< 1 2 3 > 
 
   
 

History Professor Juan Cole on “The End of Faith”

 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  477
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
25 May 2019 13:29
 
icehorse - 25 May 2019 08:03 AM

lyn:

I note that you provide no evidence, and without evidence, you’re just offering islamophobic propaganda.  Certainly, your constant repetition is one tactic of propaganda.

In fact, I’ve linked to large polls many times on this forum.

Polls which prove Sharia is supremacist,  polls that prove “But the book [the Quran] is EXTREMELY REPETITIVE, and the readers’ brains - the brains our minds are not in charge of - WILL pick up on the “make war” propaganda that’s so pervasive throughout the book”  and litany of evils you constantly list?  Provide a link.

 

lyn:

Which specific edict, core to Sharia, is supremacist, and why?

Over 500 times, the Quran instructs Muslims that they are superior to non-Muslims. There are hints of it from the very first Surah, and the 2nd Surah lays this message on thick. You can’t go more than a few pages in the book without being told how bad non-Muslims are.

 

 

By reason of superior beliefs - for example, I think people who believe in equal rights regardless of creed are superior to those who don’t.  Does that make me a supremacist?  I don’t think so.  Anyone, at some level, everyone thinks they’re superior to those whose beliefs (they think) are incorrect.  It doesn’t make them supremacist.  To be supremacist, a passage needs to support lesser or greater rights or privileges depending on ethnicity.

In any case, you haven’t provided an answer to which specific edict, core to Sharia, is supremacist, or why.  A specific supremacist edict, please. 

And, since you haven’t answered this question (just repeated your usual Islamophobic list), what exactly do you find is a mis-characterization by Prof. Cole of Sam Harris’s book?  What is your defense of the assertion that Cole’s background information on the writing of the Koran is nothing more than “anecdotes”?

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7662
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
25 May 2019 13:35
 
lynmc - 25 May 2019 01:29 PM
icehorse - 25 May 2019 08:03 AM

lyn:

I note that you provide no evidence, and without evidence, you’re just offering islamophobic propaganda.  Certainly, your constant repetition is one tactic of propaganda.

In fact, I’ve linked to large polls many times on this forum.

Polls which prove Sharia is supremacist,  polls that prove “But the book [the Quran] is EXTREMELY REPETITIVE, and the readers’ brains - the brains our minds are not in charge of - WILL pick up on the “make war” propaganda that’s so pervasive throughout the book”  and litany of evils you constantly list?  Provide a link.

 

lyn:

Which specific edict, core to Sharia, is supremacist, and why?

Over 500 times, the Quran instructs Muslims that they are superior to non-Muslims. There are hints of it from the very first Surah, and the 2nd Surah lays this message on thick. You can’t go more than a few pages in the book without being told how bad non-Muslims are.

 

 

By reason of superior beliefs - for example, I think people who believe in equal rights regardless of creed are superior to those who don’t.  Does that make me a supremacist?  I don’t think so.  Anyone, at some level, everyone thinks they’re superior to those whose beliefs (they think) are incorrect.  It doesn’t make them supremacist.  To be supremacist, a passage needs to support lesser or greater rights or privileges depending on ethnicity.

In any case, you haven’t provided an answer to which specific edict, core to Sharia, is supremacist, or why.  A specific supremacist edict, please. 

And, since you haven’t answered this question (just repeated your usual Islamophobic list), what exactly do you find is a mis-characterization by Prof. Cole of Sam Harris’s book?  What is your defense of the assertion that Cole’s background information on the writing of the Koran is nothing more than “anecdotes”?

I have provided links and evidence many times on this forum. I’m pretty darn sure I’ve done it in previous discussions with you. At this point I think your ad hominem attacks are revealing to everyone reading this thread how weak your arguments are. If you want to debate in good faith, I’ll respond. But your last several posts have not been in good faith, so until that changes, I’m done with this line of dialog.

 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  477
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
01 June 2019 09:25
 
icehorse - 25 May 2019 01:35 PM
lynmc - 25 May 2019 01:29 PM
icehorse - 25 May 2019 08:03 AM

lyn:

I note that you provide no evidence, and without evidence, you’re just offering islamophobic propaganda.  Certainly, your constant repetition is one tactic of propaganda.

In fact, I’ve linked to large polls many times on this forum.

