Top Menu

Why Can’t Robert Spencer Debate Danios of LoonWatch (Again)?

For several years, pseudo-scholar Robert Spencer of JihadWatch has claimed that he would be willing to debate any “Leftist or Muslim” to defend his arguments.  For example, on the 13th of June 2010, Spencer bellowed:

The list of the Leftist and Muslim academics and apologists who have refused my challenge to debate is very long; they know they can’t refute what I say on the basis of evidence, so they resort to broad-based smears and personal attacks — and haughty refusals to debate.

Just a few days later on June 17th, I responded by accepting Spencer’s debate challenge:

Danios of LoonWatch Accepts Robert Spencer’s Challenge to a Debate

I accept your challenge, Spencer. I agree to a radio debate with you on the topic of jihad and “dhimmitude”, namely chapters 1-4 of your book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). It will then be seen if you can defend your own writing, which I argue is a load of sensationalist crock.

Will you accept my challenge to debate or cower in fear? My guess is that you “know [you] can’t refute what I say” and will “resort to…haughty refusals to debate.”

I predict that the JW minions will give excuses to explain away why their master Robert Spencer will refuse to debate me, instead of urging him to enter into a debate as they always do with other people who challenge his ideas. They already know that Spencer does not stand a chance in a debate with me, which is why they will continue to generate excuses to exonerate him from his intellectual cowardice. This is because deep down inside they know–as does everyone else who has followed his and my writings–what the outcome would be.

Spencer backing down from a debate with me would be curious, considering that he has already conceded that my writings are “rare occasions when the opposition does offer a substantive response.” Spencer, are you saying that you can debate with people so long as they don’t give you a substantive response, in which case you flee?

As most readers are aware, LoonWatch has become the most popular anti-Islamophobia website, giving birth to a sister site called SpencerWatch.  In fact, LoonWatch won the Brass Crescent Award in 2010 and I (Danios) won the Brass Crescent Award for Best Writer in 2011.  The people have spoken, and they clearly want to see a debate between Spencer and I.

To this effect, Ahmed Rehab, Executive Director of CAIR-Chicago, asked Robert Spencer in October of 2010 why he was dodging the debate with me.  A few days later, Spencer issued a furious response, in which he said:

Debating such a compromised and dishonest individual would be a waste of time

I responded to this saying:

Isn’t that the exact same reasoning that Rehab gave for refusing to debate you, Spencer? The same reasoning you were so opposed to and called cowardice?

Spencer needs another excuse to weasel out of a debate with me. What will it be? Aha! It will be my anonymity! As many of you know, I write anonymously under a pseudonym. Spencer and his fellow fans desperately want to know who I am. Some of them are convinced I am XYZ, and others that I am ABCD. Some have even engaged in textual analysis, trying extremely hard to find out who this cursed Danios is. My question is: who cares? Deal with my arguments, not who I am. Spencer says:

…Since Rehab invokes [Danios] and others have referred to his site [LoonWatch] recently, I am willing: if “Danios of Loonwatch” reveals his real name…

Spencer places this condition on me, knowing full well that I will refuse to reveal my name, since he knows that I like writing anonymously.

On November 1st, 2010, I posted another response:

JihadWatch, a vitriolic hate site run by pretend scholar Robert Spencer, has propelled itself to the forefront of the Islamophobic movement in the United States.  The fear-mongering Spencer has used his hate site to demonize Islam and Muslims.  To bolster his credibility, Robert Spencer had long ago issued an open challenge to “Muslims and leftists” to debate his ideas.

I accepted Spencer’s challenge to a debate on June 17th, 2010.  Since then, several influential Muslim-American spokesmen have expressed their interest in such a debate between Spencer and I.  This includesAhmed Rehab (Executive Director of CAIR-Chicago), who issued a scathing statement against Spencer.  However, it has now been over 135 days since I accepted Robert Spencer’s challenge.  JihadWatch has generated excuse after excuse as to why this radio debate cannot take place.

The latest set of excuses was that I must reveal who I am before a debate can take place.  Spencer issued this pre-condition knowing full well that I value my anonymity too much to do that.  He naturally thought that this was a creative way to get out of a debate with me while at the same time saving face.  Said Spencer:

Sorry, I don’t debate fictional characters or pseudonyms. “Danios of Loonwatch” can go debate Scot Harvath or Harold Robbins.

