Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Thursday, August 16, 2012

Rape Jihad In Colorado Springs?

(hat tip to Infidel Bloggers Alliance)

AP photo and text:

Five men from Iraq that have been arrested for investigation of rape-related charges are seen in undated photos provided by the Colorado Springs Police Department. The are, from the left; Ali Mohammed Hasan Al Juboori, Sarmad Fadhi Mohammed, Yasir Jabbar Jasim, Mustafa Sataar Al Feraji, and Jasim Mohammed Hassin Ramadon. The men were arrested after a woman was seriously injured after trying to break up a fight in Colorado Springs. Police say the attack in Colorado Springs was reported Sunday, Aug. 12, 2012. Authorities said the woman suffered serious internal injuries and was taken to a hospital. Sarmad Fadhi Mohammed and Jasim Mohammed Hassin Ramadon are accused of sexual assault and being an accessory. Mustafa Sataar Al Feraji, Ali Mohammed Hasan Al Juboori, and Yasir Jabbar Jasim are accused of being accessories.
From the Miami Herald, dated August 15, 2012:
Jasim Mohammed Hassin Ramadon, 22, [a]n Iraqi man hailed as a hero for helping U.S. soldiers in Iraq is one of five Iraqis accused of rape-related charges after a woman suffered serious injuries during a sex assault in Colorado Springs.

[...]

Ramadon was featured in "A Soldier's Promise," a combat memoir by Army First Sgt. Daniel Hendrex, published in 2009, that detailed his relationship with Ramadon as a teenager who risked his life to provide information to U.S. soldiers deployed in Husaybah, a town in Al Anbar Province of Iraq.

[...]

Lt. Howard Black said Wednesday the attack on the woman was "one of the most horrific assaults I have ever seen."...
Read it all HERE.

It is interesting to note how long Ramadon has been under Western influence.  Of course, perhaps he turned on his own over in Iraq only because of his mother's threat to kill him.  As I said, read it all.  And while you're at it, note the news story's headline: "Iraqi hero charged in Colorado Springs sex assault."

Google search results for rape jihad

Two specifics from the above Google search:

1. Rape jihad in Denmark  According to this source:
100 percent of convicted rapists in Oslo have non-Western background.
2. Rape jihad in Sweden

If you are so inclined, you can find more information about rape jihad at the above Google-search link.

Was the sexual assault in Colorado Springs rape jihad? Maybe, maybe not. Possibly more details will come out later – IF the cries of "Islamphobia!" do not silence the media.

There does seem to be little doubt that rape jihad is underway in Scandinavia and the UK.  Also recall the horror of Darfur and elsewhere in Africa during the Twenty-first Century — not during the Dark Ages.

53 comments:

  1. We abhor whenever a man forces himself on a woman for sexual gratification. I remember a time in America when the men folk within that community dealt with whoever did such a thing, and it wasn’t pretty. But this wasn’t about sexual gratification. It is among the worst examples of terrorism. Will a liberal state provide this woman with justice, or will social engineers conclude this woman was just asking for it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. One more reason to not spend one more drop of blood over there. I don't give a damn how much one of them may have helped us. The still come from a culture incompatible with ours, and taking help from them just obligates us to bring them here so they can do stuff like this.

    ReplyDelete
  3. My understanding is that Al-Azhar University endorses umdat al-salik, the authorized rape of women. “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.” We don’t know what happens to the child, although we may assume there is a rape of children, too. Now, even if we dispense with stereotypes, this is still barbaric behavior. Worse, no one from the Islamic world condemns such barbarism. Through silence, they give consent … heathens.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I had not seen this, but was reminded of all the rape rings, young slave rings in the UK.

    Strange that at least some of these men are portrayed as heroes and good people. I will go read the full article.

    Debbie
    Right Truth
    http://www.righttruth.typepad.com

    ReplyDelete
  5. I will never cease to be amazed at the incredible depths of nothingness we get from the "women's" groups in the US and around the world on how Islam treats women.

    From rape to beatings to acid attacks, cattle are treated better in the Muslim world.

    Yet nothing but crickets chirping.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This treatment of women in Islamic societies goes back to the time of Mohammad and likely goes back a lot earlier than that in Arab society, before Islam. Islam has carried it forward to today whereas everyone else became civilized, pretty much, anyway.

    Non-Muslim females are considered fair game for sexual assault, even more than Muslim women, especially if they're unaccompanied by a male relative or husband. A good comparison is that unlike other game, there's no hunting season on cottontail rabbits, you can shoot them all year long. That's the attitude.

