Author Archives: Ijaz Ahmad

Not All Muslims are Terrorists, But All Terrorists Are Muslims

In my debate review of, “Is Islam a Threat to Modern Society,” I provided citations to prove the above assertion incorrect. To further my response, I would like to provide a complementary quote from Chris Hedges:

The Afghans, the Iraqis, the Yemenis, the Pakistanis, and the Somalis know what American military forces do. They do not need to read WikiLeaks. It is we who remain ignorant. Our terror is delivered daily to the wretched of the earth with industrial weapons. But to us, it is invisible. We do not stand over the decapitated body and eviscerated bodies left behind on city and village streets by our missiles, drones and fighter jets.

We do not listen to the wails and shrieks of parents embracing the shattered bodies of their children. We do not see the survivors of air attacks bury their mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters. We are not conscious of the long night of collective humiliation, repression, and powerlessness that characterizes existence in Israel’s occupied territories, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

We do not see the boiling anger that war and injustice turn into a cauldron of hate over time. We are not aware of this very natural lust for revenge against those who carry out or symbolize this oppression. We see only the final pyrotechnics of terror, the shocking moments when the rage erupts into an inchoate fury and the murder of innocents. And willfully uninformed, we do not understand our own complicity. We self-righteously condemn the killers as subhuman savages who deserve more of the violence that created them.

This is a recipe for endless terror.

He continues:

Manning, by providing a window into the truth, opened up the possibility of redemption. She offered hope for a new relationship with the Muslim world, one based on compassion and honesty, on the rule of law, rather than on the cold brutality of industrial warfare. But by refusing to heed the truth that Manning laid before us, by ignoring the crimes committed daily in our name, we not only continue to swell the ranks of our enemies but put the lives of our citizens in greater jeopardy.

Manning showed us through the documents she released to WikiLeaks what all Iraqis know. They have endured hundreds of rapes and murders, along with systematic torture by the military and police of the puppet government we installed. None of the atrocities from the leaked videos and documents were investigated. Manning provided the data showing that between 2004 and 2009 there were at least 109,032 “violent deaths” in Iraq, including those of 66,081 civilians, and that coalition troops were responsible for at least 195 unreported civilian deaths.

In the “Collateral Murder” video, she allowed us to watch as a US helicopter attacked unarmed civilians in Baghdad and as a US Army tank then crushed one of the wounded lying on the street. The actions of the US military in this one video alone, as law professor Marjorie Cohn has pointed out, violate Article 85 of the First Protocol of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits the targeting of civilians; Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which requires that the wounded be treated; and Article 17 of the First Protocol, which permits civilians to rescue and care for the wounded without being harmed.

These quotes were taken from Chris Hedges’s, Wages of Rebellion, pages 186-188.

and God knows best.

The New Testament Today

The New Testament Today – What is it? Where did it come from? Can we rely on it?

These questions and more are answered, as our journey into 2017 begins. Let this year, be a year of guidance for our Christian brothers and sisters.

YouTube Mirror if above Facebook video is not available.

Thanks to Dr. Chris Claus for inspiring this video and this series of videos that will be coming out on various pages, YouTube channels and Islamic TV channels shortly.

 

Missionary Mishap: Neil Littlejohn’s Liberation

Neil Littlejohn known as Collin, is “celebrating” his liberation from Islam while wearing Islamic clothing, keeping an Islamic style beard and an Islamic name. Quite the “liberation”! Though, while he reduces this year, 2016 to be the year of liberation from Islam, he seems to have forgotten that he changed his religion three (3) times in one year, the year of 2016:

cc-2016-nl-liberationtweet

Or that he changed his faith over 6 times in the last decade or so. Awkward!

and God knows best!

Missionary Mishap: $50,000 Bet Lost

Many missionaries offer money as a means of demonstrating that their beliefs or arguments are true. One such person made a challenge and I duly responded. You can see the notifications of his responses to me here:

wp-1483160456938.jpg

Unfortunately, asking for the rules and conditions of his challenge, caused him to suddenly block me.

In the above photo you can see that only my comments are available, despite him having commented and replied to me as indicated by my notifications. I suppose blocking real challengers to your challenge is one way of keeping the money…

And God knows best.