This is of course strange since Hugh Fitzgerald, the Vice President of JihadWatch since 2004, himself operates under an anonymous pseudonym.  Fitzgerald is a co-administrator of the site, alongside Spencer.  Is Fitzgerald then a “fictional character” who is only worthy of debate with Scot Harvath or Harold Robbins?

If that is the case, I challenge Hugh Fitzgerald–co-administer and Vice President of JihadWatch–to a radio debate.  The topic will be Jihad, “Dhimmitude”, and Taqiyya (Stealth Jihad), namely chapters 1-4 of Robert Spencer’s book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades).

Hugh Fitzgerald of JihadWatch uses a pseudonym like myself, and he remains completely anonymous like myself.  Surely two “fictional characters” are worthy of debating each other, right?

Now what excuse will be generated by JihadWatch to avoid this debate with LoonWatch?  I can just see Robert Spencer’s brain churning in order to generate a reason to get out of this one.  The truth is that JihadWatch is a bully, and as soon as someone steps up to a bully and delivers a solid punch to the mouth, the bully backs down like the coward he is.

That was where we last left off, with Robert Spencer coming up with the excuse of my anonymity to dodge a radio debate with me.  In other words, it has been 572 days since I issued my radio debate challenge–and Spencer has never manned up.

Until now?

Just yesterday, Robert Spencer posted an article with the title of “Why can’t Muslims debate? (Again)”, saying:

For example, an Islamic supremacist hate site that defames me and lies about what I say regularly charged that I was refusing to debate them:

I responded by repeating yet again something I had reiterated several times in the preceding weeks, when other Muslims had thrown up this site to me:

No response to that at all.

A simple Google search will reveal how this is a great big lie.  Spencer has adamantly refused to engage in a radio debate with LoonWatch and me in particular, using my anonymity as a face-saving excuse.

Do his recent tweets reflect a change in attitude or is he still cowering in fear of me?  Spencer, are you willing to back your words with action and “debate [me] anytime”?  I will debate the accuracy of your book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), with regard to the topics of jihad, “dhimmitude”, and taqiyya.  Are you ready to defend your arguments or not?

I think most of us anticipate “no response to that at all.”

Danios was the Brass Crescent Award Honorary Mention for Best Writer in 2010 and the Brass Crescent Award Winner for Best Writer in 2011.  

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Mach

    “Spencer has adamantly refused to engage in a radio debate with LoonWatch and me in particular, using my anonymity as a face-saving excuse.”

    – That is a very legit excuse.

  • Michael Elwood

    @Géji

    “Thanks for the reply Michael, I’ve read the article you’ve linked, and you’re right, MLK is not celebrated with good heart in many corners of America, at least for now, as there are I’m sure many who still deep down opposes what he stood for, and he was Christian, so I can imagine what opposition a Muslim Malcolm X would face.”

    Yeah, a lot of them just give lip service to the principles he advocated. For example, in the debate Believing Atheist linked to above between Edip Yuksel and Bill Warner, Warner criticized the Quran for not endorsing the Golden Rule. Warner probably thought Yuksel would insist that it did, but he thew him a curve ball by agreeing with him. Yuksel (who teaches ethics) pointed out that many Christians (and non-Christians) give lip service to the Golden Rule, but few actually apply it in real life.

    In a debate that ironically happened on MLK day, Ron Paul said that our foreign policy should be based on the Golden Rule. And the South Carolina audience, which was doubtlessly full of Christians, booed him!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltRTLNZmmfs

    “But I still think after this whole Islamophobiapalooza madness cools down, the African American Muslims who not only are growing in number but also in strength in the US, and as Dr Sherman Jackson rightly put it, when he said that they are the ones who constitute in the context of “American” Muslims as the “indigenous” element of the whole fabric, should nonetheless in my estimation lobby for a day to honor him, even though as you suggested yourself, I don’t think Malcolm would care the least for it.”

