abu_rashid wrote on Feb 19^th, 2010 at 6:02am:



Yes, here it is:

abu_rashid wrote on Feb 18^th, 2010 at 3:25pm:



On purpose. Now who can detrmine his own action, act 'on purpose' against Allah's purpose?
Shurely not the infidel. Shome mishtake.

Is that so?

So why do you Mohamedans say insh'Allah as often as yobs say fvcken', then?

abu_rashid wrote on Feb 19^th, 2010 at 8:08pm:



SO it all depends on what Allah wills. Nothing in, nothing out without his OK.


Not even a thought or an intention can be conceived by man without Allah first willing it. Everything is entirely, utterly, completely under his control. He even wills acts of rebllion against him. Even acts and thought of bloodthirsty crusading infidel innocent-muslim-slaughtering sons of pigs and apes and what have you. Even the joos. Especially the joos and especially  especially if they are zionist joos. They are completely in the grip of Allah's will.

Inshallah-la-la in the evening, shalala in the morning, as these sensitive  sufi poets commemorate it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5kBF8cByIYi

We are talking about Allah and his control of every act and event. Now. Here. In our lives.

Bible classes are two doors down the corridor.

What are you asking me?
Whether the Muslim belief in an Allah who is the author of every trivial act and event is irreconcilable with your language of blame, that is, the language of agency? Yes, it is.
Do Muslims suffer from a constant cognitive dissonance between the absolutist dogma  of an interventionist Allah and the ordinary perception of life, expressed in language that attributes agency to people? Yes, that is also true. 

Do Muslims have any  way,  other than peppering their speech with insh’Allah, to resolve this cognitive dissonance? No they don’t.
Can they face this dissonance? No. When it is pointed out to them they start talking about Babylonia and etymology or whatever else, just to avoid facing this irresolvable dissonance in the heart of their lives.
What else do you want to know?

mozzaok wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 5:22pm:


You are right up to a point.

Jews do not believe that god is in control of every act and event. Jews believe that the 'world', the human world, is a joint venture between god and man. Being chosen, for the jews, means carrying the burden of this 'working with god'. That is why Moses argues with god: why pick me?

It is only the Mohamedans, having completely misundersood the jews in Araby in the 7th century, who came up with a god who not only occasionally interferes (in mysterious ways) but is the explicit author of every event and act, leaving man completely out of the work of creating the human world.

This is what I mean by Mohamedanism being a parody.  They missed the main bit.

As for Christianity (a jewish 'susperstition' for gentiles, if you like), it is not different from judaism in this particular regard  but is as far apart from Mohamedanism as judaism is.

I do not doubt for a moment that some christians (but not any jews) will not see this differentiation, and to that extent I agree with you completely - they believe in nonsense. But for Mohamedans, this all-controlling Allah is a central article of faith, not an error of comprehension of their religion.

So they believe in nonsense as a matter of first principle and not believing in such nonsense, to Mohamedans, is the error.i

More terrorist attacks by the NATO militants on innocent Muslim civilians.

Really know how to win the hearts & minds don't they...

---

Nato raid 'kills Afghan civilians' Aghanistan government officials say at least 19 civilians have been killed by a Nato air attack on a convoy of vehicles in Uruzgan, a province in the country's south. Nato confirmed that it fired on Sunday on a group of vehicles that it believed contained fighters, only to discover later that women and children were in the cars. Isaf, Nato's force in Afghanistan, did not provide a figure of how many died. Amanullah Hothaki, the head of the provincial council for Uruzgan, said 19 people were killed in the attack, which hit three minibuses as they drove down a main road.

Uruzgan is policed by Dutch troops whose imminent pullout poses a challenge to Nato's Isaf [AFP]

Al Jazeera's James Bays, reporting from Lashkar Gah in Helmand, said an "aerial weapons team" fired at mini-buses carrying civilians.

"We understand they [civilians] came under attack from what Nato says was an aerial weapons team," he said.

"That sounds to me like helicopters. The Nato spokesman I have spoken to ... says there was a Nato operation against the Taliban in the nearer area, and Nato thought they were reinforcements for the Taliban coming.

"And that's why they launched this airstrike. But he says it's clear now it was clearly a mistake, and that in many of these mini-buses there were women and children."

General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of coalition forces in Afghanistan, released a statement apologising for the deaths, our correspondent said.

"We are extremely saddened by the tragic loss of innocoent lives," McChrystal was quoted by Bays as saying.

"I've made it clear to our forces that we're here to protect the Afghan people and inadvertentlly killing and injuring civilians undermines their trust and confidence in our mission. We'll redouble our efforts to regain that trust."

Zemeri Bashary, the Afghan interior ministry spokesman, said he had reports of 27 people killed.

He said there were 42 people in the vehicles, all of them civilians.

Source: al-Jazeerah