Turkey heading for religious cyber-censorship

I have Tribesman on "ignore" since Thursday night, after half a year I simply was tired of it.

Oh no, that means I can no longer point out when you are simply making things up
Hold on, thats not right is it? Surely it doesn't work like that?
Ah I get it now.
It just means that you will go on posting in the topic in the same vein without realising it is noted that you are writing stuff that is simply not true.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Oh no, that means I can no longer point out when you are simply making things up...

It just means that you will go on posting in the topic in the same vein without realising it is noted that you are writing stuff that is simply not true.

I would be way more willing to believe in what you say if you were finally telling people where you get your info from. If everything Skybird says is made up or untrue then show us the counter evidence! So far you have only be claiming while Skybird put up links to where he got his info from (one might agree or disagree with his sources but at least he tells us where it is from). If you want me to believe you more than Skybird maybe you should start to point to your sources. I'm writing an application right now and I have to state my sources all the time. If I don't, my Professor will not accept that passage and regard it as if it wasn't there.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

I would be way more willing to believe in what you say if you were finally telling people where you get your info from.

Good luck while waiting. Some of us are waiting for that since last summer when he was very pressingly asked by me and one or two others more to reveal his qualifications. He said he must not, and eggdanced around mysterious implications that it would be wise if we just assume that qualification does exist. I only say to that that much of the stuff he claimed and said is rightout wrong, and reveals a stellar lack of background knowledge, else he would not fall for just superficial points so often that he does not and cannot put into context, nevertheless blowing them up in size and meaning. I see him as a troll, and I just recommend to stop paying attention to him.

If you want me to believe you more than Skybird maybe you should start to point to your sources.

Hell, you should not just believe me or anyone else. Form an educated opinion yourself by reading some basic works on your own. You must not read as excessively as I did, but you are German, I can recommend you two or three German books by Raddatz that I have recommended before, since he is both very thorough and insightful, and also very precise in giving his links and sources in Islamic scripture and it's context. that is a good and solid base to found your own opinion on. I certainly do not wish that you just believe me something because I say so.

http://www.amazon.de/Von-Gott-Allah-...114712&sr=8-11

http://www.amazon.de/Allah-Terror-Dj...d_bxgy_b_img_c

This is some of the best summarising literature on Islam that I know of both in German and English language, and it compares direcly to the Christian church as well. Not too easy to read, I admit, but of very high standard, and extremely well-founded.

Raddatz, amongst other, is an academically trained "Orientalist" and was close personal student of some of the best qualified Franco-German authorities for the academical research on Islam. IMO he has surpassed them.

If you want to read the Quran, be advised that that only makes sense with plenty of secondary literature accompanying that, else too much important details and background will escape your attention necessarily. It's a bit - complicated, and more difficult than to read the New Testament, for example. It already starts with controversial translation issues. I recommend to start with summarising literature on the general case of Islam that is qualified to stand the test of academic standards. there is much amateur work out there that illustrates the author is thinking that it already is good enough to just have good intentions regarding the integration of islam, and that wish would make a good book, but these works most often are incredibly wishful, and shallow. Many others have a very PC bias.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Hell, you should not just believe me or anyone else. Form an educated opinion yourself by reading some basic works on your own.

And that is why I ask for sources.

[Mikhayl]

Still peddling the Raddatz fraud uh? That guy's work is so important that he's a total unknown outside of Germany. The only non-German references to this guy on the internets are on white supremacist blogs and racist websites like FrontPageMag and the like who, unsurprisingly, have the same consideration for him as Skybird.

[Skybird]

Counter him in argument instead by attempted character assassination.

BTW, he is so unknown that he is one of the most asked German-tongued contributors and co-editors of the Encyclopedia on Islam in five volumes (the second version published in English and French only) - and undisputed academic standard work. He is also the most asked analysts on the matter in German-languaged Europe. And a political advisor to German parties, mainly the CDU (he himself holds no party membership).

BTW, I once have even read Albert Schweitzer being quoted on a white supremacist website.

Again, counter him in argument instead of character assassination. I hold every bet that he knows his stuff way much better than you and me and we all together. He is certainly against the PC propaganda crowd, but that is not excuse to cheat him. If it is so wrong what he says, it should be easy for you to show him wrong, right?

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

The only non-German references to this guy on the internets are on white supremacist blogs and racist websites

That's a wrong and unfair diffamation that shows more about your self than about anyone else. In fact he is actively contributing to various media outlets, some of which are mass media, and quoted and linked to from other places as well. He is also sometimes on radio, Deutschlandfunik for the most. Over time you could have read him in the FAZ, Die Welt, Der Spiegel, to mention just the most widespread ones.

Prove his references and his information and his arguments wrong - or step aside.

[Mikhayl]

Originally Posted by Skybird

BTW, he is so unknown that he is one of the most asked German-tongued contributors and co-editors of the Encyclopedia on Islam in five volumes (the second version published in English and French only) - and undisputed academic standard work.

Where do you get that information from? The Encyclopedia of Islam is in 14 volumes (12 + indexes), it's the Encyclopedia on the Qur'an that is in 6 volumes (5 + index). I have found two references to Raddatz in one of the 6 volumes, two quotes from a book from 1971, nothing else. And there's no mention of his name on Brill's website
I don't have the Encyclopedia of Islam, but if you do you might want to check for those missing volumes, that thing costs an arm.

I would be way more willing to believe in what you say if you were finally telling people where you get your info from.

Info comes from many places

If everything Skybird says is made up or untrue then show us the counter evidence!

Where have I said that? I have only said tha Skybird makes things up to fit his arguement , I have not said that everything he says is made up.
If you paid attention you might notice I specicificly ask skybird to back up his claims ...as in those c;aims that are obviously false , the most common of which lately is easily demonstrated by the simple question "what law?".
On no occasion has Skybird attempted to try and justify the falsehoods he has written, instead we get.... i went to muslim countries ....i read books...you are ignorant.

one might agree or disagree with his sources but at least he tells us where it is from

Actually no he doesn't, in the main he sticks to non contentious issues for which you can provide a whole library of sources, but the non contentious issues do not make point.
When he wants to make a point he invariablty heads towards a very small number of sources. The most common of which takes specific points from a very respected, very well established scholar who is reknowned world wide.
Every time that scholars works are used to "prove" a specific bit of scriptue means "A".
Just about every time the scholars work really shows that the scripture cannot possibly mean "A" but it is omitted.
The fact that the "proof" version is so widely accepted and circulated does not give it credibility .
However the fact that the Jewish scholar of Islam rejects the misuse and misrepresentation of his studies and takes legal actions against the crazy racist hate sites that claim to use his work...well that speaks volumes doesn't it.

So schroeder, Skybird does write some good stuff on Islam but really lets himself down badly, I however could be far more critical on many aspects of Islam(after all there are sommany things to get your teeth into).
But. That should be a big ...
But
I would not have to make up ****e to make my point like Skybird does.

If you are in doubt then do a simple search for skybirds "claims", match them to the "claims" on Jihadwatch.
Then take the step to the Jihadwatch scholarly source
Then you can see why that source is really ********d offwith Jihadwatch and its misrepresentation of his studies.

The only non-German references to this guy on the internets are on white supremacist blogs and racist websites

Do not knock Skybirds sources, just errrrrr....comment on the reliabilty and objectivity of his sources