Thanks to Lawrence. I should mention that my opinons about Islam are
my own. I was internationally known as a writer on Islam well before
2000. I accepted Islam in 1971, but I wouldn't say that, at that
point, I understood it very well. I was Muslim Chaplain at San
Quentin State Prison, having volunteered there for quite a few years,
but that was only a temporary appointment, while the regular chaplain
was on vacation. While I do know a great deal about the sources of
Islam, and my perspectives on Islam are recognized as of interest by
genuine Muslim scholars, those who deeply know the source materials,
I am not a "Muslim scholar." My expertise on Islam is relative.
As a writer on Islam, I engaged in on-line debate and discussion, and
becamse a moderator of the Usenet newsgroup soc.religion.islam, and
we welcomed people from all faiths, and atheists or agnostics, to
participate. Gross incivility was not tolerated, but discussion of
such matters as the alleged pedophilia of the Prophet were on-topic
and there were many. I came to know and consider as personal friends
certain well-known Christian apologists, who actually became
knowledgeable about Islam, unlike certain fanatics, who only know
what they hate, which is actually themselves, because what they hate
is what they have invented -- for the most part.
"Islam" is a term that has many levels of meaning, and one of the
meanings is the extant and popular world religion *as it is.* We can
use the term "Christianity" in the same way, and then we have lots of
mud to toss, since people are people. If I were inclined to attack
Christianity (which would be contrary to the Qur'an), I'd claim that
Christianity is particularly vulnerable to abuse, because,
supposedly, Christians believe that *it doesn't matter what they do,
all they have to do is "believe in Jesus" and they are safe. Never
mind that Jesus himself, it's reported in the Gospel, denied this.
You can say the name and still end up rejected and denied by him.
It's not about names, it's about faith, and a sign of faith would be
light in the heart. I know Christians who have that light. It's not
about what words we use, but what we *are*.
Jojo lies. That's the truth.
Lawrence, you said that Jojo doesn't do what he does maliciously.
Yes, he does, and he's acknowledged that. He's announced his
intentions, clearly. I covered that in prior posts. He might start
with something sincere, but when he perceives a response as
insulting, he is going to *insult back*, and so strongly that it will
*force* others to back off.
What's an "insult." Jojo has insisted that his ravings are not
insults, they are simply the truth. So the truth is not an insult.
Okay, let's accept that for a moment, though we'd have to be careful.
If the truth is not an insult, then, if one is insulting back, it's
not the truth. It's something exaggerated or careless or even plain
wrong, but that one thinks will outrage, it's "fighting words." It's
not the truth, but he claims it is. Another lie. He actually knows better.
Now, maybe he's truly insane. That's possible. If he's truly insane,
he may not be functioning well eough to distinguish between truth and
falsehood. The truth, here, has been in front of him, and now I'm
talking about easily disciminable truth, like what happened on this
list. The list archive is accessible. It can be reviewed. But Jojo
may know that most people will not check, they will just believe what
they choose to believe.
When I've made claims about Jojo's behavior, I have frequently backed
it up with actual citations, links, evidence. He doesn't do that. He
just repeats claims that are blatantly false. And is either so
blatantly out of control that he cannot keep his promises, or he
liest about his intentions as well.
He does not respond to evidence with evidence, he responds to
evidence by just repeating claims, or making new claims about
evidence, such as his claims that I'm relying on Wikipedia as if it
were reliable. No, I'm relying on Wikipedia to judge notability and
as an independent review of a field. Where an article has many
editors, it can do that.
For example, from the Wikipedia article on cold fusion, we can tell
that many still believe cold fusion is bogus. However, if you search
the Wikipedia article for *recent sources* that show that this is
still a scientific consensus, you won't find them. You will find old
sources, weak sources, and you will also find, if you look carefully
at the article and it's history, you can see that recent sources from
mainstream journals have been largely suppressed. The cold fusion
article is a battleground article. The article on Allah as Moon-God
is not. As such, it may contain material that violates Wikipedia
guidelines, but *not seriously.* The article has received some level
of administrative attention, from an admin who does not appear to
have an axe to grind. There is a banned editor who contributed to the
article, but he was banned for other behavior, and he was strongly
against the Moon-God idea, his edits -- excessively -- debunked it.