Missionary Mishap: Doubting the Bible Makes Me an Atheist

During a conversation on Facebook on a post by our esteemed Br. Yusuf Ismail on the presevation of the New Testament, a missionary decided to mention the Quran. I indicated to him quite kindly that this was the tu quoque argument, to which his response was negative:


Apparently, he does not understand how dialogue works and that not everyone who rejects his scripture is an atheist:

  1. And God Knows Best!

 

Drugging Muslims Because They’re Not Christian

I was recently made aware of an extremely disturbing post on Yahoo Answers where an apparently Christian user  was angry at one of their family members converting to Islam and marrying a Muslim. Upset at the conversion and at their presence at dinner, the Christian intended to spike their drinks with the sleep aid melatonin:

cc-2016-mm-drugmuslims

Foregoing the finer details (such as the Christian assuming the Muslims would drink alcohol), it’s the ethical and moral problems that are strikingly worrisome about this post. While melatonin itself can be harmless, its interactions and side effects are not. WebMD lists the following interactions:

cc-2016-mm-melatoninwarnings

Without knowing the medical history of a person, administering drugs without their consent, even if you believe the drug to be harmful is wrong. The consequences of spiking anyone’s drinks for any reason, can never be justified and should not be encouraged. While I am deeply disturbed by the posting and the hatred in the heart of the person willing to put a family member’s life at risk (driving home while on melatonin can lead to an accident, as it falls under operating heavy machinery), we hope that users can flag and report the posting.

We all have differences in beliefs, but even if we harbour some form of enmity or dislike for a people, just as the Qur’an says, do not let your personal inclinations prevent you from being just and upright in your interactions:

“O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah and be just witnesses and let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety, and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is Well ­Acquainted with what you do.” – Qur’an 5:8.

and God knows best.

Missionary Mishap: Made Up Sources

This Missionary Mishap is quite hilarious. A polemicist became quite angry at one of my posts on Facebook regarding New Testament Textual Criticism. In my dialogue with Dr. White (1, 2, 3) I mentioned several sources for my research and arguments regarding the variant units of John 9:38 and John 20:28. One polemicist, a Kelly Melissa Mullen however, found me on Facebook and for some reason or the other, felt the need to tell me what sources I used, that I had copied my arguments from Dr. Ehrman and from some obscure book written more than a decade ago:

cc-2016-mm-kellylie3

After having made it clear over 20 times that neither Dr. Ehrman nor the aforementioned author in her comment were my sources, she continued to insist that they must have been. Why is that? Well she explains herself as follows:

cc-2016-mm-kellylie1

She thinks because my argument is similar and found elsewhere, despite earlier claiming it was an argument no other textual critic had used, she insisted that it must have come from Dr. Ehrman who is a textual critic. So in her mind, her logic flows as follows:

  • Ijaz has made claims that no other textual critic has made.
  • Dr. Ehrman who is a textual critic made a similar claim.
  • Therefore Ijaz made a claim that no other textual critic made, even though she argues my source was a textual critic, that of Dr. Ehrman.

The cognitive dissonance is palpable to the point that the Chinese government would warn you from going stepping into her home. To her, I made a claim no other textual critic would make, but my alleged source is a textual critic. Quite brilliant. She then had the audacity to tell me over 13 times that Dr. Ehrman must have been my source. Must have. I simply told her to watch my videos on the topic, I named several sources, none of which were Dr. Ehrman. So why did she claim him to be the source? Oh, because he may have said something similar to what I said. Unfortunately for her she was not familiar with the concept that correlation does not imply causation. I actually pointed this out to her:

cc-2016-mm-kellylie2

I ended the conversation with her, because she continued to insist that she knows better than I do, what sources I did use. A dialogue by definition involves two or more people (that’s what the di in dialogue implies), but to her, my own words about my own sources did not matter. What she assumed my sources to have been, must necessarily have been my sources. She was in effect having a soliloquy, something I mentioned to her.

She argued that she wanted to continue the “dialogue” with me, but the question begs itself, if you reject what the other person says, with your imagined conclusions, then where is the di in dialogue?

and God knows best.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »