I have been doing a lot of speaking all over the country lately: Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Wichita, and many more. I have spoken in banquet halls, hotel restaurant meeting rooms, country clubs, churches, and elsewhere. In Boston a few weeks ago I spoke in a synagogue, which led Joachim Martillo at Al-Jazeerah.info (which has nothing to do with the TV channel) in this report (thanks to all who sent it in) to assume that I was Jewish and try to construct all sorts of moral equivalency arguments relating to Judaism. It's a good thing I didn't speak in a garage: if I had, Martillo would be sure that I am an automobile, and bloviate about the numbers of those killed by traffic fatalities as being much greater than the numbers of those killed by Islamic terrorism.
Anyway, Martillo makes a number of statements just as silly in his piece:
Spencer's approach was similar to the anti-Jewish polemic that was common in Germany and Eastern Europe in the late 19th century and early 20th century. (To be honest, I consider Rohling's Der Talmudjude to have been a good deal more coherent albeit equally wrong and malicious.) Spencer made a big deal about taqiyah even though Maimonides gives in the Mishneh Torah exactly the same sort of permission to dissemble in the same way under exactly the same circumstances. Spencer has more or less recreated the anti-Semitic calumny that Jews give themselves permission to lie every year during the kol nidrei prayer at Yom Kippur and transformed it into an anti-Muslim slander.
I don't know if what he says about the Jewish sources is true, but even if it is, it makes no difference. Ultimately, to point to evils in other religious traditions is beside the point; only Islam today has a terror network of global extension, and only Islam has teachers who today advise believers to deceive unbelievers.
Spencer does not like the Quranic verse that assigns authority to men over women even though Abraham Geiger correctly pointed out over 100 years ago that the verse is practically identical to traditional Jewish interpretations of the punishment of Eve in Genesis.
Specifically, my beef is with the Qur'anic verse commanding men to beat their disobedient wives: Sura 4:34. Sure, wives are beaten all over. It's bad every time. But when it is given divine sanction, it becomes exceedingly difficult to eradicate. And whatever Abraham Geiger said 100 years ago, most Jewish and Christian men would not say that their religions mandate wife-beating.
Spencer also made a big deal that the Quran characterizes Sabbath-breakers as apes and pigs and that this language creeps into anti-Israel and Zionist polemic. Perhaps, American Jews are sensitive about the issue because 90% of them are Sabbath breakers, but the Hebrew Bible records in Numbers that Moses ordered the summary execution of a Sabbath breaker. Name calling is mild by comparison.
Note the sleight of hand: Moses executed a Sabbath breaker, therefore it's not as bad for Muslims today to call Jews apes and pigs. Yet who is executing Sabbath breakers today?
Spencer ranted for a while about dhimma even though this area of Islamic jurisprudence is quite similar to the canon law and halakhic rules about nonbelievers under Christian or Jewish authority.
What he says about canon law is absolutely false, and I doubt there is anything like the dhimma's institutionalized inferiority for nonbelievers in Judaism either. But once again, it makes no difference: no Jews or Christians are plumping for these laws today, if such laws even exist, while for jihadists the dhimma is very much on the agenda.
He cited out of context a lot of verses that discussed struggle with idolaters or unbelievers and tried to argue that Islam was incompatible with the idea of universal human rights (as if Zionism is). He also cited Kabbani and another Sheikh (probably out of context) in a sort of ipse dixit argument.
Out of context, out of context, out of context. I have written a book about the jihad verses in context. Islamic tradition is full of mainstream teachers (Ibn Kathir, Suyuti, etc.) who say that the violent verses of the Qur'an abrogate the peaceful ones. I suppose they're taking the verses out of context? And the idea that Islam is incompatible with universal human rights was stated not by me, but by Sheikh Tabandeh of Iran, a Muslim who wrote an Islamic critique of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as by many others. It was also suggested by the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights of 1990, which was endorsed by the OIC, and which stipulated that the Sharia was the final canon of human rights. If that's so, then women and non-Muslims simply don't have the human rights stipulated in the Universal Declaration and elaborated in Western tradition.
Later during questioning he tried to demonize as uniquely evil the desire of ibn Khaldun for the expansion of Sharia throughout the world as if ideas like manifest destiny, mission civilatrice and the white man's burden did not express a similar mentality in the most positive interpretation and a very racist mentality in a more realistic interpretation.
Yeah, there are a lot of Manifest Destiny and White Man's Burden terrorist groups out there these days. Watch out for them.
Over all, Spencer seems to have intended to use the talk to rally the troops against the Mosque and Islam or Muslims in general. Many of the Jewish attendees were quite offended by the thrust and the content. Several questioned Spencer's competence in interpreting the texts and asked why he cited questionable Orientalist literature instead of asking Muslim scholars.
It's true: there were numerous dhimmis in the audience. I am prepared to back up anything I said from Islamic sources and Islamic scholars.
Two compared Spencer's talk with traditional anti-Jewish polemics.
The key difference here is that traditional anti-Jewish polemics are based on fiction. What I say is based on fact. Skeptical? I am prepared to support any statement I have ever made about Islam from Islamic texts.
