Friday, December 11, 2009

Christian Taliban Hypocrites Pat Robertson, John Hagee & Jerry Falwell Criticize Islam & Sharia

UPDATE 4:54 PM & 6:46 PM

"Behold I will bring them the Jewish people again unto their land that I gave unto their fathers. Behold I will send for many fishers and after will I send for many hunters. And they the hunters shall hunt them from every mountain and from every hill and from out of the holes of the rocks." Pastor Hagee quoting Jeremiah arguing first God sent Theodore Herzl to gather the Jews in Palestine and failing that God/ Jehovah sent the Hunter Hitler to punish the Jews with the Holocaust.And yet American Jews and Israelis call him their friend why can't they see he just believes in a different though biblical form of Anti-Semitism and a twisted version of History.

When all is said and done, however, the historical evidence indicates that the Jews of Islam, especially during the formative and classical centuries (up to the thirteenth century), experienced much less persecution than did the Jews of Christendom.
Quote From :
"The Church’s Doctrine of “Perpetual Servitude” was Worse than “Dhimmitude” " by Danios at, Nov. 30,2009

Topics For The Day:

*Evangelical Christians claim Superiority over Islam & Sharia Law

*Christian Taliban versus Islamic Taliban

*Both are intolerant and anti-pluralism and anti-Democracy

*Both are :Anti-Gay anti-Feminist anti-abortion

*Pro-Family- both want to reinstate GOD's Law

*Stoning versus whipping- Beheadings Versus Lynchings or Lethal Injection or Burned at the Stake

* " Halakha " versus " Shar'a "

* " Dhimmitude " Versus "Perpetual Servitude "

according to Christian "Dominionist" & "Reconstructionists" there are a whole litany of laws found in the Bible which would be reintroduced-ie incarcerating or executing someone for adultery , homosexuality, pre-marital sex, blasphemy, breaking the Sabbath law, practicing a different religion especially those considered to be Pagan, reading or ditributing banned books , films, videos or internet websites , or listening to the wrong kind of music.

Falwell and Robertson on The 700 Club after 9/11

The Dhimmitude and Islamification of Britain.Aug. 16,2008
CBN Pat Roberson & Britain Capitulation to Islamic Sharia Law

John Hagee Offends Millions in under Two Minute
Tolerance ,Diversity, Multiculturalism Evil

Gays, Lesbians, liberals, feminists, Pagans

Anyway we hear a lot these days about the Muslims in the West trying by one way or another to insist that they be permitted to practice Shari'a Law within their community. As mentioned previously in Canada and the United States Jews are permitted their own form of law within their communities which is called "Halakha".
If such religious laws do not conflict with the laws of the land then society can come up with some form of compromise. But where these religious laws offend the laws of the land or our sense of justice and fairness and notions such as equality. Women and children for instance must be treated in a manner acceptable to our societies laws and norms. Our society in Canada for instance we don't approve of men abusing, beating, or raping their girl friends or wives.

A woman even though married or even if she is a sex worker ie prostitute has the right to say no to sex to her spouse or lover or a client and if it is forced upon her this constitutes sexual assault or rape. The same goes for the rights of children no one a parent or not has the right to beat up their own or other peoples children-beating the shit out of your kid is immoral at least and is illegal. The state has a right and an interests in such forms of domestic violence. This would also goes for such barbaric practices as female circumcision or female genital mutilation . Women whether Muslims or other religious groups or ethnic groups like it or not women have a right to sexual pleasure.

Even if Muslims or other religious or ethnic groups insists that girls be married at a young age under 18 or so this does not mean that her husband has the right to have sex with her before she reaches the age which depending on the jurisdiction a man is permitted to have consensual relations with his wife but before that it is to be considered "Statutory Rape". This may offend some Muslims, or Christians ,or Hindus or Sikhs etc. but that's the way it goes.

Of course the Muslims who believe in a strict form of Sharia like their Christian Evangelical counterparts believe the Man/husband/father or eldest male is the head of the household and has the right to do as he pleases to his wife or his children because they are according to their religious view the property of the Man of the house. They therefore believe that they need not follow these laws since they are the laws of men and not Allah or the Quran's.

But under Shar'a Law or Halakha or Christian Evangelical some of the rights we now take for granted or for which we are still fighting for may not be recognized as yet by the religious legal entities. Where they come in conflict the Law of the Land must prevail.

Pat Robertson like most Evangelical Fundamentalists have been preaching that America and Western society have moved away from its original Judeo-Christian values which were based upon the Bible. They believe that Christianity is the only true religion that other religions are contrary to the word of God. They make an exception about Judaism not because they approve of Judaism but mainly because according to their reading of the Bible that Jewish people play a pivotal role in history and theology and end-times eschatology.

From the early days of the Christian Church it was believed that the Jews had been cursed and were dispersed throughout the world in the "Diaspora" because they had rejected Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah and had sentenced him to be crucified. The Jews up until recent times were therefore accused by the Christian Churches of "Deicide" that is the murder of God.

The Jews were depicted as the enemy of Jesus in the New Testament scriptures themselves and this condemnation of the Jewish people continued even into the twentieth century.The Church insisted that the Jews be treated as second class citizens and could be massacred from time to time but there must always remain a remnant of the Jews in order to witness the growth of Christianity and to bear witness to the Apocalypse and /or the Second Coming of the Messiah.

In the eschatology the Jews also play the role of witnesses to Armageddon, the Apocalypse and second coming but also it is believed according to The Book of Revelation that a number of Jews (144,000 ?)will in the Last Days convert to Christianity. According to the Book of Revelation the End- times clock as it were began counting down once Israel was once again a state. Evangelical Christians believe that the End-times will not come about until the Israelites rebuild Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem kick all the Non-Jews out of Israel and perform a sacrifice of "a pure red Heiffer" in the Temple(which is being bred we are told somewhere in Texas it appears?)

The Israelis and the Diaspora Jews are not too concerned about the motives of these Christian Evangelical extremists- they accept support wherever they can find it-this is understandable after 2,000 years of oppression by the Christian majority . Israel sees itself as a state besieged on all sides. Though the Israelis and American Jews may not realize that these Evangelicals have an ulterior motive to push for their own agenda and some think they can hasten the End-Times. But the Bible says they will not know when the end is near.

It is also noteworthy that Pastor Hagee argues that the Jewish people by refusing to move into Palestine when Theodore Herzel(1860-1904) suggested it in the late 19th century -since he was the Fisher for God -God got pissed off and sent a Hunter that is Adolph Hitler to punish the Jews once again. And yet Hagee claims to be a friend to Israel and all Jews- too bad the Israel's don't listen to Hagee's broadcast.

Pat Robertson and Evangelical Christians are not merely against multiculturalism and relativism and pluralism but like the Islamic Jihadists preach time and again that the notion of the Separation of Church and State is a modern innovation which was not the intent of America's Founding Fathers or the Constitution or The Bill of Rights or the Declaration of Independence. They believe therefore that there in fact should be a religious test- that is that they are either Christian or Jewish- for anyone running for public office or working in the government including the Pentagon, the military,the FBI and CIA and even school teachers and University Professors and other bureaucrats and professionals.

There are a host of reasons that can be brought to bear in judging the sincerity of Pat Robertson and other Evangelicals in raising the alarm of Shari'a and of the spread of Islam.It appears a bit disingenuous given that these Evangelicals are always saying how evil our current Western Civilization is because they believe it is run by anti-Christian anti-God "Secular Humanists"

Like the more orthodox or fundamentalist Muslims Pat and his "Fellow Travelers" are anti-feminist, anti-Gay, anti-abortion (in all cases ?) anti-ACLU, anti-The People For the American Way & are anti-UN & any and all so called International Laws and the pernicious notion of "Human Rights " for all and not just White American Evangelical Christian Males- the USA as God's chosen nation will only do God's biding and not man's.To the Evangelical Christian Fundamentalists and Dominonists this "liberal" age of Reason is merely a trial for Christians to go through before returning to Old Testament traditions and values.