    They can lobby for it, but I still don’t think it’ll happen. When American Muslims were fighting for everyone’s civil and human rights back then, someone had to be the “good cop”, and someone had to be the “bad cop”. Malcolm X was the “bad cop”. There are other American Muslims who are more liked than Malcolm X. Like Muhammad Ali, who recently celebrated his birthday:

    http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/lapchick-120117/a-call-action-pro-athletes-use-muhammad-ali-role-model

    Or Kareem Abdul Jabbar, who was just appointed as cultural ambassador:

    http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/7475252/kareem-abdul-jabbar-appointed-global-cultural-ambassador

    “But what matter anyway is that his mission and his courage will never be forgotten, and do lives and celebrated throughout the hearts and minds of the millions of people worldwide who love and care for him, so a “day” wouldn’t be enough anyway. This man-(Allah-Yarhamu)-alone introduced so many people worldwide to Islam, whether Black, White, Latino, and that t’ill this day even way after he’s gone, so that in itself it’s a pride and an accomplishment that needs it’s own recognition and celebration throughout the Muslim world.”

    Even without an official holiday, I think Muslims in America and around the world could honor him by promoting his belief in human rights for all, and correcting the numerous misconceptions about what he believed.

    “I believe in the brotherhood of man, all men, but I don’t believe in brotherhood with anybody who doesn’t want brotherhood with me. I believe in treating people right, but I’m not going to waste my time trying to treat somebody right who doesn’t know how to return the treatment.”

    — Speech, Dec. 12 1964, New York City.

    “There is nothing in our book, the Koran, that teaches us to suffer peacefully. Our religion teaches us to be intelligent. Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. That’s a good religion.”

    — “Message to the Grass Roots,” speech, Nov. 1963, Detroit (published in Malcolm X Speaks, ch. 1, 1965).

    “But anyway, good decision “resisting” the temptation of what could’ve only been a waste of your time with trolly, loony-fruity…. Salaamu alaikum.”

    So far, so good! But I don’t know how long I can hold out! 🙂 I still want to address his amusing interpretation of 9:25-29. Salaam.

  • Géji

    @Michael Elwood

    Thanks for the reply Michael, I’ve read the article you’ve linked, and you’re right, MLK is not celebrated with good heart in many corners of America, at least for now, as there are I’m sure many who still deep down opposes what he stood for, and he was Christian, so I can imagine what opposition a Muslim Malcolm X would face. But I still think after this whole Islamophobiapalooza madness cools down, the African American Muslims who not only are growing in number but also in strength in the US, and as Dr Sherman Jackson rightly put it, when he said that they are the ones who constitute in the context of “American” Muslims as the “indigenous” element of the whole fabric, should nonetheless in my estimation lobby for a day to honor him, even though as you suggested yourself, I don’t think Malcolm would care the least for it. But what matter anyway is that his mission and his courage will never be forgotten, and do lives and celebrated throughout the hearts and minds of the millions of people worldwide who love and care for him, so a “day” wouldn’t be enough anyway. This man-(Allah-Yarhamu)-alone introduced so many people worldwide to Islam, whether Black, White, Latino, and that t’ill this day even way after he’s gone, so that in itself it’s a pride and an accomplishment that needs it’s own recognition and celebration throughout the Muslim world. But anyway, good decision “resisting” the temptation of what could’ve only been a waste of your time with trolly, loony-fruity…. Salaamu alaikum.

    @Just Stopping BY

    Salaam, thanks bro, you’re right that that may be the main reason behind the reluctance, his “Muslim-ness”. You also said the US was and still is not ready for this, and you may be right, but whether they’re “ready” or not, it doesn’t change the fact that Malcolm X was as American as apple pie as he was Muslim. But all this reminds me of a statement made by Dr Sherman Jackson which in my opinion drive this point home. He said that the American fabric is always in constant negotiation, and that everything in that fabric had to be negotiated in order to “pass” into mainstream as “accepted”, and that this has been the case since the very beginning of America. For example, Catholicism, the different factions of Protestantism, Judaism, Irishness, Italianness, Greekness, and so on and so forth , all had to negotiate their little corner into the bigger fabric of the American society. Thus, he was saying that that’s precisely what’s taking place for Islam right now, it had to happen at some point anyway, since as he said everything and everybody had to go through that process of negotiation, and in that sense Islam is no different. And although Islam itself in some ways has been in the scene of what may be the beginning, if not in some other ways then at least through slavery, since it is said that at least 25-35% of African slaves were Muslims, it was very much suppressed though nonetheless always maintaining some presence, but it didn’t succeed at the time pushing itself through the mainstream as its doing right now, nor didn’t have what we can call a solid representation which could have brought its subject to the negotiation table, as it have now. Thus, what’s taking place right now for American Islam, its very much in that spirit of the American process of negotiation in order to become mainstreamly “passable” thus acceptable into the bigger fabric of America. But as you yourself may know it, nothing comes cheap or easily in capitalist USA, I hope we can agree on that…………. Salaam bro or sis.