There was a suggestion that there should be an open debate or discussion between Spencer and a Muslim scholar. The proposal is questionable. Spencer can pack an amazing number of lies and misrepresentations into 10 seconds, and the answer to each point would probably require several minutes.
In other words, "Do not debate this fellow! He will probably win!"
The idea that Muslims must somehow prove themselves worthy to Jews is simply offensive
Why is that, Martillo? Aren't we all pluralists here? You don't have to prove yourself to Jews, but I have to prove myself to Muslims? Why is that, exactly?
If this idea of an open discussion goes forward, the format should provide equality. If Spencer is going to interrogate a Muslim scholar about various religious, cultural, communal, historical, social and political aspects of Islam or about the behavior of Muslims from various ethnic groups or states, the Muslim scholar should be able to pose similar queries to Spencer about various aspects of Judaica.
It's funny how everything I said was out of context and misused, etc., and I am unqualified to discuss Islam, while there is no "Muslim scholar that would have sufficient command of Judaica to provide a reasonable counterpoint." Judaica is beside the point. It would seem to be enough for a Muslim scholar to have a sufficient command of Islam, in order to show how I am supposedly misrepresenting it. Why can't they come up with someone to do that, if what they say is true?
For years I have heard from Muslims that what I say about Islam is "easily refuted." Yet again and again, they have declined to refute what I say. Why? This isn't a case of not wanting to give me the publicity: they're already talking about me to say that I can be refuted easily. They just won't trouble to do it. Maybe it's because they can't?
In fairness, I should note that I have received a response to my million-dollar claim from Dr. Jamal Badawi. This week I have had to tend to several urgent and unexpected problems, but I will post it as soon as possible, with a response.
Spencer seems to fixate on certain aspects of the Quranic text, a few specific commentaries, a very narrow portion of Islamic law, certain cultural practices, and the opinions of representatives of political or fundamentalist Islam. Identifying exactly comparable areas in which to question Spencer would be tricky.
Indeed it would. Because they don't exist.
If Spencer wants to question the role that Saudis play in spreading specifically Saudi forms of Islam, his Muslim counterpart might want to discuss the role that Jewish Hollywood executives play in spreading ideas about male-female relations that seem to have developed in the specifically Eastern European Ashkenazi social context (including the Frankist Jewish heresy that encouraged adultery and promiscuity).
Ah! The Jews are behind fornication! Of course! I should have known! They must have put oysters in the drinking water, eh? Anyway, this is just more anti-Semitic absurdity, unless it can be established that these Jewish Hollywood execs are funding global terrorist organizations.
To be frank, Spencer really did not seem to have much in the way of qualifications to write or to discuss Islam, and I do not know of any Muslim scholar that would have sufficient command of Judaica to provide a reasonable counterpoint. A discussion or debate between Spencer and a Muslim scholar would probably generate more heat than light and might even give extra life to the anti-Mosque campaign, which seems to be dying.
Yes, I know nothing of Islam. That's why Martillo advises Muslims not to debate me. And it's true: Mahdi Bray was in the audience that night, and he gave a soothing speech during the Q & A period that won over many people, and which included a kind invitation to debate Dr. Badawi or some other Muslim. He said he would be in touch. He has not been in touch.
But I told him that night that I would debate anyone, and I will. If I am so ignorant of Islam, it will be easy to demolish what I say, no? What is Martillo afraid of? Mahdi, Joachim, contact me at director@jihadwatch.org, and let's set it up. It's time you guys disposed of this Jihad Watch pest and exposed Judaism for what it is!!
I'll start the Muslim Enlightenment pool:
Not before the sun explodes and swallows the Earth.
All they have are specious moral equivalence arguments and stories about Jews from thousands of years ago. Every day there is a news story which confirms what you say about Islam. Not that every Muslim does these acts, but the paucity of Muslims willing to acknowledge, much less condemn, is truly frightening.
How am I supposed to question the modern application taqiyya and kitman after watching the two Saudi women on O'Reilly? "Nope, no hatred taught in our Saudi-funded school." "By the way, America...Jews...Christians..."
They ran almost every play in this playbook.
Thanks for the heads up on the million dollar prize, does everyone get a million or do we have to split it a couple of million ways? Hope this doesn’t end up costing me money.
Muslims seem to be more like flat worms these days unable to see around corners or explore the deaths of their own delusions. You cannot draw a moral equivalency or justify Islam in a age where people can read and think. It’s gone far beyond ridicules ignorance is Islam’s only real hope and its slipping away. Good riddance
Sounds like these Islamic mouthpieces have just been called out, again.
Soon we'll all be able to tell what their spines are made of.
The challenge has been made. Throw them in in the mix with the Council's spokespersons, and let's do this already.
Now that all of these people have been called to the forefront publicly, let's see if they'll respond like men, or if what we've believed all along is true: That they have battleship mouths and a rowboat asses.
This guy really got under your skin, sort of like a tick, perhaps.
Posted by: Beagle at March 10, 2005 09:41 AM
IS THIS WHAT YOU MEAN??
http://www.ci-ce-ct.com/Feature%20articles/02-12-2002.asp
Taqiyya and kitman: The role of Deception in Islamic terrorism
Tradecraft. Persona. Deception. Disinformation. Cover: Western operational terms and techniques. But, Islamic terrorists have their own terms: taqiyya (pronounced tark-e-ya) : precautionary dissimulation or deception and keeping one’s convictions secret and a synonymous term, kitman: mental reservation and dissimulation or concealment of malevolent intentions...
Taqiyya and kitman or ‘holy hypocrisy’ has been diffused throughout Arabic culture for over fourteen hundred years since it was developed by Shiites as a means of defence and concealment of beliefs against Sunni unbelievers. As the Prophet said: 'he who keeps secrets shall soon attain his objectives.’
The skilful use of taqiyya and kitman was often a matter of life and death against enemies; it is also a matter of life and death to many contemporary Islamic terrorists. As so often in the history of Islam, a theological doctrine became operational.
During the Spanish inquisition, Sunni Moriscos attended mass and returned home to wash their hands of the ‘holy water’. In operational terms, taqiyya and kitman allowed the ‘mujahadeen ’ to assume whatever identity was necessary to fulfill their mission; they had doctrinal and theological and later jurisprudential sanction to pretend to be Jews or Christians to gain access to Christian and Jewish targets: ‘the mujahadeen can take the shape of the enemy’.
Taqiyya is common to both Shiite and Sunni Muslim discourse and has significant implications for understanding Islamic fundamentalism and terrorist operations. The theory and practice of counter terrorism would be counter productive, indeed pointless, and even harmful, without reference to taqiyya and kitman and the crucial role of deception ranging from Islamic jurisprudence to Al Qaeda training manuals, which carry detailed instructions on the use of deception by terrorists in Western target countries.
According to Christian ethics lying is a sin; In Islamic jurisprudence and theology, the use of taqiyya against the unbelievers is regarded as a virtue and a religious duty.
Mr. Spencer
When you read his last words in his art. looks like there is some heat on them and they don't like it I would say KEEP IT UP DO NOT RUN FOR COVER THE HEAT IS ON!!!!
A discussion or debate between Spencer and a Muslim scholar would probably generate more heat than light and might even give extra life to the anti-Mosque campaign, which seems to be dying.
IT IS NOT DEING BUT GROWING AND MORE AND MORE PEOPLE HAVE COME TO UNDERSTAND IT WE ARE NOT THE KIND OF PEOPLE WHO WEAR OUR THOUGHTS ON OUR SLEAVE ONCE AGAIN THEY ARE WRONG!!!
NOT DIEING BUT GROWING!!!
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Kiler
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength, Wisdom, Sight, and Courage to stay the course to Victory[FREEDOM] to Destroy ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Amen
PS
Matter of Fact the Saudis were told to get their hate out of the American school books and are reviewing the problem??
It's the same old song and dance; deflect, distract, project, and desperately try to use the doctrine of relavitism. Islam will be the source of the destruction of relavitist theory(the source of political-correctness). That is what the left(and others) are so afraid of. And why they both covertly and overtly defend islam, including by silence.
The destruction of islam will also cause many people to question their own rational basis for supernatural belief, and is why believers of other faiths defend islam.
Islam is an extreme(and brutal) example of the gullibility and egocentricism of humanity-- we don't stop being, we become like gods.
Yeah more of the same trying to make Islam good by making other things bad.
deflection denial and delusions.
What makes me insane is when the truth comes out and people's ears start to perk up, one of these cobras start their soothing lies and all lie back into their false security. It reminds me of a butcher who strokes an animal before it cuts it's throat to keep the adrenalin from coursing through the meat.
Sabrina's Story
2005/03/10
Dear Dr. Sina,
Your site brought tears of joy to my eyes. It is so great to realize I am not alone!
I left Islam before your site came into existence. I kid you not; I left Islam when I was 7 years old or so! My apostasy was triggered by a very interesting incident.
Kids usually regard textbooks as something sacred and believe every word it says. If an author says that the French revolution is good (or bad), then most students will parrot it. They won’t use their own brains.
My teacher wanted us to use our brains and stop “worshipping” textbooks. She gave us an assignment to write our own book. When we finished, she said that we could now publish it. Some kids wrote that every parent has to buy an ice-cream every day, others wrote that schools and education as a whole must be banned. Nobody could prevent us from publishing our books. If we had released our masterpieces without mentioning our ages, some people would have certainly believed every single word in our books. If we had added the magic abbreviation “PhD” to our creations, many people would have started worshipping it.
Then it suddenly occurred to me that Mohammed, a man whom my parents named “a perfect man”, could have made up the Koran! Why should I believe him? I can create my own religion and claim that I’m the prophet of the only true God.
Since then I have never named myself “a Muslimah”. When I became a big girl, I studied Islam thoroughly and came to a conclusion that Islam is a load of crap. My parents left Islam too. We all now are safe and sound in Paris .