Polls which prove Sharia is supremacist,  polls that prove “But the book [the Quran] is EXTREMELY REPETITIVE, and the readers’ brains - the brains our minds are not in charge of - WILL pick up on the “make war” propaganda that’s so pervasive throughout the book”  and litany of evils you constantly list?  Provide a link.

 

lyn:

Which specific edict, core to Sharia, is supremacist, and why?

Over 500 times, the Quran instructs Muslims that they are superior to non-Muslims. There are hints of it from the very first Surah, and the 2nd Surah lays this message on thick. You can’t go more than a few pages in the book without being told how bad non-Muslims are.

 

 

By reason of superior beliefs - for example, I think people who believe in equal rights regardless of creed are superior to those who don’t.  Does that make me a supremacist?  I don’t think so.  Anyone, at some level, everyone thinks they’re superior to those whose beliefs (they think) are incorrect.  It doesn’t make them supremacist.  To be supremacist, a passage needs to support lesser or greater rights or privileges depending on ethnicity.

In any case, you haven’t provided an answer to which specific edict, core to Sharia, is supremacist, or why.  A specific supremacist edict, please. 

And, since you haven’t answered this question (just repeated your usual Islamophobic list), what exactly do you find is a mis-characterization by Prof. Cole of Sam Harris’s book?  What is your defense of the assertion that Cole’s background information on the writing of the Koran is nothing more than “anecdotes”?

I have provided links and evidence many times on this forum. I’m pretty darn sure I’ve done it in previous discussions with you. At this point I think your ad hominem attacks are revealing to everyone reading this thread how weak your arguments are. If you want to debate in good faith, I’ll respond. But your last several posts have not been in good faith, so until that changes, I’m done with this line of dialog.

Well, I’ve asked several times for you to support your assertions, and you’ve failed to provided supporting evidence. 

- There may be supremacist passages in the Quran or in Sharia, but you can’t seem to produce a single one.  Just deflections from the argument like false (in this case) accusations of ad hominem attacks.

- You haven’t produced a single quote from Juan Cole’s article supporting your assertion that he was making strawman arguments against Harris or his evidence was anecdotal.  Despite being requested to do so 3 times.

I therefore conclude that your main argument tactic is to provide flim-flam, and repetition of your points, with a good bit of sea-lioning thrown in.  While repetition may be a good propaganda technique, your flim-flam shows no respect for truth or logic, and in the case of your original points, a great deal of hypocrisy.

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7662
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
01 June 2019 09:38
 

Ok Lyn,

Here’s some more detailed feedback on Cole’s article:

- He takes small snippets from Harris’s book and attacks them out of context.
- Even given this lack-of-context approach, which should make criticism easier, Cole’s arguments still aren’t very good. For example, many of Cole’s arguments are of the “two wrongs make it right” variety, as he often compares Islam’s problems with Christianity’s problems. I’m happy to grant you that Christianity is riddled with problems and has an incredibly bloody history on its hands. That in no way relieves Islam of its faults. They both suck.
- Cole repeatedly quotes the Quran to prove his points. This should almost instantly discredit his arguments, because as we know the Quran is incredibly inconsistent, often contradicting itself. So to quote the Quran in this way can be nothing more than cherry-picking.

 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  477
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
09 June 2019 13:08
 
icehorse - 01 June 2019 09:38 AM

Ok Lyn,

Here’s some more detailed feedback on Cole’s article:

- He takes small snippets from Harris’s book and attacks them out of context.

False.  He provides them with Harris’s reason for the quote - that’s not taking it out of context.  Of course he takes a snippet.  he’s writing an article, not a whole book.

- Even given this lack-of-context approach, which should make criticism easier, Cole’s arguments still aren’t very good. For example, many of Cole’s arguments are of the “two wrongs make it right” variety, as he often compares Islam’s problems with Christianity’s problems. I’m happy to grant you that Christianity is riddled with problems and has an incredibly bloody history on its hands. That in no way relieves Islam of its faults. They both suck.

 

Now that is a strawman, a complete mis-characterization of what Cole says in the article.  Did you even read it?  It’s like you’re picking criticisms out of a hat, without caring whether they apply.  For example, your first reply in which you accuse Cole of making strawman arguments or using anecdotal evidence, neither of which you’ve been able to bolster with specifics.

