The following are quotes from Christian author and journalist, Chris Hedges’ book “Wages of Rebellion”:
The breakdown of American society will trigger a popular backlash, which we glimpsed in the Occupy movement, but it will also energize the traditional armed vigilante groups that embrace a version of American fascism that fuses Christian and national symbols.
Gabrielle Giffords, a member of the US House of Representatives, was shot in the head in January 2011 as she held a meeting in a supermarket parking lot in Arizona. Eighteen other people were wounded. Six of them died. Sarah Palin’s political action committee had previously targeted Giffords and other Democrats with crosshairs on an electoral map. When someone like Palin posts a map with crosshairs, saying, “Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!” there are desperate, enraged people with weapons who act. When Christian fascists stand in the pulpits of megachurches and denounce Barack Obama as the Antichrist, there are messianic believers who believe it. When a Republican lawmaker shouts “Baby killer!” at Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak, there are violent extremists who see the mission of saving the unborn as a sacred duty. They have little left to lose.
The kind of extremism that Hedges refers to, can be seen in the vitriol of Christian extremists such as Robert Spencer and Jonathan McLatchie. The next quote more accurately refers to these two missionaries:
Left unchecked, the hatred for radical Islam will transform itself into a hatred for Muslims. The hatred for undocumented workers will become a hatred for Mexicans and Central Americans.
The ethnic groups, worshiping their own mythic virtues and courage and wallowing in historical examples of their own victimhood, vomited up demagogues and murderers such as Radovan Karadzic and Slobodan Milosevic. To restore this mythological past they sought to remove, through exclusion and finally violence, competing ethnicities. The embrace of non-reality-based belief systems made communication among ethnic groups impossible. They no longer spoke the same cultural or historical language. They believed in their private fantasy. And because they believed in fantasy, they had no common historical narrative built around verifiable truth and no way finally to communicate with anyone who did not share their self-delusion.
In conclusion about these extremists, he says:
Those who retreat into fantasy cannot be engaged in rational discussion, for fantasy is all that is left of their tattered self-esteem. Attacks on their myths as untrue trigger not a discussion of facts and evidence but a ferocious emotional backlash.
That last quote reminds me solely of Sam Shamoun. Rather than engage in intellectual dialogue, he copy pastes articles, and insults those he disagrees with. Thus, the rise of Christian fascism, and its role in spreading hatred and violence towards Muslims is a growing pattern among polemicists such as Robert Spencer, David Wood, Sam Shamoun and now recently Jonathan McLatchie. The result of this hate can only be expressed as follows:
A Christian polemicist who previously compared Muslims to a cancer in Europe, and who denied that God inscribed the 10 commandments on tablets to Moses, has claimed that there is a chain of transmission linking the apostles of Jesus to the early Church Fathers. Is this true? How, do we respond to this?
There is nothing to respond to. The author of the aforementioned article does not seem to understand the basics of hadith criticism, and reduces the science of hadith criticism to merely throwing some names together and linking them through obscurity. It should be noted that in reading that poor article, the author depends solely on one disciple and solely on one Patristic, with two extremely obscure quotes whose works we no longer have the autographs (originals) for. After several hundred words, the author could not sum his evidences to provide a basis for a single da’eef (weak) chain of transmission. Under hadith criticism, especially that of mustalah or rijal, the hadith sciences would have no other option to regard that claim of a “chain”, as nothing more than hearsay.
Regarding his quotes, Papias and Polycarp are said to have been contemporaries of each other. Eusebius in the 4th century, corrects Papias in his assertion that he knew John the apostle. It is disputed which John that Papias knew. If Papias and Polycarp were contemporaries, and the Christians of the 4th century couldn’t identify which of the four Johns he knew (John the apostle, John the elder, John of Patmos or a John with a combination of any of the previous identities), how can someone 2000 years later claim to make that identification for Papias’ contemporary, Polycarp? Furthermore, it should be noted that Polycarp himself not once quotes or references John the apostle in any of his extant writings, and Iraeneus who in the late second century recorded the claim that Polycarp knew John, heard this in his childhood. There are literally no other sources which can corroborate something that Iraeneus writing in the late second century, claims to have heard in his childhood, much less so from any of the extant writings of Polycarp himself.
