Arab woman opens a can of verbal whoopass...

[Otherguy Overby]

http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ai=214&ar=1050wmv&ak=nul

She sure doesn't take any prisoners...

[Gewehr98]

I'll wager there's a fatwa issued for her head in the not-too-distant future. 

[SomeKid]

I have seen that before. I cannot remember her name, but I think they already want her dead.

[Otherguy Overby]

You are better informed than I am, cuz you've seen it before.  I don't think had been posted here before, though.  Regardless, the woman has stones, or ovaries, or something of the equivalent.

Somehow I don't think we'll see anything like this in our own, now politically correct, speech.

[De Selby]

Ah yes, Wafa Sultan-she makes her living insulting all religions, but primarily Islam.

Not only is there no fatwa-a-go-go against her, she's made a ton of cash off these rants.  She lives in LA, where not only is it perfectly safe to bash Islam and Muslims, it's actually quite profitable for a few...like herself.

If any person dared to bash Christianity or Judaism the same way, that person would rightly be written off as a lunatic fringe.  The only reason Wafa Sultan is taken seriously by anyone is that she primarily bashes Muslims.

[Manedwolf]

Ah yes, Wafa Sultan-she makes her living insulting all religions, but primarily Islam.

Not only is there no fatwa-a-go-go against her, she's made a ton of cash off these rants.  She lives in LA, where not only is it perfectly safe to bash Islam and Muslims, it's actually quite profitable for a few...like herself.

If any person dared to bash Christianity or Judaism the same way, that person would rightly be written off as a lunatic fringe.  The only reason Wafa Sultan is taken seriously by anyone is that she primarily bashes Muslims.

And here we hear from the resident CAIR apologist. Right on time!

Please point to ANY case where she "bashes" other religions.

She tells the truth. And you apparently can't handle the truth.

[SomeKid]

If any person dared to bash Christianity or Judaism the same way, that person would rightly be written off as a lunatic fringe.  The only reason Wafa Sultan is taken seriously by anyone is that she primarily bashes Muslims.

A blatant lie. There are posters on this forum who attack Christians daily. Of course, this reply is pointless. Maned already has you pegged. Why don't you go funnel some more money to Hamas?

As an aside, thanks for remembering her name. Wafa Sultan. I will have to remember that. She deserves to be remembered.

Oh, and your other, just as blatant lie?

Not only is there no fatwa-a-go-go against her, she's made a ton of cash off these rants.  She lives in LA, where not only is it perfectly safe to bash Islam and Muslims, it's actually quite profitable for a few...like herself.

While I do not normally like the NYT, even they acknowledge the truth. (Also, they go out of there way to be nice to Islam in this piece. Of course, you will find it one-sided, and anti-Islam anyway...)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/international/middleeast/11sultan.html

From the second paragraph:

Today, thanks to an unusually blunt and provocative interview on Al Jazeera television on Feb. 21, she is an international sensation, hailed as a fresh voice of reason by some, and by others as a heretic and infidel who deserves to die.

You say she is safe in LA. I say hardly. California has crappy gun laws, she probably cannot carry. She has Muslims out to kill her. Is that your definition of perfectly safe?

No fatwa you say? (For those who do not know what a fatwa is, here is a link straight to the definition: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/fatwa )

Back to the NYT article. You say there is no fatwa against her, when clearly there is. From the second page, 10th and 11th paragraphs:

The other guest on the program, identified as an Egyptian professor of religious studies, Dr. Ibrahim al-Khouli, asked, "Are you a heretic?" He then said there was no point in rebuking or debating her, because she had blasphemed against Islam, the Prophet Muhammad and the Koran.

Dr. Sultan said she took those words as a formal fatwa, a religious condemnation. Since then, she said, she has received numerous death threats on her answering machine and by e-mail.

She is correct. Right there on TV, she had a fatwa issued to her.

SS, how does the Kool-Aid taste?