- Cole repeatedly quotes the Quran to prove his points. This should almost instantly discredit his arguments, because as we know the Quran is incredibly inconsistent, often contradicting itself. So to quote the Quran in this way can be nothing more than cherry-picking.

ROTFLOL.  Like Sam Harris doesn’t quote the Quran to prove his points?  Yet that doesn’t instantly discredit him?  Especially when he quotes it incorrectly?  Cole provides additional historical background (and polls of American Muslims) to bolster his argument regarding interpretation of the Quran.  Besides, I’m not sure what relevance it is.

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7662
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
09 June 2019 13:25
 

lyn:

ROTFLOL.  Like Sam Harris doesn’t quote the Quran to prove his points?  Yet that doesn’t instantly discredit him?  Especially when he quotes it incorrectly?  Cole provides additional historical background (and polls of American Muslims) to bolster his argument regarding interpretation of the Quran.  Besides, I’m not sure what relevance it is.

Dude! Muslims’ own claims about the book are their own worst enemy. If Muslims didn’t INSIST on the perfection of the book, we’d have something to talk about. But given that the context is that the book is PERFECT, apologist cherry picking is logically meaningless. OTOH, all critics have to do is find minor issues with the book to prove that the book is - in fact - NOT PERFECT. It’s easy for Harris or any critic of the Quran to find the book’s many faults. But for apologists to cite “good” passages proves absolutely nothing.

Now, if Muslims would back off their claims of PERFECTION, they’d have an easier time defending the book. But as long as the starting point is the claim of PERFECTION, apologists have a virtually impossible task.

 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  477
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
09 June 2019 14:35
 
icehorse - 09 June 2019 01:25 PM

lyn:

ROTFLOL.  Like Sam Harris doesn’t quote the Quran to prove his points?  Yet that doesn’t instantly discredit him?  Especially when he quotes it incorrectly?  Cole provides additional historical background (and polls of American Muslims) to bolster his argument regarding interpretation of the Quran.  Besides, I’m not sure what relevance it is.

Dude! Muslims’ own claims about the book are their own worst enemy. If Muslims didn’t INSIST on the perfection of the book, we’d have something to talk about. But given that the context is that the book is PERFECT, apologist cherry picking is logically meaningless. OTOH, all critics have to do is find minor issues with the book to prove that the book is - in fact - NOT PERFECT. It’s easy for Harris or any critic of the Quran to find the book’s many faults. But for apologists to cite “good” passages proves absolutely nothing.

Now, if Muslims would back off their claims of PERFECTION, they’d have an easier time defending the book. But as long as the starting point is the claim of PERFECTION, apologists have a virtually impossible task.

I don’t think Juan Cole is a Muslim, and I’m pretty sure Sam Harris isn’t.  No one here begins with the premise that the book is perfect.  Once again, you’re putting out a strawman argument, the premise that the book is perfect (and the conversely, mis-characterizing your long rant of the evils of the book as “minor issues”.)  That’s not the issue, the issue is whether Sam Harris is right about it. 

But let me see if I summarize your argument: critics who say it drums violence into the minds of its readers, it’s supremacist (without providing anything other than their own word as evidence), promotes hate of the west (supported by mistranslated quotations) and that long list of evils have proven something (what? how?).  “Apologists” (again, a mis-characterization) who correct the mis-translations and cite contextual historical events regarding what’s referenced in the book have proven “absolutely nothing,”  because the Quran is imperfect.  You’re just not making sense.  The Quran doesn’t have to be perfect for Juan Cole’s arguments.

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7662
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
09 June 2019 15:18
 
lynmc - 09 June 2019 02:35 PM
icehorse - 09 June 2019 01:25 PM

lyn:

ROTFLOL.  Like Sam Harris doesn’t quote the Quran to prove his points?  Yet that doesn’t instantly discredit him?  Especially when he quotes it incorrectly?  Cole provides additional historical background (and polls of American Muslims) to bolster his argument regarding interpretation of the Quran.  Besides, I’m not sure what relevance it is.

Dude! Muslims’ own claims about the book are their own worst enemy. If Muslims didn’t INSIST on the perfection of the book, we’d have something to talk about. But given that the context is that the book is PERFECT, apologist cherry picking is logically meaningless. OTOH, all critics have to do is find minor issues with the book to prove that the book is - in fact - NOT PERFECT. It’s easy for Harris or any critic of the Quran to find the book’s many faults. But for apologists to cite “good” passages proves absolutely nothing.

