September 11, 2006

DOESN'T EXIST NOW, DID THEN:

Imam casts doubt over existence of bin Laden (Aftenposten, 9/11/06)

Asked for his honest opinion on the terrorist organization al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden, [Imam Zulqarnain Sakandar Madni] said "I think this is something that’s been made up." He also questioned whether the September 11 attacks were actually orchestrated by Muslims, and lent credence to so-called "conspiracy theories" that suggest otherwise.

Among them is one, portrayed in an American movie, that the American authorities themselves were behind the attacks. Imam Zulqarnain Sakandar Madni said he thinks "there's some good evidence that Bush & Co were behind this. See the film that's called 'Loose Change.' An American film! "

The imam stated repeatedly that Islam "doesn't allow anyone to kill or injure civilians." He stressed that Islam "is a religion that teaches people about peace and love."

Imam Zulqarnain Sakandar Madni also stressed repeatedly that all people must show respect for one another. "If everyone respected one another as people, we wouldn't have any problems. But it seems everyone wants to show what great power they have.

"We want peace for everyone. That's what Islam stands for!"

Asked what he does as both a Muslim and an imam to prevent terrorism, he said he tells his followers "that human respect is an absolute demand in Islam, and a good Muslim must be a good citizien. And that injuring or killing anyone is forbidden."

He claimed terrorists "have no religion," and that "it's wrong to say that those who commit terrorist acts represent Islam. Islam doesn't allow such acts."


Well, bin Laden is certainly dead and it's fair enough to point out that bin Ladenism is a heresy, not Islamic, just as Communism and Nazism were heresies and not Judeo-Christian, but denying the reality of al Qaeda and 9-11 is no more sensible than denying the Holocaust or the Gulag.

Posted by Orrin Judd at September 11, 2006 1:03 PM
Comments

There is no war with Oceania. We've always been at peace with Oceania.

Posted by: MiniTrue at September 11, 2006 1:23 PM

Could you possibly enumerate the ways in which Bin Ladian Islam differs from Koranic Islam?

Once you've done that, could you further answer why Koranic Islam degenerates into Bin Ladian Islam, whilst Christianity does not follow a similar trajectory?

Finally, why is it that the European peoples of the West hold to a faith that is not vulnerable to such a change, whilst the faith of the Arabic people of the East is?

Posted by: Alex Zeka at September 11, 2006 1:39 PM

Christianity devolved into 20th Century Europe where we murdered people by the tens of millions. Christianity devolved into the America where we've murdered 45 million babies. We make Al Qaeda look humane.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 2:54 PM

Mini:

Indeed, Oceania could not withstand the cold peace either.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 2:56 PM

"Christianity devolved into 20th Century Europe where we...[Emphasis added]"

Speak for yourself, Good German.

The murders are/were heretics, usurpers, parasites or outright pagans, and the orthodox and believers do/did what they can to fight them while trying not to lose their souls in the process. Unlike the Religion of Peace, where slaughter of infidels by The Faithtful makes Allah smile in approval.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at September 11, 2006 3:45 PM

The Faithful don't slaughter infidels, we slaughter the faithful. Today we remember the 3,000 that al Qaeda killed. When do you recall the 600,000 we murdered with sanctions in Iraq that even the anti-war crowd would have maintained? It's a religious war on both sides, we just happen to have the stronger religion so we win.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 4:22 PM

Correct Raoul.

So just as some Christians defeated Hitler and and Communism. We merely have to wait until Muslims defeat Bin Ladism. Uh..at least I think that's what OJ is saying.

Posted by: h-man at September 11, 2006 4:22 PM

We didn't defeat Communism. We didn't even fight it. We just waited for it to collapse of its own contradictions.

The main difference is that Nazism and Communism took power in great Western nations. Bin Ladenism is too unpopular to succeed in the great states of the Muslim world.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 4:31 PM

Tom:

You're confusing Islam and Islamicism as others confuse Christianity with Communism. All the Abrahamic faiths believe in universal subjugation before God. Bin Laden, Marx, etc, believe in subjugation before rational human concoctions.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 4:40 PM

OJ

I'm not the scholar you are (i am NOT being sarcastic), and I certainly don't know the intricacies of Muslim theoloy, but looking and listening to current events it appears to me that Bin Ladenism is accepted as a "possibly" valid interpretation of Islam by vast numbers of Arabs and Central Asians. Perhaps it's just a fad, but I think for now anyway it will not be opposed except by Westerners. Arabs/Central Asians are not offended enough to take up arms or significantly aid Western Governments in defending themselves.

Of course any rational person would be confused by adding "ism" to the end of a word and thinking it is a significant difference.

Posted by: h-man at September 11, 2006 4:54 PM

--"We want peace for everyone. That's what Islam stands for!"--

Yup, the world will be at peace when the world is under islam.

Posted by: Sandy P at September 11, 2006 6:05 PM

Or Christianity or Judaism. Hardly matters which of us turns out to be right among the three.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 6:11 PM

Syncretism is no better than atheism.