[Tecumseh]

If any person dared to bash Christianity or Judaism the same way, that person would rightly be written off as a lunatic fringe.  The only reason Wafa Sultan is taken seriously by anyone is that she primarily bashes Muslims.

A blatant lie. There are posters on this forum who attack Christians daily. Of course, this reply is pointless. Maned already has you pegged. Why don't you go funnel some more money to Hamas?

As an aside, thanks for remembering her name. Wafa Sultan. I will have to remember that. She deserves to be remembered.

Oh, and your other, just as blatant lie?

Not only is there no fatwa-a-go-go against her, she's made a ton of cash off these rants.  She lives in LA, where not only is it perfectly safe to bash Islam and Muslims, it's actually quite profitable for a few...like herself.

While I do not normally like the NYT, even they acknowledge the truth. (Also, they go out of there way to be nice to Islam in this piece. Of course, you will find it one-sided, and anti-Islam anyway...)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/international/middleeast/11sultan.html

From the second paragraph:

Today, thanks to an unusually blunt and provocative interview on Al Jazeera television on Feb. 21, she is an international sensation, hailed as a fresh voice of reason by some, and by others as a heretic and infidel who deserves to die.

You say she is safe in LA. I say hardly. California has crappy gun laws, she probably cannot carry. She has Muslims out to kill her. Is that your definition of perfectly safe?

No fatwa you say? (For those who do not know what a fatwa is, here is a link straight to the definition: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/fatwa )

Back to the NYT article. You say there is no fatwa against her, when clearly there is. From the second page, 10th and 11th paragraphs:

The other guest on the program, identified as an Egyptian professor of religious studies, Dr. Ibrahim al-Khouli, asked, "Are you a heretic?" He then said there was no point in rebuking or debating her, because she had blasphemed against Islam, the Prophet Muhammad and the Koran.

Dr. Sultan said she took those words as a formal fatwa, a religious condemnation. Since then, she said, she has received numerous death threats on her answering machine and by e-mail.

She is correct. Right there on TV, she had a fatwa issued to her.

SS, how does the Kool-Aid taste?

Do you have any proof that he is funneling money to Hamas?  That is a pretty serious allegation. 

Maybe it is my Christian upbringing but I dont think telling others that they support terrorism is a polite thing to do.

[De Selby]

Well, where to start:

Please point to ANY case where she "bashes" other religions.

First of all, if you read the actual interview, she points out that she rejects all religion and that rejecting religion is necessary to "lift ourselves out of the middle ages."  Here's a transcript:

http://www.aqoul.com/images/wafa_sultan.pdf

Ms. Sultan has an ideology that is very much in line with what she would have been taught as a child in Syria-that all religion is bad, and that only anti-religious nationalism can possibly lift the human race out of "the middle ages."  That was what the Assads who ruled Syria taught, and that was how they justified banning religion in public and massacring entire townships of religious people unhappy with the ban on religion.  (Ironically, the first suicide bomber in Lebanon was a Christian woman working for this very same Syrian "progressive" secular regime-but I'm sure Wafa Sultan is just as offended by that as she is by Muslim terrorism, right?)

You read this interview, and you see Wafa Sultan upset by the fact that religious people killed some of the members of her cultural elite in Syria.  But what you do not see is Wafa Sultan being outraged at how the anti-religious ideology of her ruling class in Syria (the alawis) was used to massacre people by the thousands in Lebanon and Syria.  I don't know about you, but I have a hard time believing that someone from the ruling circles around Hafez al Assad, and who basically apes the lines used by Hafez al Assad to justify his dictatorship is "a moderate progressive."

Somekid,
As you will note, not only is there no fatwa (which would require religious citations-there is no such thing as a "fatwa" that is just a spoken line), the guy arguing with Sultan repeatedly says that he doesn't care what other people believe, and that he thinks such measures as those taken by Saudi Arabia against non-Muslims are unIslamic.  I quote his words: "First of all Saudi Arabia is not an Islamic model that should be followed in its orientations and general practices.  It is the first country that I condemn by Islamic standards."

The fact that some backwards illiterates in rural Sudan would call Wafa Sultan a heretic who deserves to die means absolutely zero.  She's on television all the time here; it's no secret that she lives in L.A., and that she has a psychiatric practice.  She is safe because in America, Muslims hold forums to debate her and condemn her radical views.  That's how things are done here in this country-regardless of your religion.  That's also why she is going around making a pretty penny insulting Muslims, and not having to hide as a result.

I seriously doubt the plain facts are going to get in the way of your support for this lady though.  Be my guest to support her-but know that you are supporting exactly the kind of people who made Syria what it is today, and exactly the same kind of radicalism that you oppose when it is directed towards Christianity.  

[Manedwolf]

She is safe because in America, Muslims hold forums to debate her and condemn her radical views.  That's how things are done here in this country-regardless of your religion.

Oh, really.

Police: Gun linked to journalists death

By MICHELLE LOCKE, Associated Press Writer

OAKLAND, Calif. - Police are testing guns recovered from raids in which authorities arrested seven members of an Oakland Black Muslim splinter group who investigators suspect were involved in the killing of a journalist and two others.

Police Lt. Ersie Joyner said one of the guns found during the raids is thought to be the weapon that a masked attacker used Thursday morning to slay Chauncey Bailey, a journalist who was walking to work.

Bailey, 57, was the editor of the Oakland Post, and had been working on a story about Your Black Muslim Bakery before he was ambushed and slain, his colleagues said.

Guzzling that kool-aid now, are we? Man, you're in a lot deeper into the brainwashing than I thought, shootinstudent. You're really scaring me now. This is how the people who go over to the other side get started, you know that, right?

And radicals who are okay with treating women like crap are calling HER radical. The irony is overwhelming.

[De Selby]

She is safe because in America, Muslims hold forums to debate her and condemn her radical views.  That's how things are done here in this country-regardless of your religion.

Oh, really.

Police: Gun linked to journalists death

By MICHELLE LOCKE, Associated Press Writer

OAKLAND, Calif. - Police are testing guns recovered from raids in which authorities arrested seven members of an Oakland Black Muslim splinter group who investigators suspect were involved in the killing of a journalist and two others.

Police Lt. Ersie Joyner said one of the guns found during the raids is thought to be the weapon that a masked attacker used Thursday morning to slay Chauncey Bailey, a journalist who was walking to work.

Bailey, 57, was the editor of the Oakland Post, and had been working on a story about Your Black Muslim Bakery before he was ambushed and slain, his colleagues said.

Guzzling that kool-aid now, are we?

You're kidding, right?

Linking the black panther party's criminal remnants to Islam is like citing the killings carried out by white supremacists as evidence of "christian terrorism." 

Sorry, but a radical racist gang in Oakland that believes its leader was a man-come-down-from-a-spaceship has about as much to do with Islam as Matthew Hale's "world church of the creator" or Manson does with Christianity.  This is an absurd example on its face.

[Manedwolf]

Black Muslims =/= Black Panthers.

Sorry, distortion of facts strawman fails. Please play again.

[De Selby]

Black Muslims =/= Black Panthers.

Sorry, distortion of facts strawman fails. Please play again.

Yes, they do-that is what the qualifying name means in this case.  "Black Muslims" is the name of a group in Oakland, not a description of the color of some worshippers.  They owned "Your Black Muslim Bakery", and were all tied to black panther radicalism in the past, and recently to criminal drug racketeering.

Your citation of this crime as an example of "Muslim violence" is simply wrong.  The group is a gang, and its theology isn't even remotely Muslim by any standard-they believe in a dude from a spaceship who came down to America to reveal the truth that white men are the devil.  It's as kooky as Manson's theories of Christianity, and just as ridiculous. 