Now, if Muslims would back off their claims of PERFECTION, they’d have an easier time defending the book. But as long as the starting point is the claim of PERFECTION, apologists have a virtually impossible task.

I don’t think Juan Cole is a Muslim, and I’m pretty sure Sam Harris isn’t.  No one here begins with the premise that the book is perfect.  Once again, you’re putting out a strawman argument, the premise that the book is perfect (and the conversely, mis-characterizing your long rant of the evils of the book as “minor issues”.)  That’s not the issue, the issue is whether Sam Harris is right about it. 

But let me see if I summarize your argument: critics who say it drums violence into the minds of its readers, it’s supremacist (without providing anything other than their own word as evidence), promotes hate of the west (supported by mistranslated quotations) and that long list of evils have proven something (what? how?).  “Apologists” (again, a mis-characterization) who correct the mis-translations and cite contextual historical events regarding what’s referenced in the book have proven “absolutely nothing,”  because the Quran is imperfect.  You’re just not making sense.  The Quran doesn’t have to be perfect for Juan Cole’s arguments.

It does not matter if Cole is a Muslim. All Harris has to do is make a few simple criticisms - which he does. If I recall, Harris criticizes the book for promoting prejudice against non-Muslims, for promoting misogyny, homophobia, theocracy, and anti-semitism. Are we agreed that Harris’s criticisms include those?

Now back to the book’s “perfection”. It matters not a whit what people on this forum think, or what Cole or Harris thinks about the perfection of the Quran. The ONLY thing that matters is what Muslims believe. That is THE ONLY CONTEXT that matters. To reiterate, it is the combination of the contents of the book AND Muslims’ relationship to the book that matters. If Muslims would back off their extraordinary claims, a lot of criticism would vanish.

As for promoting supremacism, and it being only my word? Give me a break. All you have to do is read the darned thing. You can’t go more than a page or two without encountering some variety of bashing non-Muslims.

 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  477
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
12 June 2019 14:31
 
icehorse - 09 June 2019 03:18 PM
lynmc - 09 June 2019 02:35 PM
icehorse - 09 June 2019 01:25 PM

lyn:

ROTFLOL.  Like Sam Harris doesn’t quote the Quran to prove his points?  Yet that doesn’t instantly discredit him?  Especially when he quotes it incorrectly?  Cole provides additional historical background (and polls of American Muslims) to bolster his argument regarding interpretation of the Quran.  Besides, I’m not sure what relevance it is.

Dude! Muslims’ own claims about the book are their own worst enemy. If Muslims didn’t INSIST on the perfection of the book, we’d have something to talk about. But given that the context is that the book is PERFECT, apologist cherry picking is logically meaningless. OTOH, all critics have to do is find minor issues with the book to prove that the book is - in fact - NOT PERFECT. It’s easy for Harris or any critic of the Quran to find the book’s many faults. But for apologists to cite “good” passages proves absolutely nothing.

Now, if Muslims would back off their claims of PERFECTION, they’d have an easier time defending the book. But as long as the starting point is the claim of PERFECTION, apologists have a virtually impossible task.

I don’t think Juan Cole is a Muslim, and I’m pretty sure Sam Harris isn’t.  No one here begins with the premise that the book is perfect.  Once again, you’re putting out a strawman argument, the premise that the book is perfect (and the conversely, mis-characterizing your long rant of the evils of the book as “minor issues”.)  That’s not the issue, the issue is whether Sam Harris is right about it. 

But let me see if I summarize your argument: critics who say it drums violence into the minds of its readers, it’s supremacist (without providing anything other than their own word as evidence), promotes hate of the west (supported by mistranslated quotations) and that long list of evils have proven something (what? how?).  “Apologists” (again, a mis-characterization) who correct the mis-translations and cite contextual historical events regarding what’s referenced in the book have proven “absolutely nothing,”  because the Quran is imperfect.  You’re just not making sense.  The Quran doesn’t have to be perfect for Juan Cole’s arguments.

It does not matter if Cole is a Muslim. All Harris has to do is make a few simple criticisms - which he does. If I recall, Harris criticizes the book for promoting prejudice against non-Muslims, for promoting misogyny, homophobia, theocracy, and anti-semitism. Are we agreed that Harris’s criticisms include those?