They are also upset about American and Western society as being too promiscuous and hedonistic though they like the materialism big cars, mansions, Armani suits and they have a special hate on for the poor the disabled the mentally ill who are all categorized as being parasites(ala Hitler? Ayn Rand, Nietszche ,Machiavelli, Leo Strauss0 as John Hagee says "Let Them Starve" so how is this better than other religions-When one looks closely at Evangelical Fundamentalism there is no sense or glimmer of tolerance, understanding ,compassion, mercy . Their depiction of Jesus is some no-nonsense unsentimental sword wielding warrior (AK 47?) out to separate the "losers" from the "Winners". Their Jesus has no time for the weak minded and infirm who are always complaining and bitching.

Christian Racist Geert Wilders condemns Islam and Muhammad
Taken from :
محمد نبي رسول اسلام

Islam a backward violent culture
Glenn `Mein Kampf`Beck's interview with Geert Wilders
Oct. 29,2009

What is dhimmitude really like?
Andrew Bostom author of "The legacy of Jihad'

"The Church’s Doctrine of “Perpetual Servitude” was Worse than “Dhimmitude” " by Danios at, Nov. 30,2009

When all is said and done, however, the historical evidence indicates that the Jews of Islam, especially during the formative and classical centuries (up to the thirteenth century), experienced much less persecution than did the Jews of Christendom.

...Ahl al-Dhimma (dhimmi for short) translates to “the protected people” and was the historical word used to refer to non-Muslim peoples (such as Jews and Christians) living under Islamic rule. Arabist ideologues and Muslim apologists perpetuate the myth that the Islamic world was an idyllic “interfaith utopia” which epitomized religious tolerance; some seem to go as far as to claim that dhimmis “had it better” than Muslims under Islamic rule.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, anti-Islam ideologues argue that not only did Muslims historically persecute dhimmis, but that nonbelievers in the Islamic Orient were treated much worse than their counterparts were in the contemporaneous Christian Europe of the Middle Ages. To bolster this claim, one anti-Islam “researcher” by the pseudonym of Bat Ye’or coined the concept of “dhimmitude.” A counter-myth is now propagated on various websites, blogs and forums, namely that Islamic rule over non-Muslims had been characterized by an unparalleled brutality and wickedness. The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Studies calls out Bat Ye’or by name:

[One must] explain acts of Islamic oppression that did occur, without exaggerating them selectively into a ‘countermyth of Islamic persecution,’ as recent revisionism has done (e.g. Bat Ye’or 1985). [4]

These two sides (proponents of the interfaith utopia theory on the one hand and the Islamic persecution myth on the other hand) peddle their diametrically opposed paradigms, selectively quoting from various sources in order to “prove” their side. Of course, the truth lies in between this myth and counter-myth: dhimmis did not live under an idyllic interfaith utopia under Islamic rule–far from it: discrimination against nonbelievers was a prevalent phenomenon. Dhimmis were clearly treated as second-class citizens.

On the other hand, the counter-myth is equally dishonest and fails to contextualize the situation of dhimmis in the Islamic Orient with that of their counterparts in Christian Europe. We are always reminded by anti-Islam ideologues of the dhimmitude, a catch-all phrase which has caught on very well in recent times; the term is used as a stick to beat Muslims over the head with, as well as one to incite feelings of paranoia and xenophobia. This article will however recount what they–perhaps in their ignorance and zeal–have neglected to mention: there was in fact a direct corollary to the dhimmitude in the Christian West. It too has a catchy name: the Christian belief in the Perpetual Servitude of infidels, a concept which was in fact much more oppressive than the so-called dhimmitude.