Edit:

So we have some proof of the above:

http://www.ybmb.com/ybmbhistory.htm

He was born in Greenville Texas on December 21, 1935 but moved to Oakland with his family at the age of five.  At the age of seventeen, he joined the US Air Force and after a four year stint received an honorable discharge. He worked briefly in warehousing and shortly thereafter enrolled in the School of Cosmetology.  He went on to own beauty salons in Santa Barbara and Berkeley, California In the early sixties, he embraced the Islamic faith under the leadership of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad.    

Elijah Muhammad, you know, the guy that founded Nation of Islam?
Further info:http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/us/12bakery.html?ex=1344571200&en=5edff60d8614e8b6&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[Tecumseh]

Christian Identity =/= Christians
Timothy McVeigh =/= Christians
KKK=/= Chrstianst
Westboro Baptist Church =/= Christians

Thought I would name a few Christian groups as well.
I see the similarities.

[Gewehr98]

Maybe it is my Christian upbringing but I dont think telling others that they support terrorism is a polite thing to do.

I'm debating which is worse - insinuating that somebody supports terrorism, or trotting out the Christian upbringing schtick every 5 minutes.  I'm of the opinion that we can fix the latter problem either the easy way or the hard way. What do you think, Tecumseh?  Li'l Baby Jesus eagerly anticipates your decision...

[SomeKid]

For the record, I never said or insinuated SS supports terrorism. Merely Hamas. Take from that what you will.

Somekid,
As you will note, not only is there no fatwa (which would require religious citations-there is no such thing as a "fatwa" that is just a spoken line),

Put down that gallon, tanker truck or whatever the heck quantity of Kool-Aid you are drowning yourself in and check a dictionary. Here, I will refer you to one, again.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/fatwa

Yes Virginia-Achmed-Alawa, there is such a thing as a fatwa.

[Tecumseh]

I'll wager there's a fatwa issued for her head in the not-too-distant future. 

I seem to remember readin Sam Harris's prologue from the book called "A Letter to A Christian Nation" and he kept talking about all the death threats he recieved from Christians.  He said that he feared for his life because of the threats.  These threats were a response to his first book entitled "The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason."  It is sad that such a peaceful religion is filled with violent people. 

I recommend both the books.  They are excellent critiques of a major religion. 

[Manedwolf]

Ah yes.

B..b.b.but CHRISTIANS...!

Give that one a rest. It's worn out. It's right there beside people saying "But Mcveigh!" every time an Islamist extremist blows something up daily.

[CAnnoneer]

Was McVeigh really Christian? I seem to remember something like "thou shalt not kill", especially innocents. Also, was his bombing religiously motivated to any meaningful extent?

In any case, McVeigh is irrelevant to the current discussion. Even if Christianity were just as bad as Islam (which it certainly is not), that's still no excuse for Islam. I've said it before and I will say it again - Islam is crap and the prophet was a murderous violent power-hungry opportunist. Go ahead, put a fatwah on me, with extra phlegm, you worthless pinheads.

[De Selby]

For the record, I never said or insinuated SS supports terrorism. Merely Hamas. Take from that what you will.

Somekid,
As you will note, not only is there no fatwa (which would require religious citations-there is no such thing as a "fatwa" that is just a spoken line),

Put down that gallon, tanker truck or whatever the heck quantity of Kool-Aid you are drowning yourself in and check a dictionary. Here, I will refer you to one, again.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/fatwa

Yes Virginia-Achmed-Alawa, there is such a thing as a fatwa.

I suppose you could rely on the dictionary to tell you what a fatwa is, or you could just ask someone who is Muslim.  Whatever the dictionary says, it doesn't mean much if Muslims don't accept its definition.  But anyway, let's consider what you posted:

a legal opinion or decree handed down by an Islamic religious leader

Note "legal opinion"-there is a vast body of law in Islam.  Hence, there is no such thing as a one-line fatwa handed down in a conversation, because such a statement is not a legal opinion (obviously so.)  A fatwa has citations to the laws that justify its conclusion, exactly like a judicial opinion handed down by an American court.