    I don't think this is sexual jihad, I think it's sexually repressed Muslim men acting on the basis of their Islamic upbringing instead of our Western ways. This is just how they are.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Obviously, our society is replete with vile behavior. But unlike the culture from whence these vermin were spawned we do not condone it. "Honor Killing" comes to mind!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Great idea, Jon. Since these accused have dishonored an American woman, we should kill them immediately —in a public setting —televised if possible —syndicated for re-runs later on.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think Mustang makes a legitimate point. What would happen a westerner that dishonored a woman in any Islamic country?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sounds like Mustang just left his Knights of the White Camellia meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I love reading the perspective of some of the men commenting, women are not just objects to used, and respect them.

    It is not like that with Islam. The men are taught that women are nothing but property and can be used however they see fit.

    I hope those SOB's pay for their crimes dearly. I wouldn't mind seeing them executed promptly, but it will never happen.

    My prayers go out to that poor woman. How frightening.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I have just the remedy for these Muslime annimals----->

    www.castrator.com/
    Or if ya are the humane type a bullet between the running lights works too.
    This type of thing will never change with the Muslime savages, and too bad somebody did'nt teach her how to handle a .45 for the scenario she was in.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm riding out with Josey Wales

    ReplyDelete
  14. What else but evil may we all expect from people who follow the wicked religion of Islam ?.

    ReplyDelete
  15. String 'em up, lop off their genitalia with a machete, then let them slowly bleed to death -- in the public square.

    These events should be televised during prime time on every network channel.

    An open invitation to leave the USA within thirty days or be subject to incarceration and summary execution should be issued to all Muslims -- black and otherwise.

    ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION, IT IS A PERVERSION.

    The one thing we cannot afford to tolerate is INTOLERANCE.

    Islam is the quintessence of intolerance.

    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
  16. As per usual all the assumptions, blog-propoganda and personal bigotries come out rather than people simply saying that they really do not the subject or asking intelligent questions instead.

    "My understanding is that Al-Azhar University endorses umdat al-salik, the authorized rape of women". No, Al-Azhar has never said that and cut & paste examples of what decisions were made in the 6th century represents - well just that.

    People have got to learn three simple facts about Islam, Islamic History and the Muslim world. One is context, one is defining what is actually Islamic and what is cultural and that the same rules of what you would apply to our own history, faith and culture should apply when judging others.

    Now we all know that puritinical and militant Islamists are going to put their version, now the question is why do people here have to accept their version and not the version of the majority? Equally, why is it that you assume that these animals represent the majority when often the majority of victims are themselves also Muslim but do not believe their cr*p?

    Context is probably my biggest beef with the garbage that some people pull out. Especially when it comes to the subject of rape, honor killings and abuse of women in general. I say this professionally as the vast majority of my work over 30 years has been social justice.

    Rape, spousal abuse and even what we call honor-killings is a GLOBAL problem and in fact the Muslim world is in the spot-light but NOT the main cause. There have been more rapes over the last decade in the Congo basin and in South Africa than the entire rest of Africa as a continent. Though statistics are purposefully not kept, it is assumed by most agencies that in fact Papua New Guinea has the highest rape in a non-conflict zone. How about wife-beatings? Nepal rates the highest with India coming next with Serbia and the Ukraine not very far behind. Honor-killings? Easy, India followed by Pakistan.

    When it comes to rather silly accussations of "Intolerance", one must simply pitty the level of ignorance for such statements. One must assume that some form of intelligent homework was made when it came to such comments and frankly, it obviously has not happened. When it comes down to coordinated, religously justified intolerance, Islam actually does way better over the centuries than our own faith. As usual 9/11 is the real excuse and a purposeful confusion of being in the developing world and all the miseries associated with it as somehow being the religion itself.

    Try harder people, your true colours are showing!

    Damien Charles

    ps, the rerm Rape Jihad is not only undeserved but a bad joke.

    ReplyDelete
  17. clarification

    the term Rape Jihad is unjustified and a serious slap in the face of all the countless victims of rape whom were victims of male dominance. By attempting to place it on a specific group or cause you ignore the reality and all those millions of victims simply because of that word "power".

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  18. "An open invitation to leave the USA within thirty days or be subject to incarceration and summary execution should be issued to all Muslims -- black and otherwise."

    FT's fascist neo-N*zi colours have yet again come out, showing that sickening values exist all over the world. I am sure there is a blog in Karachi or Tehran quoting FT's abhorant fantasies as being a perfect example of American core values......

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  19. Damien Charles,
    I knew that this post would light up your board.

    I have never stated that Muslim males are the only males that rape women.

    However, you must be familiar with the Janjaweed. "Allahu akbar!" all over the place.

