Google Can Be So Cool

Lone Pony sent me an e-mail about a person who has been doing some trolling on her blog. She needs to be credited, she ticked the guy off so much he updated his blog for the first time since June of last year.

Evidently Junaid M. Afeef has taken slight offense to her 4 part series on Islam, and has in fact been blogging about her posts on his own blog.

So of course I went over and beat him up on his blog:

I've actually defended the idea of Islam as a religion of peace. How could it be otherwise, since it looked for it's original teachings in both the jewish and christian faiths.

The problem is, Islam has lost the war. Not with the Jews, who they originally treasured, or Christians, who's Joseph the Koran considers the most beautiful human ever. But to themselves.

The loss of that war started when the Arab nations decided against the 1947 UN charter of Isreal and Palestine in an area that was a British colony. It's continued since, with more and more radical Islamists taking over the speaking roles for the religion, and drowning out those who are voices of reason.

The religions leaders in other countries could have done themselves a favor in 1978 and denouced the method (not the action) of the overthrowing of the Shah of Iran. (He did need to go, the hostages were unnecessary).

The leaders of the religion could have found some more sympathy by denouncing the Ba'athists in Iraq and Syria's sudden conversion to "Islamic countries" when they'd ignored religion for decades.

Instead of supporting and defending Hezbollah and Hamas, leaders in many countries could have followed the Egyptian lead, denounced them, and had peace in the middle east.

Instead, they've allowed the "poor me" sect to take over, and destroy any credibility Islam had in the eyes of most of the world. The "religion of peace" is seen a a religion that condones homicide bombers, beheadings, and kidnappings of people who've come to help them, and basically barbarians.

It'll take a lot of work to undo that.

I decided to see what else I could find on the good attorney, because, as the article title says, "Google Can Be So Cool". It seems he'd like to see your guns taken away. Here is a link to his article on the subject from "The Institute for Social Policy and Understanding".

I especially like this unqualified statement:

The idea of curtailing rights in the name of homeland security does not seem implausible given the current state of civil liberties in the United States. The war on terror has already taken an enormous toll on the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments, and thus far, very few Americans have objected. In light of this precedence, it seems reasonable that scaling back or even repealing the right to bear arms would be an easy task.

Notice he gives no examples on the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 6th rights we've given up. I'm sure the Institute, like the ACLU, is having a hell of a time finding the actual examples of the abuses of the Patriot Act. Instead, they deal in hyperbole, hoping folks will buy into it.

I also got a kick out of this idea of his:

Even those citizens who continue to maintain such antiquated views must face the reality that the United States’ armed forces are too large and too powerful for the citizenry to make much difference. Quite frankly, the idea of the citizenry rising up against the U.S. government with their handguns and assault rifles, and facing the military with these personal arms is absurd. The Branch Davidian tragedy at Waco, Texas, was one such futile attempt.

Maybe he should give former Soviet Premier Gorbachev a quick call and find out about how helpful a large, strong military was in keeping his country together. I think he's vacationing somewhere, waiting to get back into the drivers seat.

And the use of the Davidians is funny. That wasn't an attempt to overthrow the government. Though they didn't agree with the government, they weren't trying to overthrow anything, and in fact it was the government who stormed them, not the other way around.

I've also read a few of his articles at The American Muslim and some other places, and in a number cases, like his views on religion and government (and religion in socieity) I agree with him.

But on his idea that Islam is the religion of peace, I'll disagree with him until he can convince enough of the muslim world to quit blowing things (and people) up in an effort to prove they are peaceful. Of course, they could also give other religions the reverence they are demanding from the world of their's.

I'll also disagree that we should give up our guns.

Technorati Tags: Islam, Religion, peace, guns