[De Selby]

In any case, McVeigh is irrelevant to the current discussion. Even if Christianity were just as bad as Islam (which it certainly is not), that's still no excuse for Islam. I've said it before and I will say it again - Islam is crap and the prophet was a murderous violent power-hungry opportunist. Go ahead, put a fatwah on me, with extra phlegm, you worthless pinheads.

Personally, I found myself much more at odds with your beliefs when you were saying that the holocaust wasn't that horrific or unnatural.  That's because you insulting my religion doesn't doesn't make it bad, but anyone denying the horror of the holocaust makes the world that much worse off. 

But hey, you live in a country where you have the freedom to both insult my religion and say any number of offensive things about Jews and the Holocaust.  I just wish we could all put that freedom to better use than to waste it with petty religious bashing, regardless of whether the target is me, my Christian neighbors, or my Jewish relatives.

[SomeKid]

For the record, I never said or insinuated SS supports terrorism. Merely Hamas. Take from that what you will.

Somekid,
As you will note, not only is there no fatwa (which would require religious citations-there is no such thing as a "fatwa" that is just a spoken line),

Put down that gallon, tanker truck or whatever the heck quantity of Kool-Aid you are drowning yourself in and check a dictionary. Here, I will refer you to one, again.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/fatwa

Yes Virginia-Achmed-Alawa, there is such a thing as a fatwa.

I suppose you could rely on the dictionary to tell you what a fatwa is, or you could just ask someone who is Muslim.  Whatever the dictionary says, it doesn't mean much if Muslims don't accept its definition.  But anyway, let's consider what you posted:

a legal opinion or decree handed down by an Islamic religious leader

Note "legal opinion"-there is a vast body of law in Islam.  Hence, there is no such thing as a one-line fatwa handed down in a conversation, because such a statement is not a legal opinion (obviously so.)  A fatwa has citations to the laws that justify its conclusion, exactly like a judicial opinion handed down by an American court.

The Kool-Aid is strong in you. Do you honestly believe that first paragraph? You cannot argue with the definition of words. It destroys your ability to say anything meaningful. After all, I could argue what you really mean in your last post is that all Muslims are evil and should be killed. After all, we are ignoring definitions and what words actually mean. Would you like to ask what the definition of 'is' is? Being a Muslim gives you no more authority on being able to decide what a fatwa really means than my being an American gives me a right to tell you where the borders between America and Canada really are and expect to be right even if the map says otherwise.

You focus on the legal opinion side, and ignore the decree side. Do note, in the definition of fatwa, it said or. Meaning, either one. So, what does decree mean? http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/decree I think in this instance, definition 2 applies (though you probably think it is 3). Face it, any Muslim leader who holds any real position of authority can issue a fatwa. It may not be common, but they can. While some fatwas may have some legalistic backing, and in some ways be like an opinion handed down by an American court, a fatwa can also be issued by the Muslim equivalent to a preacher, nun, or Bible scholar. The man in question, as I recall, was the Muslim equivalent to the third.

[De Selby]

The Kool-Aid is strong in you. Do you honestly believe that first paragraph? You cannot argue with the definition of words. It destroys your ability to say anything meaningful.

I'm quite surprised that this is an issue-the merriam webster's dictionary does not define the universe of Islamic worship.  I have no idea why you assume it does.

We are not ignoring the definitions of what words mean-what I am doing is pointing out that "fatwa" is a religious terms for Muslims, and hence, is defined by how Muslims interpret the term.  That's pretty simple-the dictionary does not define what Islamic worship is or what the criteria are for being a Muslim; Muslims do.

Being a Muslim gives you no more authority on being able to decide what a fatwa really means than my being an American gives me a right to tell you where the borders between America and Canada really are and expect to be right even if the map says otherwise.

It most certainly does give me more authority to define what a fatwa really is.  If no Muslim agrees that your definition of a fatwa is correct, then how on earth can you claim that Islam teaches such a thing?  Muslim belief and practice defines what Islam is, not the dictionary, and not you.  Just because you want for this guy's one liners in an interview to be fatwas, does not make it so.

Face it, any Muslim leader who holds any real position of authority can issue a fatwa.

Uh, no, that's not quite right.  For one thing, there is no such thing as a "position of real authority" in Islam-there is no Islamic clergy.  A fatwa is a researched opinion, and it is binding only insofar as its conclusions comport to the law.  A fatwa in Islamic worship is only as good as the number of Muslims who agree with its reasoning and conclusions.  There is absolutely no such thing as a fatwa that is binding because of who issued it; that concept is totally alien to Islam.

There is no Islamic equivalent to a preacher-there's no position or title in the religion that fits that role.  The closest thing is the Imam, who is the guy that recites for everyone during prayer time.  That's more like being an altar servant, since the prayer is scripted, and there is no "pause for sermon of the Imam's opinions" piece. 

You are making the mistake of assuming that Islam is just like Christianity, and it isn't-not in form anyway, though it's similar in the content of its values and core teachings.

[SomeKid]

It most certainly does give me more authority to define what a fatwa really is.  If no Muslim agrees that your definition of a fatwa is correct, then how on earth can you claim that Islam teaches such a thing?

So, by this standard, if a group of people disagrees with me about the use of a word, even if I use the word in a 100% accurate context, the definition and word choice are wrong? Just because most blacks have a knee-jerk reaction to the word niggardly does not mean it is a bad word. Muslims cannot set words aside as theirs. Words have set meanings.

There is absolutely no such thing as a fatwa that is binding because of who issued it; that concept is totally alien to Islam.

In the previous post you said it was like an opinion handed down by court. Now it is not binding. Can you make up your mind, or do you have Kool-Aid poisoning? Of course, this time you have the actual definition behind you. Congratulations! The only problem is, you are not trying to disprove whether it is binding.

There is no Islamic equivalent to a preacher-

 
I don't think Imams are analogous to alter servants. I do not think alter servants have a definition describing them in the same glowing terms an imam gets. http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/imam

Try again young Kool-Aid drinker. One day, you might actually make a convincing argument! Free tip: If you want to say that because you are Muslim you by default know more only works if you actually by default know more.

[De Selby]

So, by this standard, if a group of people disagrees with me about the use of a word, even if I use the word in a 100% accurate context, the definition and word choice are wrong?

Uh, no-your use of the word is wrong because you are applying it to things that obviously do not meet the definition.  That's why.  Not because people don't like what you are saying.  Your use is inaccurate because you insist on claiming that a "fatwa" was issued by some guy on a TV show during a debate.  Because a fatwa is a legal ruling, claiming that his statements are fatwas is an inaccurate use of the word.

In the previous post you said it was like an opinion handed down by court. Now it is not binding. Can you make up your mind, or do you have Kool-Aid poisoning? Of course, this time you have the actual definition behind you. Congratulations! The only problem is, you are not trying to disprove whether it is binding.

Please reread what I said-fatwas are binding insofar as they cite the correct laws and apply it correctly to a particular case.  Just like judicial opinions.  What they are not is binding because some person issued them-the issuer adds zero authority to the fatwa.  Just because someone said it, doesn't make it binding.  That is the rule in this religion.

I don't think Imams are analogous to alter servants. I do not think alter servants have a definition describing them in the same glowing terms an imam gets. http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/imam

That's apparently because you don't know anything about Islamic worship, which is fine, you don't have to.  But you do have to know something about it in order to properly understand the terms, like Imam, which is defined exactly as I defined it in 1. of this definition. (2 and 3 apply only to Shia, and I have little to no clue what they believe...as is the case with most of the Muslim in this world, so you'll have a hard time getting anyone to answer for those.)

The prayer leader is someone who recites verses in Arabic.  That's it-that is what Islamic prayer is.  It isn't something you make up as you go along, nor is it something that has pauses for the Imam to stop and offer opinions.