Mark R. Cohen, a professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University, is arguably considered to be the world’s leading scholar of Jews living in the Middle Ages under Islamic rule. (authored the book) , Under Crescent and Cross (which) analytically compares the treatment of Jewish dhimmis (pejoratively called dhimmitude by ideologues) with that of the Perpetua Servitudo (Perpetual Servitude) of Jewish infidels. Cohen’s magnum opus is remarkably balanced, neutral, and analytical: it rejects both myth and counter-myth, but concludes that while dhimmis were certainly not living under any sort of interfaith utopia, they did have better living conditions than nonbelievers in the Christian West...

...As one can see, Spencer has given a great deal of importance to this document, the Pact of Umar. It is, in his own words, the “foundation” of his argument against Islamic treatment of non-Muslims. Supposedly the pact was signed by Umar ibn al-Khattab, a disciple of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. In it, a series of Jim Crow laws were stipulated, and the Christian community was forced to agree to them. According to the adherents of the counter-myth, the Pact of Umar typifies the miserable experience of the dhimmis.

However, there are certain important nuances which “mitigate” the Pact of Umar and make it less persuasive of a proof-text for the neo-lachrymose theory of the Jewish-Islamic experience.

An Apocryphal Document

The first point that must be taken into consideration is that most experts agree that the document is itself a forgery:

Umar is attributed with the authorship of the “Covenant of Umar” or the “Pact of Umar”…The first western research done on the “Covenant of Umar” was initiated by T.W. Arnold in The Preaching of Islam, and A.S. Tritton in “Islam and the Protected Religions.” They both asserted that the “Covenant” was an apocryphal document. [9]

The historicity of this document is called into question by modern scholars, who hold that it is a product of later generations who mistakenly attributed it to Umar:

A later generation attributed to ‘Umar a number of restrictive regulations which hampered the Christians in the free exercise of their religion, but De Goeje and Caetani have proved without a doubt that they are the invention of a later age.
The document appears hundreds of years after Umar’s death:

No text of the document can be dated earlier than the tenth or eleventh century.

Historians refer to it as a “spurious” document:

The so-called Pact or Covenant of ‘Umar, [is] a spurious treaty ascribed to the Caliph ‘Umar I.
…the spurious Covenant of Umar, the terms supposedly granted to the Christians by the second caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab…

Interestingly, Robert Spencer cites A.S. Tritton as a source in his book (chapter four of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades), but fails to mention that Tritton himself viewed the document as an outright forgery:

The covenant is not the work of ‘Umar.


from: Theodore Herzel at Jewish Dept. Of Jewish Zionist history

In 1891 he became Paris correspondent for the New Free Press (Vienna), the influential liberal newspaper of the time. Herzl was in Paris to witness the rise of anti-Semitism which resulted from the court martial of Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish army officer, who was divested of his rank in a humiliating public ceremony in January 1895, as a mob shouted "Death to the Jews." After considering a number of possibilities, Herzl became convinced that the only solution to the Jewish problem was the mass exodus of Jews from their places of residence. Originally he wrote that it didn't matter where Jews went. He eventually realized that a national home in Palestine was the answer.

He published a pamphlet, The Jewish State in 1896. Although others had suggested solutions to anti-Semitism, Herzl was the first to call for immediate political action. Jewish reaction to his plan was mixed. Many Jews rejected it as too extreme, although there were those who responded with enthusiasm and asked him to head what was to become the Zionist movement. He succeeded in convening the first Zionist Congress in Basle, Switzerland, August 29-31, 1897. The congress adopted the Basle Program and established Herzl with his children in his study the World Zionist Organization to help create the economic foundation for the proposed Jewish state. Herzl was elected president of the organization and chaired the first six Zionist congresses. He spent much of his time in his remaining years meeting with world leaders, both Jewish and non-Jewish, trying to enlist financial and political support for his dream of a Jewish state. He died in 1904 before his dream could become reality.

and so it goes,

No comments: