point that Jewish terrorists got away with their terrorism (in the quote you gave) and that mislabelling attacks on military by liberationalists as 'terrorism' is wrong.

Repeating your beliefs that Karmi's excellent summary of the teachings of Islam (that it is tolerant, doesn't condone aggression etc) doesn't really address the fact that your views aren't in the article. I suggest that perhaps that is what is getting you all worked up.

Karmi does indeed state that Muslims commit violence, in the quote you gave. You either did not understand this point, or didn't read it. But yet you quoted it and then argue that he says Islam does not commit acts of violence?

I'm not sure whether you're just confused or just so blinded by hate that words don't sink in?

I challenge you again - read the articles and then lets discuss the ideas raised in them, not ones you imagine are there.


Cheers,
Shafique

Karmi indeed makes very good points about Islam being inclusive and not segregationalist. I challenged you to refute his specific point that Jewish terrorists got away with their terrorism (in the quote you gave) and that mislabelling attacks on military by liberationalists as 'terrorism' is wrong.

Another lie ?

Karmi never mentions attacking military targets when he says that 'protests of violence' in the Philippines and elsewhere are not acts of terrorism. He contrasts this by saying that the Irgun was a terrorists group - though they never killed as many non-combatants as Islamist terror groups in Chechnya, the Philippines, Israel and elsewhere have.

I'm not sure whether you're just confused or just so blinded by hate that words don't sink in?

Hey, his words are clear to both FD and I.

When he says that Rabbinic Judaism is responsible for a great share of the misery in the world (while Islam is completely innocent), I agree with the non-loon view that the guy is an Antisemite/nutjob/raving loon.

So why won't you address the quotes I provided that I took from your copy/paste on the third page of this thread ?

You say Karmi's words are clear to both you and FD - but there's no indication that either you or FD have actually read and understood either/both of the articles in full.

Pehaps that is exactly why you agree with each other?

I mean, FD even went so far as quoting the Mufti to back up his initial baseless claim that the first article shows Islam resembles Nazism. He was challenged and found lacking (and had to first quote a different article - selectively) and then just quoted the Mufti - all because he 'thought' Karmi was anti-semitic.

As I said, you guys crumble when evidence is produced - just look at the thread below and your comment about Homose.xuality in the Bible, look at the thread in Politics about Israel breaking the truce in Gaza etc etc. Look at the thread below about Hasan Karmi himself - can you see your or FD's response there.. no? Exactly.

The fact that you believe Karmi is an anti-semite is really only down to your views of Islam and not based on reality. You seem to be afraid to actually read and understand what is written - but such as it always was with loons.

Cheers,
Shafique

Address the quotes that have been posted on the fourth page of this thread from Karmi that I am saying are Antisemitic.

The fact that you believe Karmi is an anti-semite is really only down to your views of Islam and not based on reality. You seem to be afraid to actually read and understand what is written - but such as it always was with loons.

...
Which leads me to think you didn't actually read the articles. C'mon 'fess up - did you read and understand what Karmi was saying in the two articles?
...
As I said, you guys crumble when evidence is produced - just look at the thread below and your comment about Homose.xuality in the Bible, look at the thread in Politics about Israel breaking the truce in Gaza etc etc. Look at the thread below about Hasan Karmi himself - can you see your or FD's response there.. no? Exactly.


In summary: All Mouth, No Trousers.

Cheers,
Shafique

Yawn, more power words and empty talking points.

Karmi's antisemitic screed and loon beliefs have been highlighted.

I can copy/paste them again for you to actually address:

Referring to the Jews, Karmi writes:

prejudice, schizophrenia, hypocrisy, double talk, double standards, double think, created a split between “us” and “them”, and resulted in dividing mankind into poor and rich, weak and strong, and into master and slave

This [Jewish] doctrine seems to have imprisoned the world in its grip. The Gentiles now are the Muslims in Afghanistan, in India, in Iran, in Iraq, in Libya, in the Sudan and, above all, in Palestine.

Karmi goes on to claim that the Jewish influenced, non-Muslim and immoral West singles out Muslims for attack:

Perhaps North Korea will be spared, because, I suppose, it is not Muslim. This is how matters stand in the modern world: no justice and no morality.

And Muslims, as we all know, are always the victims and can do no wrong; if they kill civilians in greater amounts than the Irgun, whom Karmi refers to as 'terrorists', they are merely protesting:

The sporadic acts of protest against injustice as done by Muslims here and there, even when they are violent in nature, should not be called terrorism. The Jews, for instance, practiced terrorism through Irgun and Stern gangs and through their fanatic groups for their religious national cause, and got away with it. But Muslims, fighting for self-determination, in the Balkans, Cyprus, Palestine, Kashmir, the Caucasus, the Phillipines and other parts of the world are labelled as terrorists. Self-determination is still denied to them, but the Christian eastern Timor has been given self-determination.

Really, it says more about Muslims themselves who don't see the antisemitic beliefs of this author than it says about the nutjob Karmi himself.

Let us know when you actually have read and understsood Karmi's articles, and then read :

philosophy-dubai/hasan-karmi-anti-semite-t43065.html

You're looking increasingly foolish. When in a hole, it is generally good to stop digging.

Cheers,
Shafique

The quotes are clear - it speaks volumes that you would rather dig up an obituary than address Karmi's antisemitism.

Typical loon rant and typical loon deflection response - 'no, let's not address what Karmi said, let's read an obituary written by friends/colleagues, surely that would be unbiased'.

LOL - I told you to actually read and understand the two articles first and then read the orbituary.

Yet another epic failure of comprehension.

10 out of 10 for persistence, 0 out of 10 for comprehension.

Let me sum it up for you again:

The fact that you believe Karmi is an anti-semite (and FD imagines that Islam is like Nazism in the first article) is really only down to your views of Islam and not based on reality. You seem to be afraid to actually read and understand what is written - but such as it always was with loons.

Which leads me to think you didn't actually read the articles. C'mon 'fess up - did you read and understand what Karmi was saying in the two articles?

As I said, you guys crumble when evidence is produced - just look at the thread below and your comment about Homose.xuality in the Bible, look at the thread in Politics about Israel breaking the truce in Gaza etc etc. Look at the thread below about Hasan Karmi himself - can you see your or FD's response there.. no? Exactly.


In summary: All Mouth, No Trousers.


But it is typical, let's ignore the facts and believe our interpretations of selective quotes! That's the whole loon argument in a nutshell.

Cheers,
Shafique