The Muslim Murderer Of The Ambassador Didn't Say "Remember Aleppo" And Allahu Akbar Doesn't Mean "God Is Great"
Allahu Akbar actually means "Allah is Greater" or "Allah Is Greatest," and the comparison in that is very important.
It reflects how Islam is actually a totalitarian system masquerading as a religion with commands for conquest, rape, and murder and the hatred and denigration of non-Muslims.
It is the Western press that constantly mistranslates this, increasing the widespread ignorance of Islam's real aims -- protecting the more comforting view to Westerners that it is just another flavor of Jewish or Christian monotheism.
It is not. And the Quran, unlike the Bible, is said to have been written by Allah and handed down through the Angel Gabriel to Mohammed. This is why is is said to be unquestionable (unlike the Bible, which is considered a historical document written by men).
Christians are not called upon to go slaughter the Mideonites (as Muslims are to kill all the Jews -- when a rock tells them where all the Jews are hiding, in a particularly creepy Sesame Street-esque part of the Quran).
Also, the earlier parts of the Quran, before Mohammed got power, are abrogated (erased) by the later, violence-commanding parts, after Mohammed began getting followers, basically by creating the early version of violent street gangs -- having early Muslims go after caravans and rob and murder.
A great book to help you understand the origins of Islam and why it is so pernicious -- and I say this as an atheist who isn't exactly yelling at people to go to church or temple -- is Howard Bloom's The Muhammad Code: How a Desert Prophet Brought You ISIS, al Qaeda, and Boko Haram.
Brendan O'Neill has an excellent piece at Spiked on how the Western press is becoming a tool of Al Qaeda (in its constant pining for clicks).
The British press is morphing into a mouthpiece for al-Qaeda. Consider its coverage of yesterday's assassination of Andrei Karlov, the Russian ambassador to Turkey. It is borderline sympathetic. The killer's words -- or rather, certain of the killer's words -- have been turned into emotional headlines, into condemnations of Russia's actions in Syria.That the killer's first and loudest cry was 'Allahu Akbar' -- the holler of the modern terrorist -- has been downplayed, and in the case of at least one newspaper, the Express, completely ignored. Instead the papers upfront the killer's other cries, about Aleppo. 'This is for Aleppo', says The Times. 'Remember Aleppo', says the Mirror's headline, but with no quote marks, because these were not the exact words spoken by the gunman -- they're more like the Mirror's own sympathetic echo of the killer's sentiment.
To get a sense of how disturbing, or at least unusual, this coverage is, imagine if the 2013 murder of British soldier Lee Rigby by two Islamists had led to headlines like 'This is for Afghanistan' or 'Remember Basra' (those two knifemen, like Karlov's killer, justified their action as a response to militarism overseas). Or if the 7/7 bombings had not given rise to front pages saying 'Terror bombs explode across London' or 'BASTARDS' but rather 'While you kill us in Iraq, we will kill you here'.
Reading the early coverage of Karlov's killing, and noting how different it is to British press coverage of other acts of Islamist terror, one gets the impression that the media think this killing is justified, or at least understandable. 'Remember Aleppo': they're saying this as much as the killer is -- a perverse union of terrorist and editorial intent.
What he did say:
According to eyewitness accounts, he was heard shouting: "We die in Aleppo, you die here" and "don't forget Aleppo, Syria."
O'Neill:
But the killer said, first, 'Allahu Akbar'. Which perhaps suggests that his sympathy was not with Syria as such but with certain forces in Syria. Forces likely to shout 'Allahu Akbar' as they kill people. Islamist forces. Something peculiar has happened in British media and political circles in recent weeks.Having spent years telling us al-Qaeda-style groups are the greatest threat to our way of life, these people have lately become spectacularly uncritical about, and even weirdly supportive of, the existence and influence of al-Qaeda-style groups in Syria. The press coverage of Karlov's killing is in keeping with the superbly reductive, highly moralised media coverage of events in Aleppo over the past fortnight, in which there are apparently only two sides: defenceless civilians and evil Russia and Assad.