I advise all Muslims to read articles in this site. You don’t need to worship Ali Sina or believe him. He could think out every accusation he has leveled at Mohammed. In my opinion, he is just a man who studies Islam critically. If Ali Sina didn’t exist, Islam would still be a load of crap. Friends, you have your own brains, so use them. How could a prophet marry a 9-year-old girl? How could a prophet have more than 20 wives and concubines but at the same time command his followers to have only 4 wives? Isn’t it strange that God permitted Mohammed to have more than 4 wives? Decide for yourself. Make your own investigation. AND USE YOUR BRAINS!
Today I believe in God. But, I’m afraid, Mohammed had nothing to do with God.
Dear Ali Sina, I am very happy that you exist! Yes, without you Islam would still be trash but it feels so go with you.
Kind regards,
Sabrina
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Testimonials/Sabrina50310.htm
Robert Spencer is my hero.
Kol Nidre is a jewish prayer generally sung three times at Yom Kippur services.
It is a means of atoning for the promises to G-d we (I'm Jewish) will break in the coming year.
For promises made to G-d without intent to keep, it forgives. For promises in court, for oaths to other people, it does not atone or absolve responsibility.
It is different from Taqiyya in this way. It basically declares that we're miserable, we know we're going to make promises to G-d we cannot keep, and for the ones that we are forced to make to G-d that we will break (inquisition or Nazi provoked swears to convert to Christianity or face death, for example), these should be null and void, forgiven.
Yom Kippur itself is a day of atoning for the sins of the previous year. For the sins against G-d, the day of atonement atones. For the sins committed against other people, the day of atonement cannot atone unless we have made amends with the people we sinned against.
I hope this helps explain Yom Kippur and Kol Nidre a little better. Islamist propagandists and anti-semites throughout history have used it as a means of suggesting that no Jew can ever be trusted. This is foolishness or viciousness since it only has any bearing on the personal relationship between a Jew and G-d.
Now that Robert has dealt with one more example of Taqiyya-and-Tu-Quoque (this one a bit heavier on the Tu-Quoque than on the Taqiyya), he can take satisfacton from the essence of the piece - to wit, the advice not to debate this fellow (Spencer) because unlike many others, he actually knows the canonical texts of Islam and what's more, will not prove quite so willing as others to yield to those transparent arguments about how "Christians and Jews do it, but even worse."
I checked with someone who attended the lecture, and he thinks Robert may have misremembered a bit -- that only three people had something negative to say. The first sputtered Tu-Quoque, about "other religions." The second preened himself on his own hyper-awareness of the faults of those in some local Jewish group who were supporting what he considered "extremist" causes. The third was Mahdi (“I’m just a country Muslim from Norfolk, Virginia”), who was apparently soft-spoken on this occasion -- hoping to win over a few unwary Jews, no doubt for some "Interfaith Dialogue" or something (Bray deserves scrutiny; he managed to get a staged picture of himself, delivering food -- i.e., Muslim charity -- in the Globe within the last month, part of a careful campaign to make Islam look good), but when he is with other kinds of audiences, he is quite different.
Bray is most famous for the Washington rally at which, according to testimony presented to Congress, he screamed his support for Hamas, and he insisted vocally and repeatedly on the innocence of Abdurrahman Alamoudi, now doing 23 years in Federal prison for conspiracy to commit murder, following a guilty plea. And in the last year, Mahdi Bray has been appearing to express outrage over the treatment of Abu Ali, the “valedictorian” of his Saudi Academy in Virginia, recently extradited from Saudi Arabia, and promptly arrested for allegedly planning to kill the President. Possibly what Mahdi Bray found so appealing about him is that, like Bray, Abu Ali can call himself “just a country Muslim from Virginia.”
As for "Joachim Martillo," the briefest googling of Joachim Martillo Ajami gives an interesting site that lists, and describes, people who have been repeated, rather wild-eyed posters, on the Internet, and attracted attention precisely because of the wild nature of their postings.
The link is: http://www.skepticfiles.org/faq/legends4.htm.
If you spend a few minutes at it yourself, you will get the general idea of Joachim Martillo (Ajami) in his previous incarnation, and with his previous beliefs.
Here is the relevant excerpt:
"Joachim Martillo Ajami (multiple middle names elided):
Contrib. post:
who, until approximately [1992], polluted most
soc.culture.* groups with diatribes as to (pick the culture)'s primitiveness and need for recolonization by the enlighted West.
--
>Does anyone remember Juan Carlo Santos Martillo Ajami? (I may have got
>the name slightly wrong) Is he still around?
Oh, I _do_ remember Martillo. He occasionally posts to talk.politics.mideast, but he seems to've (thankfully) ceased infesting the soc.culture newsgroups he used to turn up at.
> About 3 years ago he
>used to post on various politics groups: usually deliberately
>inflammatory stuff like "Time to Suspend and Dismantle India". Basic
>view-point seemed to be a very right wing "America can do nothing wrong".
At one time, Mark Crispin (who seems to've disappeared from the net entirely) referred to him as a LaRouchie, although I'm not sure how that connects to Martillo's "the Third World is inhabited by savages and colonialism is good for them" party line, which is something he seems to repeat just about every time he posts.
>When I once took him to task for a particularly outrageous
>round of this I got a barely-coherent e-mail accusing me of favouring
>Stalinism and baby-killing.