    I used the term "rape jihad" because I wanted to use the term and because it is a form of shorthand.

    I'm sure that you'd be as enraged if I had used the term "Muslim men."

    Whatever.

    True colors? Think what you will.

    Also, note that I put a question mark at the end of the post. I'm trying to get more information about what happened in Colorado Springs. Thus far, I've found nothing else. But I do have no doubt if Christians had raped a Muslima that CAIR would be all over this story as an example of victimizing and targeting Muslims.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I suppose what else can one expect from a religion and culture that treats women as nothing more than meat.

    ReplyDelete
  21. AOW,

    most of my comments were based on those whom commented, mind you even with the question mark, I think throwing in the word Jihad simply implies a lack of knowledge and an incorrect assumption of a coordinated religious effort.

    If you really know Muslims then you will know that the term Allah-u-Akbhar is said regularly for a great number of reasons, both good and bad and can be used simply as our often used OMG, JC! and even holy-cr*p by some. So when you see an islamist firing a rocket he will say it, if you see for instance the rebels against Assad in Syria hearing an artillary hitting their house they will also say it. I was in KL early last year for a meeting and I slipped on a stair and simply bounced my fat-behind down a whole set of stairs and at least four people said it. When you ask someone they will say that "God is Great" regardless, for it could have been worse and you should be happy for what He gave us and is God not great? You cannot argue with that logic.

    A last comment - I consider FT's statement to be pure mean-spirited hate and hypocritical as he is spouting what he accuses and entire faith of. I am sure that you are aware that even in your country with your freedom of expression laws, if he published that statement in public he would be charged under a number of federal laws, let alone what an individual state has. If he was talking about Jews, mind you, I am sure you would have deleted the statement, am I right?

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  22. Damien Charles,
    Does "Allahu akbar" mean God is great or Allah is the greatest of the gods? Perhaps you can clarify that point.

    When Christians say "OMG" and "JC," it is considered a breaking of the Commandment not to take the Lord's name in vain. Muslims, on the other hand, frequently call upon the name of Allah is all sorts of contexts. Strange? Pagan? Some say so. I mentioned pagan as the frequent use of a god's name is a hallmark of certain ancient pagan religions -- or so I read somewhere. I've also read that the Israelites lost the "correct" pronunciation of Jehovah because they didn't pronounce His name.

    I don't have time to look up the info online because, as you can likely tell by my sparse commenting lately, things to prevent blogging are going on here in this household.

    Anyway, I would not have deleted FT's statement had he made that statement about Jews. He hasn't commented in an unflattering manner about Jews at my web site, but he certainly has elsewhere. Furthermore, I rarely delete comments. Note the caveat at the top of the comments form and the disclaimer in my sidebar.

    For the record, I have never advocated what FT stated.

    ReplyDelete
  23. As I am not Muslim, this forces me to rely on other “more knowledgeable” sources to help me understand the tenets of this religion. Now I have two sources: the internet, and Damien.

    My internet sources tells me the following, “The Umdat al-Salik, was composed in the 14th Century by Shihabuddin Abu al-’Abbas Ahmad ibn an-Naqib al-Misri (1302–1367). It is a classical manual of Shafi’i fiqh, meaning it is an authoritative summation of the Islamic jurisprudence– also known as Shari’a– associated with the Sunni Shafi’i school. al Misri based the Umdat al-Salik on the previous Shafi’i works of Nawawi and Abu Ishaq as-Shirazi.

    “The Umdat al-Salik is broken into sections dealing with every area of life Shari’a is concerned with– from epistemological questions on “sacred knowledge” to practical legal rulings on marriage, divorce, trade, inheritance, fasting, zakat, etc. As Shari’a is the basis for the Islamic legal/political doctrine, the section on Jihad is located within chapter 9, “Justice.” It states, plainly:

    “Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion.”

    As to the term “rape jihad,” I’m not sure how we can say that rape furthers the establishment of religion, but I think it is possible to make the argument that rape jihad punishes non-believer females for being infidels.

    We therefore find ourselves at this junction: either these sources are incorrect, or Damien is incorrect. I feel confident that Damien will assure us that only he is the repository of true Islamic wisdom, because only Damien has the true context … everyone else is a stupid American incapable of thinking as clearly as Damien is.

    ReplyDelete
  24. You were asking about an Arabic term. Here is the answer:

    Allah Akbar: Akbar is superlative form from k b r, to be big great, Akbar means greatest.

    Arabic is made up of three letter roots. Hope this helps.

    Tammy Swofford

    ReplyDelete
  25. The greatest god? Sheesh. There is but one God, and his name isn't Al.