The author of the aforementioned article, in a case of pure desperation attempts to quote Ignatius’ work to qualify the claim of early Trinitarian beliefs, whereas it should be known that Ignatius’ works are only survived through Eusebius in the 4th century, with absolutely no verifiable chain of transmission between the two. In other words, it has been demonstrated that the author himself is unfamiliar with the hadith sciences to the point he could not offer a single chain of transmission or the chain’s grading, or a jarh of any of the names mentioned in the overly lengthy article. His sole reliance on one obscure quote without any other witness or comment by Iraeneus himself, demonstrates the desperation of the author to forcibly create an instance of a chain of transmission. In my debate earlier this year, I consulted with a New Testament Professor and a scholar of the hadith sciences to examine the chains of transmission in the early Church. A basic summary of the results of our labour can be found in that debate:
It is clear that the author of the article was not attempting to present a studied argument. Due to the nature of the blog he posted the article to, it can thus be deduced that he was pandering to lay-Christians with no scholastic interest in either Christianity or Islam. I forwarded his article to both the New Testament Professor and hadith scholar I worked with on examining Patristic chains of transmission, and both of them replied quite negatively. Another brother, who discussed this topic with a prominent Christian New Testament scholar and historian, also replied negatively to the claims in the article (not to the article itself). I have not sought permission from any of these persons to reproduce their comments on this website. Should the case arise for me to do so, I will, with great pleasure. However, it is saddening that the Christian author has chosen to align himself with an anti-immigrant polemicist, whose venom Dr. James White in a recent video attempted to dissuade Christians from endorsing. It would then seem, that the author is more interested in pandering to a racist crowd, that conforms to his views, than to do objective, intelligent and honest academic research.
Following in the footsteps of now disgraced pseudo-academic (false credentials regarding the teachings of Islam – Alpha and Omega Ministry), Ergun Caner, Jonathan McLatchie is now advertising himself as an “expert on Islam”. According to an August 2nd post advertising his lecture in which he claimed that “France has a problem with Islam”, and that Islam and Muslims were “tantamount to inviting a virus into your civilization“, Jonathan is described as an “expert on Islam“:
“Expert on Islam”
In a private interview conducted with myself, meant for publication, I decided to ask Jonathan questions about Shari’ah law, given his previous xenophobic comments regarding Muslims and Islam. A portion (in chronological order) is given as follows:
So how did the ‘expert on Islam’ do? Not so well….
According to Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah, there are four sources of Islamic law:
Shari’ah law, also includes what the English would refer to as “common law” and “civil law” with deep considerations taken of ‘Urf (العرف) – cultural norms and values. Shari’ah law, also includes the corpus of laws a Muslim would adhere to in his daily life: how do I pray, what is the Shari’ah ruling on food cooked in the same pot as pork or ham, what does the Shari’ah say regarding fasting if I’m traveling, etc. So not only does this ‘expert on Islam’, not know the basics, he relegated it only to crime, politics and economics.
It was at this point I realised he did not know what he was talking about and I decided to ask him a very basic question regarding Shari’ah law. Immediately, he renounced his ‘expertise’, despite having advertised himself as such on Christian apologetics websites and on ABN/ Trinity TV’s shows last week. Jonathan was clearly caught off guard and quickly realised he needed to mitigate the situation, thereby relinquishing his claim to be an ‘expert’. This was a live interview, so he had no time to Google the answer, and he was live on Skype with me, I would have noticed if he was trying to Google search the answer to my question. So caught between a rock and a hard place, the ‘expert’ then, ‘not an expert’, who returned to being an ‘expert’ last week did indeed get the question wrong.
The Hadd laws, refer to very specific punishments within the Shari’ah. This would include stoning and cutting of the hands, which do require in and of themselves, very specific evidences for the punishment to be meted out (which is difficult to attain in most cases). These are not Ta’zir laws, which are discretionary judgments by an Islamic judge (qadhi). So the well advertised and self-proclaimed ‘expert’ on Islam needs to publicly correct himself. His rabid tirades against the Islamic Shari’ah, when he clearly does not understand it are very worrisome. He’s arguing and hating against something of which he has no idea about. Clearly then, when confronted with a difficult situation, he quickly discarded his ‘expert’ title and rightfully accepted his position as being theological unqualified about Islam.
I advise Jonathan, to fully discard the title, you sir are not an ‘expert on Islam’.
We Muslims should not be excited at the prospect that Tommy Robinson has departed from the infamous English Defense League. Rather, we must try to understand Tommy’s motives and intentions in his recent jump to the Qulliam Foundation. The EDL is not a government funded group, the Qulliam Foundation is. This is an important point, but we shall return to this later.
When you think of the EDL, the first word which comes to mind is hooliganism. You conjure images of drunkard buffoons running riot through the streets of Britain attacking Muslim homes, businesses and places of worship. You think of violent attacks and white pride terminology and slogans. You do not think, ‘an educated think thank’, you think the exact opposite. For all it’s worth, the most popular slogan that any EDL campaign as managed to bring to an international level is the absolutely hilarious Muslamic Ray Gun video:
Tommy Robinson is only seeking to legitimize his anti-Islamic rhetoric in a suit and a tie, provided by government funding, as opposed to shouting angry slogans in marches meant to disgrace Britain. What this change allows for, is that it gives Tommy Robinson a platform which is supported by the government and by sell out Muslims such as Dr. Usama Hasan. He hasn’t changed any of his views, he still intends to fight against Muslims and he still intends to criticise Muslims for the mere fact that they follow Islam and now he isn’t doing so with a gang of drunkards, he’s doing so in a suit and tie, with an organization that will present him as an educated individual whose societal and cultural beliefs must be taken as serious intellectual study.
This jump from the EDL to the Qulliam Foundation is not something to celebrate, but it should be seen for what it is, an attempt to make the violent views of Tommy and his friends, seem as respected social commentary.
The potential for violence as is seen on these images is very real and extremely possible to occur. However as you’d notice, the EDL’s logic isn’t the best.
Muslims are not Sikhs, but don’t expect the racist and violent EDL to know this. As for the second image, any Englishman should recognize that as the Brighton Pavilion! Yet the ENGLISH “Defense” LEAGUE, can’t discern between one of their own public structures and a Mosque. Sad, but funny. Tommy Robinson doesn’t exactly lead the brightest bunch of folks, they’re more like blockheads.
Masjid e Umer condemns this heinous atrocity that occurred Yesterday – it is was barbaric act of pure evil worthy of nothing but contempt. There is no evidence and no room in Islam for such unacceptable behaviour. The Quran clearly states:
“….whoever kills a soul unlawfully – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely….”. Surah 5 Verse 32
We would also like to ask the community to remain calm and vigilant, as such barbaric acts usually cause reaction by other extreme groups.
We ask Allah to protect everyone and safeguard the Muslims and Mosques and guide us all to the straight path, Ameen.
The men who killed a man using machetes in London today committed a criminal and evil act. I pray that all communities remain united and don’t let this cause hatred and division. Know that whoever did this does not represent any community or any religion.
Br. Hamza + Br. Adnan have posted this video in response to the Woolwich incident:
Unfortunately, violence against Muslims who are innocent of the actions of a few have begun to pop up, where it is reported in Essex that an armed intruder with two knives attempted to stab members of the congregation and then tried to burn down the Mosque in response to the Woolwich attack:
Frail Mohammed Saleem, 75, who used a walking stick, was knifed three times in the back just yards from his front door on Monday night. The blows were struck with such violence they penetrated all the way through to the front of respected community elder’s body.
Detectives leading the murder hunt said a racially-motivated attack was a “significant line of inquiry”. Mr Saleem usually made the same trip to his local mosque five times a day with a friend – but on Monday he walked alone.
His horrified wife, Said Begum, discovered the grandfather of 22 dying on the pavement after neighbours raised the alarm. Cops released CCTV footage of a man seen running in the area of the attack in Small Heath, Birmingham.
Tommy Robinson and his followers (the phrase “in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king,” comes to mind) are intent on running Islam and its teachings out of the country and are using criminal acts from Muslims as evidence for their cause. Their next stop is set for Woolwich, following the death of a man and the broadcast of an ITV video showing a bloodied man claiming to be fighting for Allah.
The militant anti-Islamic today ordered the march toward Woolwich, exactly three months after he was released from prison for possessing a fake passport following the killing of an alleged British soldier in a suspected jihadist attack – note the words ‘suspected’, the motives of the attack have not, as yet, been confirmed
I’m sorry, Mr Robinson, but I think you’ll find the problem isn’t with Islam. You see, the real issue here is with extremism and you pointing at every news story involving a Muslim and shouting “SEE! I TOLD YOU,” isn’t going to cut it.
Islamic terrorist attacks account for fewer than 100 deaths in the UK – which, of course, is too many. But, in recent years, we’ve seen the IRA apologise for the death of 1,800 “non-combatants” alone, I can guarantee the knuckle-draggers won’t be chasing Paddy down the road on St Patrick’s day.
Lest we forget that Anders Breivik, a Christian, killed 69 people – mostly teenagers – on and around the island of Utøya, Norway and the many, many school shootings by mostly white, non-Muslim people in the United States.
At no point in this piece do I intend to protect any murder or act of terrorism, but we should certainly not tar an entire religion with a brush as a result of the sinister actions of a few.
The EDL are claiming that since the attack took place, their Facebook page has had over 3,000 new ‘likes’ – do not be one of those people, you’re only giving credence to an organisation dedicated to the hatred of an entire sect of people. The group would have you believe that each and every practicing Muslim will behead you for hanging a St George’s Cross from your roof – it’s not true, I promise.
And, I’m sure, EDL-apologists around the country will claim I’m a journalist, paid by the government to keep acts of violence by Muslims quiet. Were that true, I’d have many more pairs of nicer trainers, I promise you.
At the time of writing this column, too few details exist to write a well-rounded opinion piece on the Woolwich situation, but the furore the EDL is creating on Twitter is unsettling. As we speak, the tweet from the fascist group’s official Twitter account, which calls its members to arms, has over 775 retweets, considerably more than my own which intended to warn the police of possible violence (a measly 17).
Here’s exclusive photos of Tommy Robinson’s EDL members, provided exclusively by CC via EDL Members Gary Lord and Jonathon Francis (who is seen below threatening to kill Muslims tonight):
You must be logged in to post a comment.