Now back to the book’s “perfection”. It matters not a whit what people on this forum think, or what Cole or Harris thinks about the perfection of the Quran. The ONLY thing that matters is what Muslims believe. That is THE ONLY CONTEXT that matters. To reiterate, it is the combination of the contents of the book AND Muslims’ relationship to the book that matters. If Muslims would back off their extraordinary claims, a lot of criticism would vanish.

 


The main criticism Harris makes is that it inspires, virtually induces violence in its followers, as if they’re mindless fanatics who all think they’ll be rewarded with virgins in the afterlife for blowing themselves up to kill Jews or westerners, but I suppose your list is there too if worded a little differently.  It’s not a “few simple criticisms”, it’s an Islamophobic rant - you haven’t provided a single iota of evidence that Juan Cole is wrong regarding Harris’s book on Islam.  Just, as noted, your own rant and random but unsupported accusations (e.g. using anecdotal evidence, taking Harris out of context) against Cole.

The Quran doesn’t have to be perfect nor do Muslims have to accept that it’s imperfect for Harris to take a mis-translation from it, then mis-interpret the mis-translation, and be pretty much all wrong about Islam.  His criticism is of what it says, not that it’s actually imperfect.  If it said all the “right” things, it would presumably be perfect. The issue that Muslims think it’s perfect is a strawman.

A lot of criticism would vanish if Muslims backed off their extraordinary claims [of perfection]?  Dubious, Harris’s list as reported by you doesn’t even include that one.  So I don’t see how that follows.

As for promoting supremacism, and it being only my word? Give me a break. All you have to do is read the darned thing. You can’t go more than a page or two without encountering some variety of bashing non-Muslims.

If that’s so, you should have an easy time providing a supremacist quote from the book, yet, you’ve thus far been unwilling or unable to do so.  You repeatedly make the claim, but you haven’t provided any evidence to support your claim.  So yeah, I have only your word, endlessly repeating the same bad arguments over and over again.

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7662
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
12 June 2019 15:10
 

lyn,

Here’s a link to a page that lists over 500 times the Quran preaches intolerance towards non-Muslims. Full disclosure, I did not check all 500 items on the list, but I did spot check the list and the list seems to be totally consistent with my reading of the Quran. I will stand by my claim that it’s really hard to go more than 2 or 3 pages in the Quran without encountering a verse that disparages non-Muslims.

500 bits of intolerance in the Quran

And as a measure of good faith, let my cite you a bunch of occurrences, in the 2nd Surah of the whole book:

2-6: .. warn them (non believers) or do not warn them, they will not believe
2-7: Alaah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing… Theirs will be a great torment.
2-9: They think to deceive Allah.. while they only deceive themselves.
2-10: in their hearts is a disease.. a painful torment os theirs because they used to tell lies
2-12: ..They are the ones who make mischief
2-13: ..Verily they are the fools, but they know not
2-14: paraphrased: they claim to believe but in secret admit they were mocking Muslims
2-15: Allah mocks them and gives them increase in their wrong-doing to wander blindly
2-17: Allah took away their light and left them in darkness
2-18: They are deaf, dumb, and blind..
2-19: paraphrase: they fear death but Allah will gather them all
2-20: the lightning snatches away their sight..

and so on.

lyn, give me a break. if you’ve read the Quran you must admit that one of it’s main - endlessly recurring points of focus - is to disparage non-Muslims. There is a point at which, when you deny that which is self-evident, you’re only making a fool of yourself. Give the patrons here a little credit.

[ Edited: 12 June 2019 15:22 by icehorse]
 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  477
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
23 June 2019 06:04
 
icehorse - 12 June 2019 03:10 PM

lyn,

Here’s a link to a page that lists over 500 times the Quran preaches intolerance towards non-Muslims. Full disclosure, I did not check all 500 items on the list, but I did spot check the list and the list seems to be totally consistent with my reading of the Quran. I will stand by my claim that it’s really hard to go more than 2 or 3 pages in the Quran without encountering a verse that disparages non-Muslims.