The creator of the article seems to have generally favored the idea,
but not as a fanatic. He's not banned, it looks like he simply lost interest.
I pointed to the Wikipedia article because it is a place to find
evidence on the issue, i.e., cited reports. Whatever is in the
article that is not backed with verifiable evidence from "reliable
sources," which can include sources that in a battleground article
would never be allowed, won't last. The neutral editors, who rather
quickly recognize such stuff, will, long-term, take it out. Wikipedia
is easy to find. Trackig down all the sources is not so easy. Jojo
claims that it's easy to find what he claims. He's then claimed that
one must go to a library. That's a contradiction! The fact is that
his sources are obscure, mostly. They aren't on-line, it is not easy
to find them. But there is material in the article from people who
have, indeed, read them.
I'm not necessarily citing sources any more. It's a waste of time,
but if anyone doubts that I'm telling the truth about Jojo's
behavior, ask me. I won't be insulted. I'll respond. Except I reserve
the right not to respond to obvious trolling, as from Jojo himself,
or, say, "Orgasm Wikipedia."
Jojo also writes incoherently. Below, he talks about knowing "more
about Islam" than "many so-called islam experts," and then he makes
it clear that he's not talking about "many experts," because he
narrows it to me, because he's made that "physics expert" claim about me.
I have never claimed to be an expert on physics. There are people on
this list, a significant number, who know more about physics than I.
What I've "claimed" is just the truth. I was present for the Feynman
lectures on physics, and I know the years involved without looking it
up, because those were my freshman and sophomore years at Caltech,
i.e., 1961-1962 and 1962-1963. I did not graduate, and, specifically,
I took no more physics courses. Ever. I had originally intended to
major in nuclear physics, and studied it from before I was in high
school. But my interests shifted, and ultimately shifted entirely
outside of academia. Yet I never forgot Feynman's approach, and
Feynman visited my residence house (Page), and told us his famous
stories. I identified with him then, and still do, my life has been
like his in certain ways.
But I'm not a physicist. I just know some physicists, and I know
enough physics to recognize some BS, but not all. I can read
Hagelstein and understand him. Takahashi, it took me years to figure
out what he's saying so that I could explain it to others, and he's
confirmed that I got it right. That's actually my role in the field.
I'm an interpreter.
Below, Jojo claims this would be his last reply. He lied, as any who
has a list archive can see. (Specifically, he replied re Islam again,
with his post of Sun, 23 Dec 2012 13:51:48 +0800.)
Is Islam a "peaceful religion"? That depends on what one means by
"peaceful." It also depends on what one means by "Islam." Normative
Islam is both peaceful and strong, i.e., "oppression is worse than
killing." Yet, in describing response to aggression, the Qur'an also
says that retaliation is acceptable, but "do not go beyond limits."
The Old Testament rule of lex talonis is repeated by the Qur'an, but
then, again, it's clear that "two eyes for an eye" is forbidden, that
lex talonis is a *protection and a mercy*, i.e., it is a limit, not a
command to retailiate, and the verse goes on to say that forgiveness
is better, but forgiveness with justice (i.e., compensation,
according to "ma'ruwf," i.e., custom and community law). In other
words, the modern position. The Qur'anic Islam, then, revealed in a
tribal setting -- so tribal law is recognized and accepted --
foreshadows and anticipates a much broader civil law, and helped to
create that.
However, if "Islam" is the reality of all those who call themselves
"Muslim," it's basically the same as any other religion. If I judge
by the worst of these people, and what they have done, I'd want to
reject it all.
