Since Carl Ernst refuses to debate Robert Spencer, instead of a debate, why not a specific question that deserves to be answered?
A few years ago, entering freshman at the University of North Carolina were required to read Approaching the Qur'an: The Early Revelations by Michael Sells. This bowdlerized version of the Qur'an, turning it into some kind of cross between Rumi and Omar Khayyam, conveyed absolutely nothing to those hapless freshman about what Islam, or about what the Qur'an, is all about. Leaving aside the Sunna, reducing the Qur'an to those softer "Meccan" suras, it was a guide to nothing at all.
Sells himself, I think, may even be coming around to the fact that his recension has missed something. He may, by degrees, come to realize that his Approaching the Qur'an deceives. But he has his own investment in it, and perhaps his reluctance to realize the folly of offering young people, young Americans, a further prolonging of their misunderstanding and naive trust that "all religions teach the same thing" -- of course they don't -- might be understood on that basis. It would be fascinating to hear from Michael Sells himself on whether he now has just a bit of a doubt about what, for example, the great Western scholars of Islam, and of the Qur'an, might make of his work, what Joseph Schacht and C. Snouck Hurgronje, and Armand Abel, and Arthur Jeffery, and Tor Andrae and Noldeke and Brockelmann and Goldziher, would think. Let's try to imagine what Crone or Hawting or Ibn Warraq or Luxenberg would make of this, what any of the thousands of native speakers of Arabic who have become defectors from Islam, would say about the pedagogic value of Approaching the Qur'an.
Yet Carl Ernst, a professor at the University of North Carolina who taught Islam, was all for this exercise in disinformation. He saw nothing wrong, he saw everything right, in pushing this forced mental march through what essentially is no different from the propaganda of an army of apologists. Muslim and non-Muslim alike have been having the time of their lives pulling the wool, through the deployment of taqiyya and tu-quoque, over the eyes of all kinds of unsuspecting Infidels. And this is what Carl Ernst wanted to give to UNC freshmen, and gave them.
So at least one question -- not a debate question in the context of some non-appearance with Robert Spencer, but a question that has been waiting to be put, so that a clear answer might be given. This question needs to be pointedly put to Carl Ernst, who no doubt is infuriated by the notion that anyone outside the cozy and well-patrolled confines of MESA, MESA Nostra, should have the gall to ask him anything, much less expect him to supply an answer.
But such a question exists. And Carl Ernst owes an answer to that question. He owes it to the affected students who in the past were required to derive their knowledge of Islam from Approaching the Qur'an. He owes it to the parents of those students. He owes it to other faculty members in the University of North Carolina system who may not like the idea, may not approve of the idea, of that kind of apologetics calling into question support for the university from intelligent and inquisitive alumni, and trustees, and members of the North Carolina legislature. Not everyone on that faculty is a wilting violet. Not all will be inclined to defer to his "credentials" and his "expertise" quite so readily as he may think. There are all kinds of deservedly self-assured people on the faculty there who may have taken it upon themselves, in the years since that brouhaha over Required Reading, to find out for themselves, by reading and studying, not only what the Qur'an contains, but what it means, and what "naskh" or abrogation means, and further, what the hadith are all about, and what is the tremendous significance of Muhammad, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil, and the significance of every detail of his life, including the Khaybar Oasis attack, the decapitation of the Banu Qurayza, the assassinations of Asma bint Marwan and Abu Afak, and of course little Aisha, on her swing, and with her toys.
And this is the question:
Why did you, Carl Ernst, one who certainly knows the contents of the Qur'an, knows about the interpretive doctrine of abrogation, knows the hundreds of violent verses against the Unbeliever, knows what the Qur'an has been taken to mean through time and space by Believers, knows of the uncompromising division between Believer and Infidel, knows what the Hadith -- the Hadith of Al-Bukhari and Muslim -- further offer as a gloss on the Qur'an, and what the Sira, the biography or biographies of Muhammad, offer by way of the Perfect Man suitable for emulation -- why did you not only see nothing wrong, but everything right with the idea of inflicting, as a requirement, on innocent incoming freshman, at a time when it was clear that an intelligent knowledge of Islam was important for reasons of national security, and was not something to be trifled with -- why were you so enthusiastic about the use of that so-called version of the Qur'an, that travesty known as Approaching the Qur'an: The Early Revelations (or was it The Lyrical Suras -- I forget) which even its compiler, one suspects, must be beginning to question?
Don't answer here. Forget Jihad Watch. But in another forum, answer that question. Answer your colleagues. Answer those students and their parents. Answer discontented alumni, and trustees, and members of the legislature of North Carolina, some of whom will have the contents of this query made known to them. Not all of them are likely to be charitable when egregious examples of educational malpractice are brought to their attention.
One imagines Mr. Ernst's response to be something on the order of:
"I shall not respond to one so...uncredentialed."
I am a UNC alum and after the Approaching the Quran fiasco I stopped giving money to the school. I still have not given a dime nor will I. Now that I have learned about El Profesor Ernst I may demand my tuition money back! Scoundrel.
I think the wise men of yesterday are right:
http://www.mythfolklore.net/aesopica/oxford/521.htm
521. HERMES AND THE ARABS
Perry 309 (Babrius 57)
Hermes filled a cart with lies and dishonesty and all sorts of wicked tricks, and he journeyed in this cart throughout the land, going hither and thither from one tribe to another, dispensing to each nation a small portion of his wares. When he reached the land of the Arabs, so the story goes, his cart suddenly broke down along the way and was stuck there. The Arabs seized the contents of the cart as if it were a merchant's valuable cargo, stripping the cart bare and preventing Hermes from continuing on his journey, although there were still some people he had not yet visited. As a result, Arabs are liars and charlatans, as I myself have learned from experience. There is not a word of truth that springs from their lips.
This looks like the next Tarheel Jihadist, only this time he's a Marin County copycat. Let's see what Sweetcheeks Newsom does with this one! Toodle loo!!! Check out the perp's name in caps below:
SAN FRANCISCO -- As many as 14 people were injured this afternoon by a motorist who drove around San Francisco running them down before he was arrested, authorities said.
Seven of those injured were in critical condition, police and firefighters said.
Authorities have identified the man who was arrested as OMEED AZIZ POPAL, who has addresses in Ceres (Stanislaus County) and Fremont.
Authorities said they believe Popal was the same driver who ran over and killed a 55-year-old man walking in a bicycle lane in Fremont, at Fremont Boulevard near Ferry Lane, just after noon. That crash scene is just blocks from Popal's Fremont address, where he had most recently been living.
Popal was arrested at a Walgreens at Spruce and California streets.
In San Francisco, the attacks began around 1 p.m., but it was unclear in what order:
• Two people, one of them a child, were critically injured around by a sport-utility vehicle on the 3500 block of California Street in Laurel Heights.
• Three people were hit at California and Fillmore streets. Witnesses said they included a man with a broken hip and a woman with a gashed head.
• Two people were seriously hurt at Bush and Pierce streets and one person was seriously injured at Bush and Buchanan streets, police said. One person suffered minor injuries in an incident at 1850 Fillmore Street.
• Two other people suffered minor injuries when they were hit at Pine and Divisadero streets, and another two were hit and suffered minor injuries at Divisadero and Bush Street.
"It was like 'Death Race 2000,' " firefighter Danny Bright said at California and Fillmore streets, as an ambulance stood nearby. "Guys were walking down the sidewalk and the guy just came up and ran them over. The guy went crazy.''
Fire Lt. Mindy Talmadge said Mayor Gavin Newsom had been notified and was coordinating the response with the command post at Spruce and California streets.
This afternoon, Newsom left City Hall saying he was en route to a hospital -- presumably San Francisco General, where seven people had been admitted.
Are university students required to read the United States Constitution and The Declaration If Independence of the Thirteen Colonies?
Why is prayer banned in school and on sports fields while Muslims are forcing schools to provide prayer mats and private screened rooms for Muslims to to "pray" five times a day?
Why do schools prohibit students from wearing clothes of their choice, while bowing to the demands of Muslims to wear face coverings and burkas?
Why are Muslim college professors allowed to teach and inject Muslim philosophy with there subjects and American teachers are fired for displaying the Ten Commandments?
It seems like we are bowing down and surrendering.
I do not like it.
Dear Mr. Fitzgerald,
I read your letter and got mad. I probably shouldn't have done it, but I forwarded it to Carl Ernst and several professors and deptartments at UNC. I only received one reply, from Jim O'Hara, department of classics:
Who are you, since you do not identify yourself except by a yahoo
signature?
Where did you learn to write so badly? Vague deatil where specifics
would have been easy to find, exaggerarted claims in extreme language
("conveyed absolutely nothing"). The claim that Sells now doubts what
he has done is impressive, until we realize that this is pure
mind-reading on your part. Classic illegitimate rhetorical tricks pile
one after another--the straw man, the distorted claim, the ignoring of
history, the quaint notion that students would passively get their
information only from one book, instead of having at their fingertips
countless resources for learning about the complexity of all religions.
"Dear Mr. Fitzgerald,
I read your letter and got mad"
This is not Mr. Fitzgerald. But I read your letter and got mad.
"I probably shouldn't have done it, but I forwarded it to Carl Ernst and several professors and deptartments at UNC. I only received one reply, from Jim O'Hara, department of classics:"
What you did was right. What they will do, is to avoid the subject altogether.
"Who are you, since you do not identify yourself except by a yahoo
signature? "
One who speaks the truth about islam, has to conceal his identity. Ask salman rushdie. Or, think of Theo van Gogh.
"Vague deatil where specifics
would have been easy to find, "
You can find the specifics on this site itself, if you want to find the specifics. If you do not trust this site, go to another. Please do find about the specifics, before making your next comment.
"the distorted claim, the ignoring of
history,"
And in case you fail to find the specifics, please go through history. I'll make your job easier. Go through the book(s) on the Indus Valley Civilization, 9th century onwards.
"complexity of all religions."
I know of only one religion that makes it compulsary for its followers to make their kids perform the qurbani (sacrifice, killing) using the halal (sawing off head) method. Not a clean kill. We shall discuss other complexities later. This is a simple fact.
On another thread ("A Tribute to Carl Ernst") I posted what should have been posted here:
Those who decide, on their own, to forward articles put up at JihadWatch, might try to make sure that their own accompanying remarks are kept to a minimum. "This may be of interest" or "FYI" is enough, is more than enough. The intended recipients should not be distracted from the text itself. The article's author, having no control over its being forwarded, deserves to have other words kept to an absolute minimum. The recipient who then chooses to read what is sent may then decide on its cogency without having that judgment affected by words written not by the article's author, but by the article's forwarder.
[Posted by: Hugh at September 2, 2006 09:44 PM]