The militants in Aleppo, which include some grotesquely illiberal and misanthropic groups, have been airbrushed out of the coverage as surely as some reporters airbrushed away, or at least demoted to paragraph six, the Turkish assassin's cry of 'Allahu Akbar'.
He notes also what a distorted story is being told about goings on in Syria:
What's missing is striking: images of the gunmen, an estimated 10,000 of them, huge numbers of whom are al-Nusra, who had made Eastern Aleppo one of their harsh, unforgiving strongholds.These militants would muddy the simplistic narrative of a Russian-led genocide against Syrian civilians, and so they're simply redacted from what we see on the TV news: an act of omission that borders on censorship.
The end result is coverage that elevates emotionalism over analysis, feeling over fact, making readers weep over helping readers understand. And coverage which, in the process, ends up doing Islamists' bidding.
In the words of Patrick Cockburn of the Independent, Western news organisations are 'being spoon-fed by Syrian jihadists and their sympathisers who make it impossible for independent observers to visit areas they control'.
Given that it's too dangerous for Western journalists to go to Eastern Aleppo, the media have become reliant on anti-Assad and anti-Russia activists to provide them with information and heartrending footage. But of course, these activists are only permitted to do and say certain things, given they live in areas controlled by 'some of the most violent and merciless movements on Earth', in Cockburn's words.
The consequence? 'There's more propaganda than news coming out of Aleppo', as Cockburn says.
I grew up in an evangelical church, attended an evangelical college and was taught the Bible is the divinely inspired word of God and is to be read as the absolute and ultimate truth. The fundamentalist tradition goes one step further. The Bible is literally true in every word.
Of course, if every American evangelical or fundamentalist Christian really believed that, they'd all be ascetic monks.
Howard Owens at December 20, 2016 6:54 AM
Gavrilo Princip's actions were justified in his mind and in the minds of Black Hand supporters. Yet, his actions directly led to World War I.
That Princip's actions would lead to a large war was not inconceivable in 1914, this was probably the intent. That yesterday's assassination of the Russian ambassador to Turkey will lead to wider hostilities is also probably the intent. Given that Erdogan and Putin are two of the most belligerent leaders in today's geo-politics, brace yourself, it's gonna be a bumpy ride.
===================================
Islamic scholars generally divide the hadiths into three categories: generally true, probably not true, and wildly not true. ISIS cherry picks hadiths, ignoring the scholars' views and using any, even "wildly not true," hadiths to justify its violence.
That ISIS claims something is "Islamic" does not mean that it is. Under the rule of the Ottoman Turks, the Islamic world did not have the violence that today plagues it. Nor did it have widespread sharia. Suleiman's law system was more logical (and merciful) than today's version of sharia.
Do not confuse what today's fanatics are calling Islam with historical Islam, which was indeed sometimes violent, but was also civilized (at least as civilized as any other society). Today's Islamist fanatics are a death cult disguised as an ancient religion. That disguise fools allied and enemies alike.
Conan the Grammarian at December 20, 2016 7:14 AM
Of course, if every American evangelical or fundamentalist Christian really believed that, they'd all be ascetic monks.
Really? I seem to recall there was go forth, be fruitful and multiply. Paul acknowledged that, even if he wanted all men to be like him.
I R A Darth Aggie at December 20, 2016 9:26 AM
Patton Oswalt, atheist, explains why religion was important to humanity and how it became a problem.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 20, 2016 10:05 AM
I stopped arguing with people about their religion at the same time I stopped arguing with ill educated socialists.
It is a waste of time, and breath.
Treat people well, and save your words about values and religion for your minor children.
Shoot dead anyone who tries to kill you whether they are a Muslim, a Christian a Buddhist, a Hindi or a wack job.
Isab at December 20, 2016 10:19 AM
I'm giving a sideeye to this whole essay, especially this:
Reading the early coverage of Karlov’s killing, and noting how different it is to British press coverage of other acts of Islamist terror, one gets the impression that the media think this killing is justified, or at least understandable.