You actually got _Email_ from him? Hmmm. He never bothered mailing me after I flamed him on a few occasions...
>The "Ajami" part of the name appeared _ex_nihilo_ one day after he
>claimed to have had a Moslem great-uncle in Palestine who was murdered
>for collaborating with the Jews (or something like that). He also showed
>up on soc.religion.islam, but I don't know what his religious views are.
Presumably orthodox Loonyism. He seems the type. >:)
--
> Does anyone remember Juan Carlo Santos Martillo Ajami? (I may have got
> the name slightly wrong)
He used lots of variants, starting as Joachim Martillo and later spelling his first name Yakim or Yehoyaqim as the fancy took him and adding the Ajami.
> Is he still around? [...] Basic viewpoint seemed to be a very right wing
> "America can do nothing wrong". [...]
Haven't heard from him in a while. He apparently got an article published in a prestigious neo-conservative magazine (Commentary?), which says a lot about their editorial standards...
> I don't know what his religious views are.
He is or was an atheist Sephardic Jew. He mildly despised religious Jews and Christians and regarded Muslims as subhuman vermin."
--
You can make of all this what you will. But it is certainly curious, given his new incarnation.
Go Robert, Go Hugh
We support what you do!
Fight the good fight
With all of your might
The fight is for truth,
The fight is for freedom,
The fight will be hard
We are no longer in Eden.
But with fighters like you
We all can take heart
And continue the battle
Until death do us part.
God bless you both.
Keep knockin' 'em dead, Robert. Your bravery gives the rest of us courage.
Robert, in my opinion there is one point in your posting that is debatable. You say that regardless of the alleged similarities in the content between the Jewish/Christian and Islamic religious books, today only muslims are carrying out acts of violence in name of the religion. This is something that you and other critics, Daniel Pipes for example, agree upon.
However, Pipes and you differ on the point that you believe this violence is not inherent in Jewish/Christian thought while it is inherent and inseparable from the Islamic thought. Now on this point, it becomes quite valid to compare the content of the texts irrespective of the historical or current events. In other words, it would be valid to ask why do you think the muslim scholars will never be able to re-interpret the texts while the Jewish religious scholars were able to do so hundreds of years ago, and still call it Judaism.
I am sure you will have a solid answer for this question, but I am just pointing out that your answer in that posting (that the Jews don't carry out the violent commands in their texts) does not sound sufficient.
My 2 cents.
An excerpt from a piece to be found by googling "Joachim Martillo":
"...the Church is failing far worse than it did during the Hitler period. Palestinian Israelis live under a regime comparable to life for Jews in Nazi Germany circa 1935. Jerusalem Palestinians live under a regime comparable to life for Jews in Nazi Germany circa late 1938-9. Palestinians in the Occupied Territories live under a regime comparable to life for Jews in occupied Poland circa January 1941. Today we know more about the class of extremist organic nationalist political phenomena to which Nazism and Zionism belong. While there was a legitimate fear in the 1930s that an open clash between the Vatican and Nazi Germany could worsen conditions for Jews, the State of Israel is in a very dependent relationship with the USA. Strong moral leadership by the Vatican against the State of Israel could materially affect US politics to provide relief to Palestinians and would show to 2 billion justifiably angry Muslims that Westerners will pay attention to their completely legitimate complaints and outrage about the situation in Palestine.
Now is the time for the Catholic Church to help to stop another mass murder before it happens. Now is the time for the Church to act and to make the forthright condemnation of Zionism that it did not make of Nazism in the 1930s. The controversy over The Passion of the Christ is far more than a matter of Catholic-Jewish or Christian-Jewish relations. It provides a chance for Catholics and all Christians to make amends by standing up to the genocidal racists. As long as Catholics and any other Christians maintain friendly relations with pro-Israel groups, all their repentance for neglect of the victims of Nazi Germany is totally in vain."
[article.email.prefix]: ThorsProvoni@aol.com [article.homepage.prefix]: http://www.cardamon.org
Note Martillo's call to "stand up to the genocidal racists" -- the "Zionists" --and the usual comparison of "Jews-under-Nazis" with "Palestians-under-Israeli rule."
Also of note is his casual reference to the existence, a few years ago, of "2 billion Muslims." Apparently saying it makes it so.
One mo' time, from what appears to be a pro-Israeli website:
"o Adi Papadov,
Joachim Jose Martillo AKA Jill AKA Leon Koppel etc. etc. is a known troublemaker and racist. His comments were deleted."
I like that "Leon Koppel," and "Jill."
Who says computer engineers can't have multiple personalities?
Standard fare to silence critics --- no one except the anointed can possibly know about Islam --- those that try are tarred with the brush of ignorance, quoting out of context, lying and so on. He even used the kitman tactic of comparing apples to oranges by requiring that you debate a scholar on Islam by defending Judaica.
Typical tactic: Beat your chest, call everyone else a lying ignoramus or worse and hope that no one will understand, notice, or have the intestinal fortitude to take you on.
Some ARE Noticing. Keep up the good work!
Why would anyone go to such a laborious and extensive effort,just to (wrongfully)defend islam??!!