  • Our resident English teacher has pointed out to me that what I called The Arabic active imperfect verb salama is actually the active perfect, and what I called The passive perfect verb salima is actually the passive imperfect. Salama means “he restored,” and salima means “he is restored” to an original state and condition. “Salama Allah Adam” would say “God restored Adam” ~ a done deed ~ while “Salima Adam” would say “Adam is restored” ~ an on-going condition subject to change.

    Arabic has two tenses ~ “It is done,” referring to an action that has been indelibly written into the overall fabric of time and will not change, and “It is happening,” referring to an action taking place at a particular time, which may or may not become recognizable as a matter of “It is done” at some future moment, or may continue happening forever.

    When the Messenger said “I see darkness falling among your houses like rain,” he was seeing something happening. When he said “Surely he has entered The Garden,” he was not talking about something that was happening, but about what happened.

    Arabic says “I’m going to the store” only when the speaker is actually on his way to the store, which is true whether or not he gets where he is going. Before he starts on his way, he would say “I’m going to the store if God wills,” which is true even if he never gets started. English speaks of possibilities as certainties, leading to false prophecies ~ “I’m going to the store” is not true until he has actually started going. Arabic is more precise and clear.

  • Perhaps reform [of Islam] is not the correct word for it but I am struggling to come up with a better more realistic one. Something that means brought back to its pure and original form. Any word like that?

    Yes. The Arabic active imperfect verb that means “to return to a natural or original state” is salama. It’s the root word for “Islam.”

    The passive perfect verb, salima, means “to be safe and sound, unharmed, unimpaired, intact, safe, secure; to be unobjectionable, blameless, faultless; to be certain, established, clearly proven (fact); to be free.

    saleem means, among other things already meant by the passive perfect verb, “undamaged, sound, intact, complete, perfect, whole, integral.”

    al-Islam is explicitly the name of our religion ~ it can be accurately translated as “The Restoration” ~ the restoration of our original human nature and state, before “The Fall” of Adam from the human nature in which he was created. In the Qur’an, God says “This day I have perfected your religion for you and completed My Favor on you and have permitted for you al-Islam.” (Q5:3) This is generally believed to be the last statement, completing the Qur’an.

    The material manifestation of that perfection ~ the situation and condition of the muslim Ummah on that precise day ~ is thoroughly known. It included the faithful and the hypocritical, the rich and the poor, the wise and the foolish, the cooperative and the antagonistic, the agreeable and the contentious; twenty-three years of development, demonstration, and explanation; and a complete description of human nature and the behaviors of the inmates of The Garden and the inmates of The Fire, which were then, are now, and forever made known to us as good news for the faithful and a warning to those who do not keep faith. We have this “User’s Manual for the Naturally-Occurring Autonomic Human Being,” and the Manufacturer’s “Complete Guide for the Operation of the Phenomenological Universe,” complete, intact, unchanged, unrevised, and utterly inexorable, with us, today. What we do not have is that material manifestation of that perfection, but only what is probably the largest library devoted to a single topic in human history.

    A few days later the Messenger died, and that complete perfection disappeared from full manifestation before his body had grown cold. After that, everything went downhill, and that’s what people are discussing today as “Islam.” The amazing thing is that some people think that something that no longer exists can be “reformed,” and something that is perfect and intact needs to be “reformed.”

    But that’s the word you’re looking for: Islam is a means of “restoring your natural, pure, original form and state” ~ which, it will be found, no one can do without God’s continuous Guidance and Help. As for the Qur’an, it is not in need of “reform” ~ we are in need of understanding, which comes only from God, and can be found within the Qur’an as we try to live By The Book.

  • Michael Elwood

    @Géji

    I know that I said that I wouldn’t continue with WAJ? and his multiple personalities. But I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t tempted. You know how argumentative I am.

    Particularly, I want to respond to his assertion about verse 9:29 not being connected to 9:25, and the “People of the Book” that WAJ? believes fought in the battle of Hunayn (but not of “appreciable importance”). But I know that if I give into the temptation, I’ll be sucked into the vortex of stupidity forever. 🙂

  • Jack Cope Says: … amongst other things there is the so called ‘Faster-than-light neutrino anomaly’ which was tested last year (small sub atomic particles were found to travel a distance faster than light was) …

    What traveled faster than light was information, not a particle. A change in one particle was echoed in another “bonded” particle simultaneously ~ or so close to simultaneously that it could not be measured. There is information in the Qur’an implicitly showing that information can travel at fifty times the speed of light. The European accelerator experiment proved that to be true.

  • Michael Elwood

    @Just Stopping By

    You know Hebrew better than anyone on LW, so I’ll defer to you.

  • WhatAboutJihad?

    One more time, here’s what Musa wrote:

    “Taken together, these verses show us that believers must be willing to exert great efforts in the cause of God, using our wealth and ourselves. These efforts (jihad) may, or may not include fighting.”

    Mikey, you are starting to disappoint.

    Musa’s clear, unambiguous comments on Jihad not directly relating to warfare have been posted several times and each time you choose to ignore what Musa wrote.

    For the umpteenth time:

    “[t]he verb jahada (to struggle, strive) in various forms appears more than 30 times. None of these refers directly to fighting, let alone specifically to military action”

    “where the Quran specifically commands striving, there is no reference to warfare”

    Pray, tell, Mikey, what does Musa mean when she says ‘jahada’ does not directly refer to fighting and military action or that where the Koran commands striving, there is no reference to warfare?

    So far, you haven’t defended anything you’ve said.

    You mean the quote from Bonner saying the Kharajites derived principles and norms solely from the Koran?

    When I pointed out that their interpretation of jihad couldn’t be teased from the Quran, you couldn’t defend that assertion.

    No, Mikey, I didn’t have much to say about your opinion. I was half expecting an actual rebuttal to a real scholar or an admission you were wrong.

    Who said anything about People of the Book? Verses 9:25-29 are referring to the battle of Hunayn. Again, with the reading comprehension. . .

    Sigh, Mikey. V9:29 says something about the People of the Book. You’re referring me to a previous verse that is not contextually linked with verse 9:29. The proof is that the Battle of Hunayn involved fighting Pagans (and it was in the past tense!) and verse 9:29 talks of fighting ‘People of the Book’ in the present.

    Please, Mikey, you’re getting torn up. Take a break and read Robert Spencer’s commentary on the Koran so you can learn something and be better able to respond to my arguments.

  • Just Stopping By

    Michael Ellwood says, “However, the term holy war (קַדְּשׁוּ מִלְחָמָה) was used in Joel 4:9.” At best, that would translate as “consecrate war” because that’s a verb (plural command) plus a noun (“war”), though I imagine a war so consecrated may be considered a holy war. The verb is also often used somewhat idiomatically.

  • Michael Elwood

    @Géji

    Salaam, bro. Yeah, that’s 2-3 days out of my life that I’ll never get back. Let me just correct something I said, then I’ll leave it alone. I said that the German orientalist, Friedrich Schwally, coined the term holy war (heiliger krieg). However, the term holy war (קַדְּשׁוּ מִלְחָמָה) was used in Joel 4:9. And Pope Urban II used the term holy war (bellum sacrum) to refer to the Crusades.

    “But anyway, I know it’s Martin Luther King’s day today in America, so happy MLK’s day to you. But if I may, I will like to ask you, since A- I’m not from US, and B- I’m sure you know more about American Black history than me, is that how come there haven’t been any demand for Malcolm X “day”? Weren’t they both civil right activists of the same calibre during that time? I mean I never understood why one is nationality celebrated and praised, but the other is not. I hope it’s not his “Muslim-ness” that has blocked the way and prevented this.”

    I don’t know. It may have something to do with the fact that MLK is perceived as less threatening than Malcolm X. That wasn’t the way MLK was perceived when he was alive, however. When he was alive, Conservatives perceived him the same way they perceive Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Rev. Jesse Jackson, and Rev. Al Sharpton. Even after his death, they still hated him:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._Day#Reluctance_to_observe

    As for Malcolm X, he didn’t seem to care what his enemies thought of him. And he’d probably take umbrage if people who clearly didn’t like him grudgingly honored him with a holiday.