Jojo, I don't doubt, may have done research, but when we do research
looking to find what will confirm what we believe, and if we believe
something fringe, yes, we may have to do serious research, looking
for obscure sources. A real scholar would, in reporting this
research, then cite the sources, knowing that it was fringe, and
would acknowledge that, and explain why it's fringe. The scholar
would do this whether or not the scholar believes the fringe
position. Jojo, to the contrary, claims that "anyone who researches
this will recognize that he's telling the truth." Look at the first
statement below. He "can't convince" if we "don't do our own
research." But that presumes that anyone who researches what he
claims will be convinced, and that must mean that the sources needed,
that would presumably overwhelm *all other scholarship*, are easy to
find. Given how many people believe the Moon God trope, why aren't
those sources available on-line, for easy citation? Jojo doesn't even
give *any* of them. He doesn't mention the names of authors, nor of works.
That allows him to get away with claiming whatever he wants. And if
one tries to verify it, and comes up empty, he simply claims that one
didn't try hard enough.
Yes, I found "sources." Such as a Christian evangelist comic-book.
That simply states the claims without evidence. Oh, there are some
books you can buy. If you belong to a certain kind of church, they
might have then in the church library. Hey, if you want to find out
the truth about Islam, join a church and read what they have in their
library, and you can be as "informed" as Jojo!
On-line, though, you can find
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm
Bold face from that page: "The reader must know that Islam, Judaism,
and organized Christianity (so-called) all worship a trinity of gods."
I.e., everyone is astray but us. That's the definition of a sect, in
the Qur'an. (And, yes, any "Muslim" who thinks like that is
sectarian. The Qur'an is a message *to Muslims* and it is not a
collection of arguments to hurl at others, it's a reminder and a
warning, that is exactly how it describes itself.)
http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-moon-god-allah.htm
One of the sources cited on the above page has a page of quotes cited
there. The source is "The Archaeology of World Religions." The page
of quotes is at http://www.bible.ca/islam/library/islam-quotes-finegan.htm
The claims of the site are not supported by those quotes, except as
material is taken out of context and used to claim what is not
supported there. There is no scholarship here, on the "bible.ca"
page, it's polemic, where alleged fact is strung together to lead to
a desired conclusion, regardless of balance. The encyclopedia itself,
as quoted, seems like a work of scholarship, with what I can
recognize as personal opinion of the author plays only a minor role.
He does speculate in line with his own opinion, but seems also to be
careful to signify this with "it seems," or language like that,
speculating about the *motives* of the Prophet. There is a lost
reference there, "it seems" *to whom*? To him, obviously. And that
might be a shared opinion, but the speculation is also clearly that
of a non-Muslim, who believes that Muhammad made up the Qur'an for a
purpose (a somewhat noble one, by the way, the scholar is not
attacking Islam, merely identifying himself as non-Muslim in the
traditional sense.)
Jojo made a claim about a pilot and copilot who were allegedly
murdered by pilgrims incensed by a flight delay. That story was told
as some kind of alleged evidence as to the violent tendencies of
"Muslims." He gave no specifics, but I searched, and eventually I
found a story that was close enough to his that it might have been
the origin of his claim. But crucial details were quite different
from what he confidently asserted as fact, and those details make the
story completely suspect as to being anything like what he wants to
make uot of it. So I can't be sure that there isn't some *other*
story that would be a closer match. I kept looking. I didn't find it.
Now, I could go to a library, but what would I look for? This is the
kind of search that any present scholar would do on-line, unless they
happen to have access to certain specific databases.