I'm still waiting for the steel cage death match between Robert Spencer and Nihad Awad...
BTW, Robert, you can use my chair...
From a 1988 exchange, when Joachim Carlo Santos Martillo (the Ajami came later) was still preparing to build his billion-dollar company:
"In a rebuttal to the Forum letter published last month (from Joachim Martillo of Constellation Technologies, Cambridge, Mass.), Stallings makes several new points that we believe may benefit other readers. What follows, then, is Sterling's response to Mr. Martillo`s recent letter.
To the editor:
In turning what could have been a worthwhile technical exchange concerning the merits of TCP/IP into a personal attack, Mr. Martillo ["In defense of TCP/IP," Forum, August, p. 208] displays not only bad manners, but a gross misunderstanding of what I wrote ["TCP/IP: Should you feel guilty? A communications conundrum, " May, p.294.] Mr. Martillo`s letter appears to make the following points:
I am wrong in stating that TCP/IP is static.
Users are more interested in sophisticated applications than in a slightly enhanced version of Kermit.
OSI is unlikely ever to provide for resource sharing because it is industry-driven.
Standards only help the big players, and then only if the big, player does not already have a large installed base.
Many in the computer industry no longer understand the concepts of modem computer networking.
IP allows fragmentation; no other acceptable alternative is possible.
Netview might become standardized, destroying the OSI model.
It is naive to say that OSI is superior to the ARPANET protocol suite and that OSI will prevail.
With regard to the first point, I stated in my article that "there are no planned enhancements or additions to the DOD standards." While it is true that protocol R&D continues within the ARPANET context, there are no plans that I know of for new military standards. It is the military standards that appear on procurement specifications and that have driven the development of interoperable, commercially available TCP/IP products.
To use Mr. Martillo`s words, he displays a "shocking business naivete" if he thinks that network-transparent graphics and network paging are more important to business users than electronic mail, file transfer, and other existing OSI-based standards. A powerful electronic mail facility, in particular, has been found to have substantial business benefits (see, for example, "How one firm created its own global electronic mail network," DATA COMMUNICATIONS, June 1988, p. 167, and "How to grow a world-class X.25 network," DATA COMMUNICATIONS, May, p. 193). In terms of more sophisticated applications, business is interested in the OSI direction of document architecture and distributed transaction processing, directions not being pursued in the TCP/IP standards context.
To equate FTAM with "a slightly enhanced version of Kermit" implies that (A) Mr. Martillo isn't sure of his facts, or (B) he understands the power and range of FTAM services but is being parochial in his views.
As to point 3, Mr. Martillo has evidently never heard of MAP, TOP, the U. S. GOSIP (Government OSI Profile), and various other GOSIPs in other countries. Recently, a GM study found that for the first time, MAP compliant networking produced, and software are now less expensive than corresponding proprietary ones. Who's in the driver's seat?
I will let the many small and start-up companies who are selling OSI-based products respond to point 4. However, I can't resist one question: How can you be a "big player" if you don't have a large installed base?
Point 5 is insulting to the readers of this magazine.
On point 6: Yes, indeed, the DOD does allow fragmentation. But so does the more powerful and richer ISO connectionless internet protocol. Is this the only acceptable alternative? Do I detect a narrow-minded-ness and a "not-invented-here" syndrome?
With respect to point 7 and Netview, a recent survey of Fortune 1,000 companies by Forrester Research indicates that there is more support for OSI network management, and precursor products that allow easy migration to OSI, than for Netview. In any case, Netview will not cause the abolition of X-400, FTAM, VTP, Document Architecture, or distributed transaction processing.
Again, in point 8, Mr. Martillo has missed the point he is attempting to refute. The OSI-based standards, both current and forthcoming, are superior to the set of five TCP/IP-based military standards. For purposes of comparison, it is the TCP/IP-based military standards that are actually supplied by real-life vendors to real-life customers, not some set of research-based ARPANET protocols.
Whether OSI will "prevail" over SNA in the mainframe shops may be open to question, but given the commitment represented by MAP/TOP and especially GOSIP, to call "naive" the belief that OSI will prevail over the TCP/IP standard suite is itself shockingly naive.
William Stallings
President
Comp-Comm Consulting
London, England"
The only reason for adding this technical exchange from 1988 about something that most visitors will have no interest in, or understanding of, is to make a point. It is clear that a great many people did not get rich from the Computer/Internet boom. Almost all of them, being reasonable people, got over it. Some are still in the same business. Some saw their companies implode, or explode, and changed careers, or states, and became schoolteachers, ski instructors, or went back to graduate school to get a doctorate in history, or opened a bed-and-breakfast, or went into urban planning, or opened an antique store. Everything is possible.
And a very few found solace in -- well, whatever it is that Joachim (Carlo, Santos) Martillo (Ajami) or "Leon Koppel" or "Jill" eventually found, which appears to have something to do with anti-Israel activity, and ardent defenses of Islam.
Years ago a lady out in Ohio was arrested for some infraction, and claimed that she had multiple personalities -- 21 of them to be exact -- and the good ones could not always be responsible for the bad ones.
The Judge at her trial was not impressed.