  • Just Stopping By

    Géji asks, “how come there haven’t been any demand for Malcolm X ‘day’? Weren’t they both civil right activists of the same calibre during that time?”

    My belief on this. 1. It is he “Muslim-ness” you discuss. The US was, and most likely still is, not quite ready for that, though I bet you could get a Muhammad Ali Day. 2. MLK has a consistent history of advocating non-violence while Malcolm X had a more convoluted road with some more inflammatory quotes from earlier in his life. See, for example, the quotes used by Spike Lee in his 1989 film “Do The Right Thing” (below), and you’ll understand why it would take more guts to propose a Malcolm X holiday to mainstream America, given that that is how Malcolm X was presented by someone sympathetic to him.

    “Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. It is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding; it seeks to annihilate rather than to convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys a community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends by defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers.”
    – Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    “I think there are plenty of good people in America, but there are also plenty of bad people in America and the bad ones are the ones who seem to have all the power and be in these positions to block things that you and I need. Because this is the situation, you and I have to preserve the right to do what is necessary to bring an end to that situation, and it doesn’t mean that I advocate violence, but at the same time I am not against using violence in self-defense. I don’t even call it violence when it’s self-defense, I call it intelligence.”
    – Malcolm X

  • Géji

    @Michael Elwood

    Asalaamu Alaikum Michael, I see you’ve been going back and forth for the last 2-3 days with the same troll who was determined from the get-go to go off topic on yet surprise-surprise another million times “brought up”, million times refuted and explained subject to waste our times as usual, I swear its like these Islamophobes never learn anything, this individual particularly seem to have an unhealthy obsession with Jihad, note he always attaches it after his many different pseudonyms WhatAboutJihad, JihadBob ect, he keep on bringing everytime this same subject even though he knows his arguments has been million time refuted, but does he ever learn or even listen to anything said of course not, so I’ll advise you not to waste your time, those are the precise people Allah is talking about when He says- there are those who’s hearts and intellects are veiled.

    But anyway, I know it’s Martin Luther King’s day today in America, so happy MLK’s day to you. But if I may, I will like to ask you, since A- I’m not from US, and B- I’m sure you know more about American Black history than me, is that how come there haven’t been any demand for Malcolm X “day”? Weren’t they both civil right activists of the same calibre during that time? I mean I never understood why one is nationality celebrated and praised, but the other is not. I hope it’s not his “Muslim-ness” that has blocked the way and prevented this.

  • Michael Elwood

    @WhatAboutJihad?

    “Nope, and Musa is quite clear in her belief that the term “Jihad” and its various uses and tenses are not used in a martial context”

    One more time, here’s what Musa wrote:

    “Taken together, these verses show us that believers must be willing to exert great efforts in the cause of God, using our wealth and ourselves. These efforts (jihad) may, or may not include fighting.”

    WhatAbourJihad? wrote:

    “Those are the words of your “scholar”. You should defend them and if you cannot be upfront enough to acknowledge that what she said is wrong.”

    So far, you haven’t defended anything you’ve said. First, you said the Khawarij were “Quran only” Muslims. When I pointed out that the Khawarij had their own collection of hadith, you didn’t defend that assertion. Then you said, okay, maybe the Khawarij weren’t “Quran only” Muslims, but their interpretation of jihad is based only on the Quran. When I pointed out that their interpretation of jihad couldn’t be teased from the Quran, you couldn’t defend that assertion. Then you said that the term “holy war” was coined in the 19th century. When I pointed out that the term was coined in the 20th century, in reference to the Bible’s concept of war, you wouldn’t defend that assertion (and quickly changed the subject ). But you demand that I defend someone else’s words from your caricature?

    “Sorry, but the battle of Hunayn was an engagement against a Pagan enemy.”

    No shit, Sherlock!

    You can look up the history behind the battle yourself. There were no “People of the Book” of appreciable importance involved.

    Who said anything about People of the Book? Verses 9:25-29 are referring to the battle of Hunayn. Again, with the reading comprehension. . .

    I don’t know where you’re at, but here in America it’s MLK day. And if you think I’m going to spend it arguing in circles with you and your multiple personalities. . . somebody done told you wrong!

Powered by Loon Watchers