I cited my result, linking to stories about it. The most reputable of
the sources was the Guardian.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/feb/15/afghanistan2
I did not find follow-up on this, but if the story in the Guardian is
covering the incident Jojo wrote about (as being "a true story that
you can research also," his facts were severely distorted, Jojo got
the facts radically wrong, in the way that happens with someone who
believes unverified rumors, because they confirm preconceptions. The
pilot and copilot were not killed, nor even harmed, though the story
is not completely clear. The man killed was an Afghan government
minister, and the Guardian reports government claims that this was
not a mob killing, though there may have been a attempt to make it
so, it was (allegedly), a political assassination. Kabul,
Afghanistan, 2002. Messy place. A war going on. Etc. Early reports
claimed that two women had died from exposure to cold, waiting for a
flight for days. That could be the fog of rumor, but if there really
was a mob attack, as such, there may have been more at stake than a
mere ordinary flight delay. Jojo's story says nothing about Islam
(which prohibits "mob justice"). As I mentioned, fighting of any kind
is expressly prohibited during the pilgrimage, which would include
any waiting at the airport. But this is not a story about Islam, as
such, it's a story about people. Yes, a group of pilgrims might be
expected to have a greater knowledge about Islam than the average
Muslim, but "it ain't necessarily so."
Jojo is not about to make his story verifiable, I strongly suspect.
He is not about to correct his errors, or to point to the real event,
if it's different. No, he's done his work by making the outrageous
claim. He knows that what he's written is not true, but he does not
correct it, because his intenion was not truth, it was insult. He's
trolling. And that is just about all he cares about.
He certainly does not care about reaching Muslims with the truth,
like my Christian friends were. His approach to Muslims would either
leave them bewildered, at his ignorance, or, yes, for a few, angry.
But nobody is going to call for a "fatwa against him," suggesting he
should be killed for "insulting Islam." Nobody here has even remotely
approached that. I'm, to my knowledge, the only declared Muslim
participating here, and I've not even called for him to be banned.
I've suggested that the list owner might warn him, that's the extent of it.
Jojo doesn't recognize what's in front of his face, much less what is
out in the world about a subject as complex as Islam, or anything
else that he raves about.
At 10:15 PM 12/22/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Hey, I can't convince you if you don't do your own research.
Everything I've said so far is the truth; and even muslim scholars
acknowledge it. But if you rely on Wikipedia (stable or not) then
you only have yourself to blame.
You know, even in college, even before the Jihad aginst the "Great
Satan" of 2001, I already knew more about Islam than many so called
islam experts (who also claim to be physics expert but did not
graduate.) My friends, I have done my research in real libraries,
not wikipedia and the Internet blogs and "politically correct"
opinion news we find today. I did my research the real way people
do research; thru hard work and long hours of fact finding; not
simply regurgitating wikipedia. LOL ...
If you want to be convinced by deception that islam is a "peaceful"
religion, it's your right to be stupid. A simple research effort
will reveal that I am speaking the truth about islam.
This is the last reply I will make regarding the matter. You have a
right to be deceived if you want.
Jojo
----- Original Message ----- From: "de Bivort Lawrence" <ldebiv...@gmail.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2012 3:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Essentially, all that Jojo has written about Islam is flat-out
incorrect. Lomax did a great job explaining and providing sources
for the reality.
I don't believe that Joho is doing so maliciously: he is, I believe,
merely repeating misinformation that he has picked up elsewhere.
Alas, given the current levels of Islamophobia he has plenty to
choose from. I also believe that Jojo is not interested in genuine
discussion or education on this matter, and so have merely pointed
out for the benefit of anyone else interested here that his posts on
Islam are deeply mistaken.
If anyone on this list is interested in Islam, I'll be happy to
discuss further, perhaps off-list.
Cheers,
Lawry
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 22, 2012, at 10:58 AM, Harvey Norris <harv...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Are all muslims preoccupied with obsessions? Someone told me they
have animal sex and it is advocated in the Koran. Could this be
like a virus from (that activity) and a medical condition causing
undue speculation as a mental syndrome. Does it make muslims to be
insulted or mad to suggest this? I assume that the freedom of
information act is allowed with OT posts, but if it aint I will
cease and desist, but my opinion is just the whole subject is
obsessional or just plain stupid. HDN
Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