Thanks, Mike, but I wouldn't mark the calendar just yet. Nihad Awad was scheduled to appear with me on Pax-TV's "Faith Under Fire," but he dropped out. It wasn't the first time CAIR officials have ducked away from debates with me.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Robert -- So you think you're tough, eh? Well, I'm willing to debate you. Here are the possible topics:
1. "54-40, or Fight?"
2. "Tippecanoe -- or Tyler Too?"
3. "Resolved: This House Will Not Die for Danzig."
4. "Should We Recognize Red China?"
5. "Is It Real -- Or Is It Memorex?"
Ball's in your court. Choose.
I am sure you will have a solid answer for this question, but I am just pointing out that your answer in that posting (that the Jews don't carry out the violent commands in their texts) does not sound sufficient.
My 2 cents.
Posted by: SeenathePersian at March 10, 2005 02:14 PM
MAYBE YOU ARE JUST STUPID WHO KNOWS ??
But if you read the Torah or as the Christians call it the Old Testement then you would Know!! The Answer my freind is Blowin in the wind??
When it talks about to relie on your kings and Judges to inturpit the law so you can live in haramei??
But mussis are never to Q? this is their problem!!
It is so simple!!
All you intellucels?/ Looking for the Gray it ain't there!!!
As for lieing aint happening cause the only thing God wrote was the 10 comments and one of the 10 is thy shall not lie!!
But the mulsums this is okay and a must for their goal??
Qur’an 3:54 “‘Lord, we believe in Your revelations [the Torah and Gospels] and follow this Apostle [Jesus]. Enroll us among the witnesses.’ But the Christians contrived a plot and Allah did the same; but Allah’s plot was the best.” [A third translation says that “they” refers to “disbelievers,” not the disciples and they plotted to kill Jesus.] “And they (disbelievers) plotted (to kill Isa [Jesus]) and Allah plotted too.”
Why would God have to Plot?
Qur’an 3:50 “(I [Isa/Jesus] have come) to attest the Torah which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was forbidden; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me. Lo! Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. That is a straight path.”
The Torah and the quran are not the same thing! So mulsums are cursed??
Bukhari:V4B55N658 “Allah’s Apostle said ‘How will you be when the son of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you and he will judge people by the Law of the Qur’an and not by the law of Gospel.’”
So the quran was rewritten and the curse is on the mulsums and all who follow it??
Bukhari:V4B55N657 “Allah’s Messenger said, ‘Isa (Jesus), the son of Mariam, will shortly descend amongst you Muslims and will judge mankind by the law of the Qur’an. He will break the cross and kill the swine [Jews] and there will be no Jizyah tax taken from non-Muslims. Money will be so abundant no one will accept it. So you may recite this Holy Verse: “Isa (Jesus) was just a human being before his death. On the Day of Resurrection he (Jesus) will be a witness against the Christians.”’”
Could this be a rewrite again to curse the followers of mo-ham-od??Because notice how they leave out the Torah and the word of God??
Yes I can see how the king of Jordan is a little worried?? With the teachings coming from his country and other mulsum countries who want the death of Gods People who he saved from slavery???
And lets not forget Jesus was of Jewish Blood!! Yes something about the destruction of the people from Babylon could this be the followers of mo-ham-od??
Qur’an 3:45 “Behold, the angels said: ‘O Mariam! Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be the Messiah, Isa (Jesus), the son of Mariam, held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of those nearest to Allah.”
SO WHICH IS IT WHICH IS THE LIE??
Qur’an 4.171 “O people of the Book (Christians), do not be fanatical in your faith, and say nothing but the truth about Allah. The Messiah who is Isa (Jesus), son of Mariam, was only a messenger of Allah, nothing more. He bestowed His Word on Mariam and His Spirit. So believe in Allah and say not Trinity for Allah is one Ilah (God)…far be it from His Glory to beget a son.”
COULD THIS BE THE ONE THE KING IS A LITTLE WORRIED ABOUT?
Qur’an 61:14 “O Muslims! Be helpers of Allah: As Jesus the son of Mary said to the Disciples, ‘Who will be my helpers (in the Cause) of Allah?’ Said the disciples, ‘We are Allah’s helpers!’ Then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, and they became the victorious.”
IN GODS CAUSE TO SAVE HIS PEOPLE OF ISRAEL WHO HE SAVED FROM EGYPT?? REMEMBER JESUS WAS A JEW!!
Qur’an 48:11 “The desert Arabs who lagged behind [in fighting] will say to you (Muhammad): ‘We were engaged in (looking after) our flocks and our families.’ We have prepared for them a Blazing Fire!”
THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE USING TO CALL TO FIGHT NOW!!
Qur’an 4:78 “Wherever you are, death will find you, even if you are in towers built up strong and high! If some good befalls, they say, ‘This is from Allah;’ but if evil, they say, ‘This is from you (Muhammad).’ Say: ‘All things are from Allah.’ So what is wrong with these people, that they fail to understand these simple words?”
Ubl [yellow coward who runs away] USE THIS TO TAKE OUT THE WTC NOT SOME THING HE THOUGHT UP??