500 bits of intolerance in the Quran

And as a measure of good faith, let my cite you a bunch of occurrences, in the 2nd Surah of the whole book:

2-6: .. warn them (non believers) or do not warn them, they will not believe
2-7: Alaah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing… Theirs will be a great torment.
2-9: They think to deceive Allah.. while they only deceive themselves.
2-10: in their hearts is a disease.. a painful torment os theirs because they used to tell lies
2-12: ..They are the ones who make mischief
2-13: ..Verily they are the fools, but they know not
2-14: paraphrased: they claim to believe but in secret admit they were mocking Muslims
2-15: Allah mocks them and gives them increase in their wrong-doing to wander blindly
2-17: Allah took away their light and left them in darkness
2-18: They are deaf, dumb, and blind..
2-19: paraphrase: they fear death but Allah will gather them all
2-20: the lightning snatches away their sight..

and so on.

lyn, give me a break. if you’ve read the Quran you must admit that one of it’s main - endlessly recurring points of focus - is to disparage non-Muslims. There is a point at which, when you deny that which is self-evident, you’re only making a fool of yourself. Give the patrons here a little credit.

I’ll take the first of your list as an example.

There is nothing supremacist about 2-6, “As for those who have rejected (these truths), it is all the same whether or not you warn them, for they will not believe”

How does it meet the definition of supremacism:
“The belief that a particular race, religion, gender, or culture is superior to others, such that those who identify with it are entitled to dominate, control, or rule those who do not” (from https://www.yourdictionary.com/supremacism)  ? 

Where does Quran 2-6 say (for that matter, where do any of the quotes on your list say) that “non-believers” should be dominated or controlled by “believers,” e.g., are not entitled to rights under law that “believers” are entitled to?  This is completely missing from the quotes.

A truly supremacist law would be the Israeli law of return, “every Jew has the right to come to this country as an oleh [immigrant]” (quoted from wikipedia) which gives entitlements to Jews above other ethnic groups, in particular its indigenous inhabitants, Palestinians.  Given your support for Israel which was set up for Jews to dominate within the territory it controls, and your constant badmouthing of Muslims indicating you believe you’re superior to them (most Palestinians are Muslims), I’d say that makes you supremacist.

Sorry, case closed.  All you’ve demonstrated is a failure to grasp the meaning of the word “supremacism”.

 

[ Edited: 23 June 2019 07:24 by lynmc]
 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7662
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
23 June 2019 08:50
 

lyn,

As for understanding the Quran, I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain it to you.

As for Israel and the Palestinians, I’m curious to know if you’re equally worried about a homeland for the Kurds or the Coptics or the Yazidis, or the other misplaced tribes of the ME. And if you’re not, why not?

 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  477
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
25 June 2019 16:17
 
icehorse - 23 June 2019 08:50 AM

lyn,

As for understanding the Quran, I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain it to you.

Since you don’t seem to understand a lot of concepts in plain English (such as supremacism), I would not expect you to understand the Quran either.  You could use an infinite number of “crayons” and I still wouldn’t get a fair reading from you.  So don’t bother.

As for Israel and the Palestinians, I’m curious to know if you’re equally worried about a homeland for the Kurds or the Coptics or the Yazidis, or the other misplaced [sic] tribes of the ME. And if you’re not, why not?

The Kurds and Coptics have homelands from which they haven’t been displaced.  I’m curious, do you think the Yazidis should be allowed to return to their homeland, from which they were driven by threats of terror and mass murder (for not having the “right” religion), regain possession of their lands, and live there without threats in peace and equality with surrounding peoples? 

If you do, do you also think Palestinians should be allowed to return to their homeland, from which they were driven by threats of terror and mass murder (for not having the “right” religion), live there in peace and equality with surrounding peoples, and regain possession of their properties which were confiscated by supremacist policies of the state of Israel? 

If not, why not?

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7662
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
25 June 2019 20:53
 

when you want to debate in good faith, let me know.

 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  477
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
28 June 2019 16:25
 
icehorse - 25 June 2019 08:53 PM

when you want to debate in good faith, let me know.

You spent many “crayons” avoiding saying anything to back up your assertions on supremacism in sharia or the Quran (also your evaluation of Juan Cole’s article), and when you finally produced something, it was a fallacious.  The most generous benefit of the doubt I could give you was that you fail to understand what “supremacism” actually is - a less generous (but IMHO more likely) reason for you to spend so much effort not to say anything verifiable would be that you simply want to repeat your Islamophobic talking points and don’t care about truth or logic.  That isn’t debating in good faith.  Persistently, almost insistently failing to back up your points with facts or logic isn’t debating in good faith.  To debate in good faith, I would require someone on the other side who is willing to do so.  ‘Nuff said.

 
 < 1 2 3 >