I have permission to post this. This is the most incisive statement you will ever read. This was sent to me on “mail” here. This individual was “something” in Afghanistan, far above military operative, IMO. I suggest rereading if you really want to understand these bastards.
“From BeauBo | 06/17/2016 7:52:17 PM PDT replied
There are four main schools of jurisprudence to interpret Islam (pass judgements in Sharia).
Hanafi: Used the old Ottoman Empire
Shafi: From the West coast of Afica, Yemen and Indonesia
Maliki: From North Africa
Hanbali: From the Arabian Peninsula
Of the four, Hanbali, the first promoted by Abdul Wahhab, is the newest, and was the smallest by far - until expansion was fueled by oil wealth, starting in the 1970’s.
It is characterized by an absolutely strict, literal reading of only a few specific sources - Quran and Sunnah (from which the word Sunni is derived). The Sunnah consists of two works, Sira(t) (the classic biography of Mohammad) and Hadith (the stories (or acts) of Mohammad and his companions. For Hanbalis, it is forbidden to use any logical, moral, or even factual analysis, to vary in any way from the literal reading of these texts (especially Quran, which is supposedly perfect and divinely protected from error).
Wahhabbis use a rule of supercession, on top of the Hanbali literal approach. This rule dictates that whenever there is an apparent internal conflict in the texts (of which there are many), the chronologically later statements supersede the earlier ones. Apparently, God was frequently changing his mind and reversing himself for a couple of decades, and then stopped and locked everything for all people for all time, about 1,400 years ago...
A critical effect of this rule, is that all the moderate or tolerant statements from early in Mohammad’s career (before he had political and military power) are superseded by his later, increasingly megalomaniacal statements advocating ruthless totalitarian conquest. In the end, he said that he had been commanded to continue his conquest until all men accepted islam.
Salafi literally means “one who follows the ways of the pious forefathers”, implying an originalist approach to Islam. That term is older than Wahhabism, and originally did not indicate the specific rules of interpretation that one supported.
After the fall of the Ottoman Caliphate, what is now the modern Salafi movement started in Egypt, with the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood (whose name borrowed some inspiration from the Wahhabbi Brotherhood (Ikhwan) groups that had been active the century prior in nearby Arabia. They took a more political orientation, proposing that West and its culture were undermining islam, and that muslims needed to get back to their pure islamic roots, and fight to restore pure islamic society (a caliphate).
Although they are more of a political movement, they have fundamentally adopted the religious doctrine of the Wahhabbis as their figh - their ideal of a pure islamic society.
Additionally, there were others who called themselves Salafis, but were more focused on preaching to fellow muslims, to purify/rectify their understanding and practice of islam (so called Tablighi Jamaat). Wahhabbis in contrast, emphasized strict enforcement, in addition to exhortation - policing, smashing idols or graven images, censoring, beating, amputating and executing.
In effect, salafis have now effectively adopted/acceded to Wahhabbi religious/juridical authority - so the distinction has become less meaningful than it ever was. Operationally, they have become intimately intertwined, with Wahhabbi Gulf Arabs funding and hosting and arming the others, and establishing think tanks and academic departments to develop strategy for them.
...And building mosques and madrassa in the West, and corrupting Western politicians, with an explicit strategy to impose sharia rule on the whole world.
On that happy note, have a great weekend. Always a treat to chat with a like-minded person.”
This is the money quote.
It explains, in part why the Godless Left excuses Islam and its terrorists.
The Left also has adopted the tactics of forbidding any use of Logic/Reason, Morality or Factual analysis when debating their positions.
The only thing the Left is missing is some "Holy Text".
They are trying their best to place "Gaia" at the helm but are having difficulties gaining traction.
The thing that the Left really hates is that the Christian Bible has been thoroughly examined for over a thousand years using Logic/Reason, Morality and Factual analysis.
It's no wonder that they sympathize with Islam.
It’s called abrogation, and until we understand it, it will be the ruin of its all.
This rule dictates that whenever there is an apparent internal conflict in the texts (of which there are many), the chronologically later statements supersede the earlier ones. Apparently, God was frequently changing his mind and reversing himself for a couple of decades, and then stopped and locked everything for all people for all time, about 1,400 years ago...