Qur’an 4:88 “What is the matter with you that you are divided about the Hypocrites? Allah has cast them back (causing their disbelief). Would you guide those whom Allah has thrown out of the Way? For those whom Allah has thrown aside and led astray, never shall they find the Way.
YEA RIGHT LOOK AT EVERY MULSUM COUNTRY A SHIT HOLE!!
sorry Robert I couldn't help myself??
By the Way did you get the money or not??
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her Amen
RS: "Mahdi Bray was in the audience that night, and he gave a soothing speech during the Q & A period that won over many people, and which included a kind invitation to debate Dr. Badawi or some other Muslim. He said he would be in touch. He has not been in touch.
"But I told him that night that I would debate anyone, and I will. If I am so ignorant of Islam, it will be easy to demolish what I say, no? What is Martillo afraid of? Mahdi, Joachim, contact me at director@jihadwatch.org, and let's set it up."
As a kind of thought experiment: What venue and format 1) would be one that a credible opponent would participate in, and 2) would produce the highest light-to-heat ratio?
A neutral blog somewhere?
Paltalk?
In person debate?
Would the debate have one of those "Resolved ..." propositions? Else how would the topic and scope be defined and limited?
Just thinking out loud.
Hugh,
That is a grave challenge indeed, and I treat it with all the seriousness it deserves. And much as I would relish a chance to expand on the merits of "All of Texas and All of Oregon," or of the first Accidental President (and only former President to win a seat in the Confederate Senate, although others, I'll wager, have been similarly sedition-minded), I would like to propose an alternate topic for our debate:
"Millions for defense, or one cent for tribute?"
Choose your weapons, name the time and place, and I will be there, Sir. The gauntlet has been thrown down. The whole earth trembles in anticipation of the coming contest.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
The Weapon: Words, at Twenty Paces.
The Topic:
"If We Are Not Stalwart, Can Arthur Still Be President?"
Time and Place: TBA
"his Muslim counterpart might want to discuss the role that Jewish Hollywood executives play in spreading ideas about male-female relations that seem to have developed in the specifically Eastern European Ashkenazi social context (including the Frankist Jewish heresy that encouraged adultery and promiscuity)"
Pardon my intemperate language, but let me ask his: what the hell is he talking about? "The Jooooos" developed promiscuity? Oh-my-God. This is Martillo's idea of a rational argument?
Finally: Hugh, I find it surprising that computer engineers have any personalities, let alone the depth for multiple such. [zing] Not to mention that one of his above is female.
Geoff
Thank you Laish for clarifying that piece about Yom Kippur and Judaism as NOT being a form of Jewish Taqiyya. I was about to make the comment myself, however you got to it first.
It just amazes me how Muslims talk about Judaism, as if they know everything about it. Whenever I hear them comment on the Jewish religion, I just shake my head in dismay. The lack of understanding and ignorance just blows my mind.
Yes, it is true that Jew's break their vows on Yom Kippur - for those that they make either wittingly, or unwittingly with G-d. But this renunciation on Yom Kippur has nothing to do with any sins committed between one person and his fellow human beings. In fact, if that person has something against the other and has not been forgiven for it, then the Rabbinic teaching is that even if you go through Yom Kippur perfectly, your sins will not be forgiven you. For Christians this should put them in mind of Jesus' words from the Sermon on the Mount, "For if you forgive men their tresspasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men of their tresspasses, neither will your Father forgive your tresspasses." Matthew 6:14-15. However, if your slate is clean between you and your fellow, but you have sinned before G-d, then you can ask that G-d will forgive you for having said a hasty oath, or having made a promise you discovered you cannot keep.
If I remember correctly, the whole Kol Nidre service was created for Jews who were forced to convert at the point of the sword. It was a way that they could live with the psychological guilt of having been weak when their lives were on the line. I could be wrong about that however.
Having a slow night? Download the PalTalk online chat software and join one of the political debate forums where Islam is often the topic.
As one who frequents these live 'debates' (debating with an Islamist is an exercise in futility) I can assure you, a newfound appreciation for the oriental mindset will ensue.
Al taqiyya, Tu Toque, and Kitnah are but a few of the techniques often employed. However, they take a distant second to foot-dragging, recalcitrance and plain old confrontational attacks. Never mind how thoroughly one demolishes Islamic rhetoric with logic and reason, the opponent will invariably skate or resort to triumphal chest-beating.
An alarming fraction of these boastful, self-styled believers will dissolve into frightful profanity worthy of a longshoreman at the slightest approach of cognitive dissonance. But the better debates provide keen insight into the mindset and belief system we face.
One particularly adept Arab Christian debate master uses his native understanding of the Arab mindset to systematically plant the seeds of truth in Muslim's minds. His deep knowledge of Qur'an and Hadiths provides an often humorous look at Islam's wackier beliefs and traditions.
If one can get past the childish diatribes that riddle some forums, the dicussions can be sources of insightful and valuable information about the threats Islamism poses.
Donchicago:
How do you get into a debate forum? I did download the software, though. So where do I go from here?
Thanks for useful tips!
http://www.terrorists-suck.org/fight/winds_of_jihad.html