    ReplyDelete
  26. AOW and others.

    Simple. Allah is the Arabic word for God and because their Koran and thier revelations were realeased in Arabic they will continue to use the Arabic word for it in as much frequency as Jews will use the word in Hebrew. Add to that modern pan-Arab nationalism and that Arabs lead conservatism, they will ensure that it is so. Either way it simply means God. You will find arguments saying otherwise and it will all come from the same-same blogs and anti-Islam campaigners or the Evangelical movement whom are the only Christian movement that has not accepted that Islam, Christianity and Judiasm are all worshipping the same God.

    Secondly, Sam's hypothisis is flawed from his choice cut and paste from Wiki by noting that he has only read from one (Shafi) school of jurispudence. It is also flawed by his interjecting his own assumptions of what is Islamic and Sharia.

    He has also chosen one form of Jihad and not both nor has he added context by simply explaining them.

    There are two forms of Jihad in Islam. The "greater Jihad" and the "lesser Jihad". The "greater Jihad" is the personal jihad of self-improvement (jihad simply means struggle). The second "lesser jihad" is to defend Islam itself from attack.

    Now the main contextual point here is that the current crop of "jihaddis" are the minority radical groups that have waged war and have claimed a jihad (the lesser one) and have sold it, pushed it and continue to push it. Sam has basically fallen for their propoganda and, as has Robert Spencer, implied that only the radical view is the correct view. Again, putting context, that is obviously false. In reality a jihad can only be claimed by the head of the fiqh (one of the five schools of Islam) as can fatwas (religious directives or edicts) but, because there is no central organisation, radical such as Bin Laden (not an Imam) have not only declared jihads but fatwas. These days there are televangalist Imams whom also declare their own fatwas.

    Thus Sam is incorrect in his sources, assumptions but also on basic rules.

    Now, the end result of these incorrect assumptions is that no the concept of "rape jihad" simply cannot apply as first it is not a jihad in any fashion and two because there is no basis that "raping non-believes" is not proscribed in Islam in any fashion. Provide real source evidence, not Spencer please.

    Regards


    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  27. Now we're getting somewhere, AOW. Inasmuch as Damien rejects Shafi’i fiqh, this places him among the most knowledgeable Islamists in the entire world. Do you think he'd autograph Jon's copy of the Koran?

    ReplyDelete
  28. What?

    Damien Charles is a Muslim?

    Crap.

    Who saw that coming?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Sam,

    is it not logic that if you are going to discuss a topic to the point of condemnation or criticism that you should at least know something about the topic?

    The answer is an obvious yes and that is why you should avoid obviously embarassing yourself when it comes to Islamic studies.

    How many differing schools of islamic jurispudence (fiqh) are there?

    When you finish working that one out, come back and start a discussion with some credibility please. I did not do a degree and learn Fusa Arabic for wasting my time with worthless arrogance.

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  30. Actually, Damien … I was only teasing you. AOW and I had this bet going … and I was saying, “Yes, I think Damien has a sense of humor.” Well, I lost the bet. If you’ll give me your address, I’ll send you a roast pork sandwich.

    I know there are perhaps as many as 12 schools of various jurisprudence, made possible I suppose because Islam is composed of fascist pagan swine whose best attempt at writing scripture was plagiarizing the Hebrew Bible. Plus, only pagan swine would contrive to cause more pain and suffering among their own people than from all other external sources, combined. That this sort of thing interests you speaks volumes, does it not?

    I suspect you are a pagan, too, Damien. I think this because you are an insufferable ass and there’s just no other explanation for your boorish behavior. And by the way, I’ll believe you are a barrister when Mohammed converts to Catholicism.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Sam,

    your logic even fails you when you try and justify garbage.

    I detect a foul smell of religous bigotry in your cr*p and frankly speaking I am more insulted by such behaviour then most other actions. To me the best of Christian ethics is understanding and that requires just a bit of knowledge. Thus when I see worthless jab-come-whine such as "contrive to cause more pain and suffering among their own people than from all other external sources, combined" which is factually wrong - I simply reject the author as being another "wannabe".

    You may consider my style boorish and whatever, but I only express my view like anyone else and I certainly admit to enjoying pointing out those whom rant without facts. That group is the ugly smelly stain on the web.

    What you believe I am is as valued as your failures in facts and context, I stand by my thirty years in social justice law and that I can smell BS and have the balls to point it out when I do.

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  32. I keep coming back to this from the news article:

    Lt. Howard Black said Wednesday the attack on the woman was "one of the most horrific assaults I have ever seen."

    Now, Colorado Springs has a very high rate of sexual assault. Related to the 1% Muslim population? Maybe, maybe not.