It's not that different, nothing in the media is suggesting it's justified, and O'Neill is stretching this to the point where he's going to need a chiropractor.
Amy, you said this is an example of "how the Western press is becoming a tool of Al Qaeda (in its constant pining for clicks)." But nothing here suggests sympathy to Al-Qaeda, nor does O'Neill make the point that coverage of the Karlov killing was framed in any kind of a clickbait way.
Given that it's too dangerous for Western journalists to go to Eastern Aleppo, the media have become reliant on anti-Assad and anti-Russia activists to provide them with information and heartrending footage.
"Anti-Russia activists"? I think I know where this guy's sympathy lies.
Kevin at December 20, 2016 10:27 AM
An Erdrogen vs. Putin cage match... I'll get the popcorn. Seriously, this is a situation that bears watching, but even if we could identify which side is "right", there is little we can do at this time. I think it's less likely to spill over into trans-European war than it was in 1915, but the possibility is there. However, unless the nations of western Europe are willing and able to stand up for themselves, I don't think we have much choice other than to watch it burn. We don't have the capability to raise or equip a 4 million man Army at this time, nor is there any American public sentiment to do so.
Cousin Dave at December 20, 2016 1:16 PM
> Patton Oswalt, atheist, explains why...
I especially enjoyed his writerly "punch-up" of the 15th draft of Disney's enormously successful 2007 "Cartoon Shitshow 7: Return of the Assweeds."
Crid at December 20, 2016 4:18 PM
"Allahu akbar" is the Islamic religious equivalent to "My kid beat up your honor student."
mpetrie98 at December 20, 2016 8:10 PM
Really? I seem to recall there was go forth, be fruitful and multiply. Paul acknowledged that, even if he wanted all men to be like him. - I R A Darth Aggie
Paul was a murdering thug who decided to co opt the cult rather than stamp it out
As for be fruitful and multiply, that command was only ever given to Adam, Noah, his sons and their wives
lujlp at December 20, 2016 9:54 PM
One word, er acronym: NATO.
Conan the Grammarian at December 20, 2016 10:29 PM
It is when terrorist actions like this happen that make me glad, yet again, that Trump won and not Hillary.
Not that Trump can stop it any better than anyone else; but, at least he isn't making "statements" about how we have to respect Islam and all that crap.
Hillary would be out their saying things like: let's not all jump to conclusions and blame all Muslims yada yada yada.
charles at December 21, 2016 6:45 PM
> One word, er acronym: NATO.
I affirm that Trump's polished, featureless ignorance of NATO's strictures duplicates that of the American voters.
Well, I don't really, but if I did, what would you say, Conan?
I mean, how does your "one word" play out for us?
(The 57yo mildly-underutilized but over-taxed white guys, I mean.)
Crid at December 21, 2016 9:18 PM
The original thread was about what a conflict between Turkey and Russia might mean and whether it could have the disastrous consequences the last international assassination in that region had. Cousin Dave didn't believe a Putin-Erdogan cage was likely to expand into a wider European war, the way the Franz Ferdinand assassination did.
I am pointing out that with Turkey's membership in NATO, any conflict between Turkey and Russia would likely draw in NATO countries bound by treaty obligations to come to the defense of Turkey. Many of those countries border Russia, so expanding the conflict's theater is not beyond the bounds of possibility.
What does that mean for "57yo mildly-underutilized but over-taxed white guys?" Likely even more taxes and seeing sons and grandsons (and now daughters and granddaughters) off to war, if the US honors its treaty obligations; and Russia and Turkey don't go hyper-belligerent with each other. Remember, there's already bad blood there, Turkey shot down a Russian plane earlier this year.
Conan the Grammarian at December 22, 2016 7:19 AM
That is if "Russia and Turkey go hyper-belligerent with each other."
Conan the Grammarian at December 22, 2016 7:21 AM
Leave a comment