Posted by: Gideon at September 11, 2006 6:42 PM

Yes, you have to believe that only one of three is true.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 6:46 PM

Wait, I think I get what oj is saying. He is saying..um...no, wait...er...What are you saying?

Posted by: Thaddeus Tremayne at September 11, 2006 8:51 PM

Bin Ladenism is a rather minor heresy and was easily dealt with. The comparison to Christendom's mass murderous heresies is especially revealing.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 8:56 PM

"Those who speak ill of you do not love you.": I take the binLadiinsts at their word. They pray to Allah five times a day for the means and opportunities to unleash a holocaust on the unbelievers that will dwarf what the abortionists may or may not have done, and that they won't rest until they've achieved their goal, Or at least bettered their previous successes. To think otherwise is wishful thinking, the kind which used to be exclusively found amoung Leftwing multi-cultis.

Their co-religionsists have shown no desire to change or disavow them, because, let's face it, why should they? Unless or until forced to do so, they'll just "get along to go along", and you've shown no desire to raise the price of going along with the mass-murderers committed in their (the umma's) name. Are abortions committed in the name of Christ? I thought they were committed by secularists, which is why your trying to pin them on Christians is so reprehensible, even using your definitions.

"as others confuse Christianity with Communism."

Another libel. Please give us some examples of people who've confused the two. Nobody took Liberation Theology seriously who didn't pay tuition.. I've heard the libel that the National Socialsts were really closet Catholics, but this is the first I've heard that particular rationalization of your. Not to be too accusatory, but you when you make sweeping unsupported statements like that, you sound like a cleaned up cousin of the Leftwing conspiracy yokels. (Or else you've confused anti-rationalism with irrationalism, and embraced the latter thinking it the former. Like gravity, not believing in logic doesn't mean you are immune from its effects.)

the 600,000 we murdered with sanctions in Iraq

You love throwing that "we" around, don't you? What about those of us who wanted the job finished? Are you saying that since we didn't rise up and take up arms (or fight the Feds using methods like those used by Timothy McVeigh), but accepted the democratic process in this republic, we are as guilty as those who actively carried out the deaths? Or as guilty as the Iraqis who didn't fight the tyranny themselves, but left it to us to finally remove it?

No wonder the trolls have all left, they can't compete with you any more.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at September 11, 2006 9:11 PM

America is a democracy. We are responsible for what our society does as some schlub in Morocco is not for what al Qaeda did. We don't disavow America.

Actions speak louder than words. We have in fact killed millions of our own. OBL killed a few and we dealt with him. We are an ongoing threat. He isn't.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 9:56 PM

h:

Vast? Where?

They don't generally defend themselves against bin Ladenism because it isn't a threat to them. The Shi'a of Iraq defend themselves, because it is a threat to them, and then people get hysterical about the defense.

Posted by: oj at September 11, 2006 10:24 PM

Oj, it looks like you got up cranky this morning.
Is America the only country doing abortions? I must have missed that. That 600,000 from sanctions to Iraq sounds like a stretch.

Posted by: jorz at September 12, 2006 1:55 AM

jorz:

It was hundreds of thousands. 600,000 was the number that got tossed around:

http://www.reason.com/0203/fe.mw.the.shtml

Abortion is okay because other countries do it?

Posted by: oj at September 12, 2006 7:45 AM

Apologists for any ideology with an h istorical record like Islam and founded by a character like Mohammad have no choice but to rationalize. The radical secularists could take lessons from you, oj.

Posted by: Tom C.,Stamford,Ct. at September 12, 2006 7:49 AM

No, abortion isn't okay but your argument sounds like America is the only country doing it. Western society should take the blame because it's happening all over. The sanctions were used to persuade Saddam to cooperate. It was a diplomatic solution that Saddam chose to prolong.

Posted by: Jorz at September 12, 2006 2:23 PM

America is the only country where it matters. Secular nations needn't meet Judeo-Christian moral standards.

Posted by: oj at September 12, 2006 3:48 PM

I wonder if oj is quite aware of Islam's bloody history, such as the sujugation of N. Africa, the Balkans, India, Indonesia. Remember, the rulers of each of these were forced to convert at sword-point, in notable contrast to the far more humane methods of Christian proselytising.

But lets forget all that, and pretend that Christians are every bit as evil because of what the atheistic Commies and pagan Nazis did.

Posted by: Alex Zeka at September 17, 2006 7:55 AM

Mr. Zeka:

It's not evil to bring the God of Abraham to heathens, as we and the Muslims did.

Posted by: oj at September 17, 2006 8:47 AM

Mr. oj:

It is if this bringing involves mass murder, forced conversions and the practice of castration for the sake of creating a pityless warrior class (see the janissaries). Learn some history, or at least enough to realise the enormous and telling differences between Christian and Islamic proselytising, and indeed the differences between the contents of these two religions.

Posted by: Alex Zeka at September 19, 2006 3:35 PM

They'll never catch up to us. Look around you and count the churches. Now the totem poles.

Posted by: oj at September 19, 2006 3:47 PM
« REMEMBRANCE: | Main | COMMODITY PRICES DON'T RISE: »