    But I digress.

    With such a high rate of sexual assault in that city, I'm CERTAIN that the police chief has seen "the worst." Yet, he made the above statement. Why?

    Could it be that the woman was subjected to FGM? Of course, FGM is usually forced upon children. But did Ramadon, in a state of intoxication, do such a horrible thing to this woman?

    If such a horror did happen, then you can bet your bottom dollar that the information will not get out to the public -- unless, of course, the victim herself goes public with it. But even if she does go public, will the media tell it?

    ReplyDelete
  33. As I have done extensive research over a decade now, with primary source documents from the Qur'anic Sciences my daily lot, I have little patience with the ignorant who proclaim Jews, Christians and Muslims worship the same god.

    Nope. "Far be it from Allah to have begotten a son" comes to mind. Allah has no son. Islam teaches that when Isa/Jesus - their prophet returns, he will kill Dajjal (the Anti-Christ), break the Cross and slay the pig. He will institute Shariah law on global scale.

    How is it possible that the "same god" will destroy the tenets of 2/3of his adherents?

    Illogical rants merely make me smile.

    The above, are just two small examples amongst hundreds of additional textual examples and biographical nuances from the time of Muhammad. These sources, reside on my personal library shelf. Some of my books, cannot be found in the public sector. They come straight from the school rooms of Saudi Arabia.

    "Anonymous" comments completely lack merit.

    Until we get it right, we will not be able to generate the necessary policies which will assure that America remains a healthy melting pot. Blatant lies, do more harm than good.

    We can never truly be inter-faith. But that should not impede basic kindness to our neighbor.

    Tammy

    ReplyDelete
  34. Tammy,
    "Far be it from Allah to have begotten a son"...

    Thank you for commenting and informing others here of what is really present in the Quranic Sciences, which are primary sources.

    ReplyDelete
  35. A MUST-READ!

    Videos and story!

    The victim was 53 years old.

    ...After the alleged attack, Jasim Ramadon left with the woman. He came back to the apartment without her allegedly saying, “Man she’s going to die and there was blood everywhere.” The woman called Springs Police the next day.

    Officers say there was blood soaked clothes and shoes inside her apartment.


    Much, much more at the above link.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Tammy/AOW,

    No, Tammy has not given any such reference or source.

    Tammy,

    With all respect, your basing your logic on what you want as an outcome not on allowing the basic facts and views chose the end result. I suspect you may also do so based on your own religious community view and from that point, you may also simply be baised (and most certainly in a minority).

    Two simple points before I point out the basics. I have studied Islam not only through a degree and learning the language but also 30 years of working with Muslims, travelling in many Muslim countries but also having co-chaired a bi-annual EU/ASEAN legal framework group. I live in Gibraltar and travel to North Africa (14 odd-miles away) on a regular bases.

    The first point is for anyone that quoting the Koran from your own perspective fails every time. Are you quoting the interpretation from one of the five schools of jurispudence? No, obviously not.

    Second point is, as mentioned before, your also looking from your standpoint and your desired result and then seeking out confirmation.

    Third point, believing in the same God is the issue, how such belief and how each faith interprets that belief is not the issue.

    Now the main simple fact, that kills off your view (though of course you can keep it and be in that minority that will think so) is that the Catholic Church, the various Protestant Communnities, all the Eastern Orthodox Churches, Copts and Assyrians and many, many more (including the World Council of Churches - the international body that represents over 90 per cent of Christianity) says that the God (or Allah in Arabic as also used by Maronite and Melkite Christians, why is that?) is the same "One True God" as worshipped by Christians and Jews and thus Islam is as much an Abrahamic Faith as ours is.

    I suggest you look up the Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian Religions of the Second Vatican Council (Nostra Aetate),
    "Part three goes on to say that the Catholic Church regards the Muslims with esteem, and then continues by describing some of the things Islam has in common with Christianity and Catholicism: worship of One God, the Creator of Heaven and Earth, Merciful and Omnipotent, Who has spoken to men; the Muslims' respect for Abraham and Mary, and the great respect they have for Jesus, whom they consider to be a Prophet and not God. "

    Also you may wish to do some research with "Lumen Gentium 16" which explains further the above and why.

    A good read would be at Crisis Magazine which wrote a well thought out item on the subject - see http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/do-catholics-and-muslims-worship-the-same-god

    Now, not to push just the Catholic view but how about others? The World Council of Churches will disagree with you as well. the "Ecumenical Considerations on Christian-Muslim Relations" simply says so (written first in 1971, then rewritten in 1978 and again in 1992) refering to the need for the two faiths that represent more than half of humanity to aspire to their teachings and shared faith in the One True God.

    The issue of Jesus being the Son of God and Lord Saviour though an important difference in our three faiths (remembering that Jews do not believe in Jesus at all!), is ultimately beside the point and not relevant to this argument.

    As I said, you are obviously free to believe what you want, but please do not do the fundamentalist/evangelical/emotional argument that simply "because I or my pastor says so I will not hear of it". Fringe is as fringe does and your welcome to be so but please do not assume you are speaking for the rest of us whom make up more than 90 per cent of Christendom.

    Lastly, if you quote something then quote it in total and get an intepretation from those that do it professionally and from their faith, not anothers, it smacks of agenda.

    With respect

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  37. Damien Charles,
    And you don't have your own perspective? C'mon. That's dishonest, and you must know that.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Damien,

    You quote entirely from Western sources and the opinion of ecumenical organizations. I quote, from primary source documentation - the words of the Qur'an (the ACTIVE voice of Allah, who has not begotten a son), the Sunnah, and the tafseer (exegesis) of the most well know muhaddithun.

    I prefer the Usool al Fiqh as expressed in as-Sihaah as-Sittah and lean toward the canonical corpus of the man who was born in what is now known as modern Uzbekistan. Were I to swing from the other side, I would ignore qiyaas as a source of jurisprudence. My research on the jurisprudential schools lean toward the Hanafi flank, and the writings of a jurist from the Abassid dynasty. I also have writings from Shi'a chain of command an letters from a moderate Grand Ayatollah in response to various questions.

    Not the same god. Not by any stretch of opinion which is not supported by primary source documents from Islamic primary texts.

    Take a leap on the accusation of tainted research. My research cubicle is a sterile, apolitical environment. I have mentored under PhD Shariah lawyers - we speak the truth, each in the presence of the other. That is part of the basic understanding when we dialogue. Mentorship, has been under one of the 500 most influential Muslims in the world. I talk to people, some analysts only write about. So take a leap, regarding this issue, Damien. Text and PhD lawyers support that Allah is the god of anyone but the Muslim believer.

    I believe in intellectual honesty. You have hit the wrong target.

    Tammy Swofford

    ReplyDelete
  39. AOW,

    no, I am reporting what the accepted view and facts are. I have, in fact, kept my own view out of it.

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  40. Tammy,

    Again you are doing your own interpretation of Islamic texts and views and have not actually made any stated view or position from the Muslim side.

    The overiding point is that Muslims clearly state that they are worshiping the same God as we do simply by their assumption (again REGARDLESS if we accept it) that their Prophet is a continuation of Prophets, that they accept Moses, Abraham and even Jesus - thus they are talking about the same God. In addition, they state that the Koran is the next revalation that overtakes the Old and New Testiments.

    You have clearly avoided those points which are in fact the only point regardless of how much you would like to imply that interpretations (that you have made) must be in conflict with that view.

    I have also pointed out that the vast majority of the established Churches (and I should add that established Judaism as well - and they have an input which we must not deny) also agree that they are worshiping the same God.

    Be honest Tammy, you are attempting to look for evidence of what you want not what you have discovered and I am pretty sure that it comes more down to your own particular (and fringe) religous view point.

    I really suggest that you, as I have done, taken the purely academic (and frankly logical) route and not one that has agendas. For instance, I am a Catholic and yes the Catholic Church (as I have shown) views it as such but I chose to do so from my own violition. Sure there is even some dispute and debate within our own Church. The previous Pope (John Paul II) said he was not absolutely sure but he agreed that the position held by the Church was ovewhelmingly solid and thus chose to accept it.

    Regardless, it takes a bit of strength to avoid personal grudges and bais and just look at the facts. It helps when, as I have pointed out to you, that you try not to put your own interpretation on the texts from another faith - I do not, have not, and just quoted from what is widely accepted by the five major schools of jurispudence - fiqh. None of them go off on some baseless tangent that they do not believe in another God, they do the opposite. You may wish to refer to the term "People of the Book" and how when on Judgement Day all good Muslims and those People of the Book (ie Jews and Christians) will stand "shoulder to shoulder" and witness God's presence. Actually the Shia and Abadi say that they will witness the "truth".

    In fact, Tammy, for someone who says they have read the Koran and studied the faith, you should be fully aware that a good one third of the Koran is explaining and the continuation from the Old Testiment. Now, since they are talking about the same Prophets, that same Book, why would anyone state that they are worshipping a different God?

    Your consistant reference to "who did not begot a son" tells me that you are just another Evangelical who just cannot bear the thought that someone is talking about the same God and yet has rejected that the Lord Jesus is God's Son on this Earth and that must disqualify them. Sure, it certainly does not make them Christian, but then Jews reject Christ the Saviour altogether, do they worship another God?

    Serious arguments please.

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  41. Tammy, just a final comment. You can claim to be in contact and discuss all sorts of things with all sorts of people. Until you come out with a clear source reference that states - their God and our God your argument is going to fail. Regardless of which fiqh you may follow or prefer - which is somehow a bit illogical since your not a Musilm - you will find that none have. We all know that Islam rejects the divinity of Christ and the Holy Spirt and pressing that issue only makes your argument more suspicious and agenda driven. Just cough up the facts or simply avoid delving deep into an area that apparently your way over your head in.

    If you wish to drop names go ahead but be prepared to stand by them.

    As part of my work and community activities (as well as being able to speak Arabic and my studies) I have had the pleasure of sitting down with Abdallah Bin Bayyah a member of the international Ilslamic Fiqh Council, I believe he teaches in Saudi (he is Mauretanian) and amongst the most respected experts on fiqh on the planet. He stated clearly that we all worship the same God and even can and do pray together.

    If you go to Russell Square in London and visit SOAS (a part of London University) you can join in the Wednesday evening multi-faith discussions and ask the question. At least three of the Department of the Study of Religions' main lecturors and professors will be present. As my degree comes from their I am known well enough (my Arabic Letters comes from Fes in Morocco though). Professor Abdel-Haleem will tell you and quote you enough Qur'an (he is actually a hafiz) to put your comments in place. If you do, say high to him as he is mostly retired now and much loved. Professor Jan-Peter Hartung, though concentrating on Iranian studies, is an expert on Islamic Philosophy. Mind you, a regular on Wednesdays, is my friend Dr Sian Hawthorne and considering she specialises in myth and myth-making - you may wish avoid her......

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  42. Damien,
    I think that Tammy is done with you.

    And she may not be checking this thread again.

    ReplyDelete
  43. AOW,

    I am not suprised as she bit off more than she can chew and exposed her ugly agenda.

    Simply put she was caught out and frankly is unable to justify her deliberate attempt at fraud.

    If you talk to her or I see her comment on another thread I will simply expose and accuse her of being exactly that, a sham and a fraud. She deserves no less than that.

    I wanted to post a list of details and quotes showing without a doubt just that but after two lengthy comments I thought it excesive and was going to allow her to sink deeper, but the facts are simple:

    1. She actually attempted to misquote a text from the Koran - blatant fraud. Her quote misphrases the word in Arabic of "their" (usually "hum" added to end of word) for "they/them" (hum/hunna) and thus changes the context completely and thus the so called (and poor) crux of her sole argument.
    2. She avoided context completely and avoided the full text of that Surah and others around it that simply point out word for word that Jews, Christians and Sabians will go to heaven along with Muslims because of their faith in God (ie the same).
    3. She purposefully stayed away from the major component of the Koran itself which is the acknowledgement of the "Injil" which is Arabic for the Gospels.
    4. If her claim was true then that can not be possible at all because, as I am sure she probably knows but wishes to hide, is that Islam says there are four holy books in total - "Zabur" (Psalms), "Tawrat" (the Torah), "Injil" (Gospels), and the Qur'an.
    5. She claimed that an Islamic fiqh says so, simply put she lied, it does not and somehow I am sure there is no (top 500 scholar) involved unless of course it is Robert Spencer (sic)!

    Though you do not like my language, the simple fact is she is the worst form of hack and if I see a posting from her anywhere I will ensure that I point that out, my major pleasure in life is exposing frauds who use September 11, public fears and other agendas to push hate.

    She can hide in shame, most people when they get caught out do so (or cut your posts if they can). If she is a "friend" of yours, bad luck, she deserves it and personally I think you should avoid frauds, their smell tends to stick.

    Why would I go out of my way to do so? That is easy, there is one thing having a different opintion, there is another going out of your way to destort simple facts to promote your opinion, the lowest of the low. Interestingly, she attempted another feat in the clever-disgusting way, instead of being Evangelical and trying to deny that most Christians recoginise Islam as worshiping the same God, she attempted to imply that Islam itself does not recognise Christians and Jews worshipping God. Either way, we must ask the motive - to create division, hate and ridicule? Often a failed journalist or wannabe has to invent scandal to try and look important. Sad.

    With respect


    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  44. Just to add for contextual reasons some simple clear and indisputable evidence of Tammy's attempt to recreate history.

    Compare her argument with the following:

    "And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit."
    (Quran 29:46)

    "And there are, certainly, among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), those who believe in God and in that which has been revealed to you, and in that which has been revealed to them, humbling themselves before God. They do not sell the Verses of God for a little price, for them is a reward with their Lord. Surely, God is Swift in account."
    (Quran 3:199)

    "Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in God and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (Quran 2:62)

    Even though I dislike the western use of the term, the historical concept of dhimmi clearly existed based on the fact that Jews, Christians and Sabians also worshipped the same God and thus required a status (in their way of thinking of course).

    Just by the side, an interesting fact. When Islam appeared, Christianity considered them as just other heretical Christians but Christians nontheless and it was not until Pope Urban II in the beginning of the 11th century declared a Crusade (holy war) that somehow they were no longer of the same faith - and yet they still agreed that they were talking about the same God.

    As I said above, Tammy is a fraud and of the worst type.

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  45. Damien Charles,
    You really need to get a grip! Anybody and everybody who disagree with you are branded "Fraud!" by you.

    Think about it.

    Look in the mirror.

    Get that ego of yours under control. It's unbecoming, sir.

    ReplyDelete
  46. AOW,

    No, I with respect disagree totally.

    I may very well be verbouse and go on quite a bit but here is EXACTLY the point I made when I came here in the first place.

    Give me facts and I can say nothing, give an opinion and I have respected it and acknowledged everybody's right.

    However, when someone bases their argument (ESPECIALLY when it comes to accussations and hate) on basic fraud and lies - I will point that out.

    There are limits.

    Also, and you can go back to any of my postings, when I call someone a fraud I do so with justification.

    What is personally disapointing is when blog-owners will thank, comment, recommend and praise questionable postings and opinions but when their is an obvious error or wrong-doing shown, it is shuffled quietly in the corner, ignored or defended by being told to "get a grip". Aparently facts, morality and justice has no place in such a sphere.

    I will hold my words but my point is made, no need to talk about hypocrisy right? Seeking acknowledgement for truth, out of the question.

    Damien Charles

    ReplyDelete
  47. Damien Charles,
    You insist on having the last word. Fine.

    Gotta go! Catching the therapy bus with Mr. AOW. Off to the hospital today.

    ReplyDelete
  48. "Also, and you can go back to any of my postings, when I call someone a fraud I do so with justification."

    Yes sir you are, indeed, "a legend in your own mind"!

    ReplyDelete
  49. AOW,
    I agree with you, after reading your analysis of Damien Charles unbecoming characteristics. It is really disconcerting to read most comments made by Damien Charles, who appears to "know it all" when he sounds just ignorant in too many occassions(despite his claim of being knowlegable). His reality is obviously different from what us infidels or others saw as reality. Is Damien Charles trying to insist that Moslems, Jews and Christians believe in the same God, even when us infidels or others believers believe otherwise? Moslems everywhere continued to spout so many contradictions, therefore it is even more puzzling to read about Damien various comments. I think everyone have their own perspective on what constitutes mostly myth and what constitutes mostly reality. While I noted that many christians distanced themselves from islam, there are instances in Asia where asian christians who tried to get close to islam, due to reason or reasons best known to themselves. Hopefully, more Christians will honestly distance themselves from such a totalitarian ideology such as islam that have so little respect or almost no respect for our infidel opinions or others opinions.
    WLIL

    ReplyDelete
  50. The problem is a "Rag Head" is unprediciable. They are spooky and you can [never] know where they are gonig to come from or do. From what I've seen they could be a neighibor with all good intentions until they decide to kill their daughters for trying to assimuiate. Or , next, decide to strap on a bomb and kill a bunch of innicent people. Muslims should either be into getting the worst parts of thier society out of the US or we should get them out(all of them)! I'd love to heare from DC on this one since he has no idea or, prehaps, he's one of them!

    ReplyDelete
  51. Middle Eastern is a good example with regard how unpredictably unpleasant those eastern people are. They expect United States of America help everytime when they go to war with each other and yet continue to blame United States of America for the slightest reason. Those rich moslems(with head covering or without head covering) became even more arrogant, more dangerous, more unpleasant, more unpredictable and more unrealiable after the Western people helped them to develop their backward eastern civilization.
    WLIL




    WLIL

    ReplyDelete
  52. WLIL,
    The West's dealings with Moslems over the past 1400 years have resulted in a disaster for the West -- sooner or later.

    We need an iron veil (Along the lines of the Iron Curtain) to wall ourselves off from them.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Another problem is moslems are noted to be only obsesssively supporting moslems(eg palestinian causes) or their related islamic agenda or islamic countries.
    Therefore, those moslems would take us infidels for a fool if any one of us infidels ignorantly support them.
    WLIL

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective