The House of David

"dawnbreak in the west"

Sunday, January 25, 2015

Demonstrating against parodies of Muhammad

As a rule, a "demonstration" is a demonstration of physical force. You demonstrate a pistol by firing it at a cantaloupe, was Moldbug's comment. As I've said here before.

Also as a rule, country A doesn't believe in belief B, and country B doesn't believe in belief A. So A should expect B to mock A's beliefs; and likewise B.

So when mobs in B demonstrate against (some people in) A's mockery of B - the mobs under B are pushing the B leaders to force A to repress those dissidents within A. They want aggressive-politics - they ultimately want war against A. Hey, lefties and Ronulans - just consider them as "neocons of Ishmael".

I wonder why we here in A don't feel like it's in our rights to go force some stuff on B. Like, to find out where these mobs are gathering and to BOMB them. They've done enough of that over here in A, 'alama Allahu. (I might be hazy on the subject / verb order.)

Sure we can talk root-causes and 'oo bombed 'oo. But right now I happen to live in A. And I don't trust B, and don't want any of it on me. I'll settle for not letting any more citizens of B to enter into A territory.

posted by Zimri on 23:06 | link | 0 comments

Oxford University Press gets burned (again)

Ahmad al-Jallad puts the smack down on another work of bad scholarship (h/t Zaotar):

It is hoped that non-specialists would read reviews of this book by Semiticists, as it is a work of comparative Semitics and not Arabic dialectology or sociolinguistics, and not take for granted its quality because it was published by Oxford University Press.

Do high-school students still apply to this university anymore?

posted by Zimri on 22:28 | link | 0 comments

Mut'a marriage today

Many years ago I pointed to Ibn Abbas and his unpleasant opinions on this and that. Mut'a temporary marriage came up. I'd thought his fatwa was abandoned among Sunnis but still holds strong among Shi'a.

The Ismailis reject it, and so historically has the Zaydiya - although the Houthi Zaydis, under Tehran's dominion now, might change their minds. On the other side of the divide, it's looking like the caliph, and the Egyptians and Saudis, are reviving it in Hanbalism.

posted by Zimri on 16:32 | link | 0 comments

Thursday, January 22, 2015

Show us the code


I am pro-#gamergate on general principle. Social-justice rage-junkies like Anita Sarkeesian are evil - literal servants of Morgoth. But one thing I'll grant to the unwilling hate-figure of the #gamergate movement herself, its Gavriel Princip, Zoe Quinn: she did, in fact, show us her code: Depression Quest.

It wasn't good code. Also up to then she'd made some major errors as a person. After the truth of the game came out - no thanks to her - she really should have slunk off in embarrassment and tried again. And then she didn't do even that. Because she's not (yet) a good person.

But - she did throw her code out there.

posted by Zimri on 21:57 | link | 0 comments

Was Muhammad white?

From "Muhammad: Believe it or else" and several other polemics, oft directed against the NOI etc:

The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaybar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet. He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. (tr. Bukhari 1.8.367)

Paul Atreides, come on down! - or not.

Consider the source: Bukhari, like Muslim al-Nisaburi, wasn't a Greek, but he was of old Central Asia. Both scholars Bukhari and Muslim were probable racial Soghdians; northern Iranians. These two were white men themselves, with a little Asian in them. I have seen photos of late 1800s Bukhara. Many of those guys looked exactly like me. Especially the, er, Jews but we'll not get into that.

I haven't looked into the asanid of the ahadith which say that the Prophet was, beneath the sunburn, white. But I suspect they were part of the anti-Arab shu‘ubiya. This movement was strongest in newly-Islamicised Persia, as part of the ‘Abbâsid revolution.

posted by Zimri on 21:27 | link | 0 comments

Dishonesty and abortion

There are ways to be honest about the abortion debate. So far I've counted three.

One can oppose it; perhaps with that extremely narrow exception for the imminent death of the mother and child. One can assert, with Medea, that the mother is sovereign. Lastly one can (this is rare) support abortion: for instance, a eugenicist. Also there are those... others. The host of Unamusement Park once, perhaps joking and certainly trolling, said he was for it for everyone except for whites. I didn't count those who profess not to care but I'll throw that in as a defensible position (everyone's got hobbies). We can opine that any or all of these positions are odious. We cannot find them contemptible.

I've said before that the "pro choice" position is contemptible - because not all involved parties can have a choice. Another contemptible position is to support it in cases of the "health" of the mother, because this is an escape-clause for weasels.

It is looking like the rape exception is weaseltalk too. It's real easy for ostensible pro-lifers to say "except for rape [and incest]". But that means a crime is alleged; and not only that, but a crime where we can know by a simple blood test on mommy approximately half the entire genome of the rapist [and if incest, more than half]. All of this is testable in court. If we're not testing this in court, then we're defining "rape" as "second thoughts two months later"; like we've defined "health" as "I feel really bad right now".

Individual GOP politicians, and their class as a self-interested group (as opposed to the conservative ideologues who write that platform) don't want to test this in court. They did up to the 1980s but they don't anymore. The politicos know the demographics of the electorate. No Republican wants a lot of nonwhite bastards in her district, which would make it not her district anymore. I must agree with HalfSigma and, now, 5Yg+I (Hector) in these comments: deep down, Republicans are Unamusement Park Rangers. Maybe their party should run on that platform and save our ears the bother.

APPENDIX: Note that the GOP is fully on the bandwagon of "rape" being "second thoughts two months later". I'll let that all sink in, for you men out there (and for you female lovers of lesbian women).

posted by Zimri on 17:55 | link | 0 comments

Yemen: screwed

I'd posted a somewhat pro-Zaydi post almost a decade ago. Now it looks like they've taken over Yemen.

And the first words out of their mouths are "death to America", "death to Israel", "curse on the Jews", and "victory to Islam".

* I'll append here: yes, I am biased. Still. The measure of a healthy state isn't to blame everything that sucks upon a foreign entity. Yemen does not border Israel; and it has long ago thrown out its Jews.

posted by Zimri on 17:23 | link | 0 comments

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Early Gospel of Mark

Everyone serious agrees that the Gospel of Mark is the first one that survives. (I used to argue here for Egerton as perhaps earlier; but then that one doesn't exactly survive.) Other (less-) serious people have argued for Thomas.

It was a little embarrassing, in that sense, that the Gospel of Mark hasn't been found to survive, its own self, until the tail end of the 100s AD. Revisionists have made hay with the fact that, given Oxyrhynchus 1 etc, Greek copies of Thomas as of 200 AD were about as numerous and antique as were those of Mark - despite Mark being, also, so associated with Egypt. This hasn't annoyed just Evangelicals; it has also annoyed us Markan-priority "revisionists". I mean, it's easy enough to say that Mark survives in the reworked gospels of Matthew and Luke and then that Synoptic harmony which Justin Martyr used, but... "begging the question" sometimes comes up.

That gap may now be filled. Someone's found some Mark in mummy-carton(n)age circa 90 AD. But Roger Pearse warns it might be too good to be true. We'll see. We'll need more cartonnage to be sure.

SIDENOTE: In that light: can art-historians please quit whining that unravelling cheap, ugly papier-mache masks for their palimpsests is "destruction"? With cherries on top? Dude. Take pictures and publish 'em; then let others have their turn. Documentary evidence trumps prole art from a backwater province. Maybe that's the palimpsest of this debate, come to that; historians of prole Egyptian art are guarding turf.

UPDATE 1/24/2015: CNN are doing the Atlas Shrugged thing. Yeah. I'm going with this MS as authentic. The Left'd never go against, say, a Gospel of Thomas copy in cartonnage.

posted by Zimri on 17:19 | link | 0 comments

Halfway there

This morning I've approved the changes to The Arabs and Their Qur'an. Right now Amazon is still listing it as edition 4, but I think (I don't remember well) I can get this bumped to 5[th] if I just send them here to last night's page. While we're all at it, I hope they've got House of War listed as 3[rd] (which it is); I need to check that. * just did; it seems I hadn't ever stuck an "edition" note in there before, so, did that.

BUYER BEWARE: I DID NOT CHANGE HOUSE OF WAR THIS MONTH. So if you already got edition 3, do NOT buy it NOW! I mean, unless you're planning on gifting it to some Chechens with my home address. In that case it's cool. (On second thought maybe not.)

As for Throne of Glass... bayna my own poor editing skill wa-bayna Microsoft Word, Throne of Glass's layout is now shot. I have to un-shoot it before I can put it back up there.

posted by Zimri on 16:57 | link | 0 comments

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

The 2015 edition(s)

It has been close to two years since Edition IV of The Arabs and Their Qur'an. Since then I have done a whole new book, and new essays, and a fairly thoroughgoing series of edits to House of War.

In that span, we have also seen Maria Conterno and Joseph Witztum throw some serious spanners into the works. Conterno has questioned the whole ethos of tracking down sources for Byzantine / Syrian history. As the same time Witztum has questioned Neuwirth's sequence of 20 > 7.

In the meantime I've also found the usual bugs in mine own work. This might, incidentally, explain why sales of Throne of Glass have been slow. See, I'd admitted here before that the other two books were put out too early. This really wasn't wise from a marketing standpoint.

So anyway. I now feel Arabs can justify a new edition - it's the fifth, and I truly am sorry about the 2012-13 flurry; but one lives and learns. For those who got the earlier editions: here is where I support Treadgold (and by extension Hoyland) against Conterno. Here is where I (partly) support Neuwirth against Witztum. Both arguments are now developed more fully in the relevant essays in this book. Mostly I get to stand my ground (yay!) but I do, now, see how sura 7 relied on Charlton Heston dubbed in Syriac (as well as on sura 20).

Throne is also getting a tweak. This one isn't really at the "second edition" stage; those readers about whom I know were happi(er) with it when it came out. But it's sold few enough copies that a small bugfix can't hurt. It should point to the new Arabs at least.

Will let you know when available.

posted by Zimri on 22:10 | link | 0 comments

Sunday, January 18, 2015


Pro-whites tend to get angry about Diversity - this much, we know. One of their better arguments is that affirmative-action (particularly) will select unworthy candidates, who are transparently there on account of race, and who end up doing nothing useful but "manage" (i.e. meddle). Pro-whites believe that, just by dint of IQ, a pro-white society (and state) would naturally allow more competent candidates to take positions of responsibility. This opinion is incidentally shared with Conservatives and (more so) Libertarians, but it's not polite to tell them that.

Neo-neocon argues against the pro-white position (as such) that it is more likely that a pro-white state would decay - VERY quickly - into a racket that rewards political suck-ups. Which suck-ups wouldn't be competent either. But hey. White!

I suspect Neo-neocon is right. This is why, although I'll link to pro-white sites and articles, I insist on drawing those lines . . .

posted by Zimri on 21:22 | link | 0 comments

Upload #99 - Promises kept

During my first rush of posting stuff, toward the end in spring 2010, I was throwing everything I could find against that proverbial wall. Among these was a look into the parallels between the muhkam passages of suras 4, 6, and 17 - the "Islamic ten commandments" if you will. This was "The Muhkam of the Furqan".

Later on I fine-tuned a lot of what I'd been saying about the proto-Qur'an's transmission. Much of "Muhkam" ended up cannibalised for other, better essays. Then, in January 2012, most of these ended up in The Arabs and Their Qur'an. Not without some hiccups; in the first edition I'd forgotten that I'd pulled out Uthman's take on things, so that joined the collection later under the title "The Martyr For The Book". (There was some shuffling here too.)

By that point the source "Muhkam" essay had crumbled into the state of a devastated ruin. It didn't even have a proper title anymore: "The Muhkam of the Furqan" had referred to a Tamimite poem, relevant to Uthman's recitation of sura 17; it was no longer relevant to anything in this essay. (This topic shifted to a part of "The Martyr for the Book" in case you were wondering.) Also I'd found Devin Stewart's 2008 essay, "Notes on Medieval and Modern Emendations" which had argued much the point of The Paper With No Name - but only in an aside, and looking into the barest text only. Clearly I needed to rewrite this thing. So I took "Muhkam" down-for-maintenance, along with "Covenant Of Those Given The Book" and others. Unfortunately since the link was down, that meant the versions of The Arabs I've had are now pointing nowhere. Turns out I was wrong about no other essays relying on this one - gah!!

I have now restored the essay, with a real(ish) title: "The Muhkam of the Was[s]iya". (The inconsistent and wrong spelling is on my next to-do list.) With this title, those who're looking for "-to the Furqan" in the books they've bought should at least manage "-to the Wasiya" with a minimum of confusion. In sha'a 'llah.

Also corrected: "Dispute"; and "Interceding with God" and "Abraham's Promise" again.


posted by Zimri on 14:55 | link | 0 comments

Friday, January 16, 2015

The meaning of Charlie Hebdo

The slaying of the cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo was an act of qital. It was an act calculated to bend Western freethinkers to the will of Allah.

To the extent the West should have protested, it should have protested against a violation of French sovereignty first, of Western sovereignty secondarily. When I was younger I'd have supported protest against Islam in general, but this much isn't really our business.

The politicians and journolistas who showed up arm and arm might not have been as obviously phony as John Kerry; but these creeps weren't there to restrict the ongoing invasion of France and other Western nations by people who hate us as a matter of Qur'anic principle.

I liked the US's response better back when we weren't sending doddering soft-rock musicians as official ambassadors. We should have stayed out and told them, hey, you let 'em in, we're going to tighten up our own security.

posted by Zimri on 19:54 | link | 0 comments

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Robert E Lee and the rebel flag

On Monday the 19th, the Union Government will honour a Democratic Socialist; but I'll be honouring a patriot.

Other people are considering that patriot as well. I suspect, though, that if that patriot could see how all the States have been acting today... he'd have fought twice as hard.

(And yeah, I did mark's email as the SPAM it was. They won't let me off their MEETUP.COM SPAM list, without signing up, so SPAM MEETUP.COM SPAM SPAM.)

posted by Zimri on 23:05 | link | 0 comments

The mind of an anti-Islamophobic scholar of Islam

I was hoping not to look into Morris's stupid commie twitter feed again, because he deserves to be ignored like the kook he is, but zeca at the Council Of Ex Muslims is roping me back in:

Honesty: There are plenty of interesting things I'd like to blog about, but I'm afraid of how they would be misused by racists and [Islamo-]'phobes. It's not enough to get my facts right, because facts have resonance; they feed into discourses beyond my control. Facts can be weaponised.

I'll justify commenting on grounds that it is a Teaching Moment. About General Principle. Yeah... that's the ticket.

Before I even had a blog, I recall the editor of Biblical Archaeology Review saying more or less just that: that Biblical revisionism was likely to be misused by antisemites. Therefore - he implied - thoroughgoing Old Testament criticism shouldn't be done. I scribbled out a web-page (like I said: before blog) complaining about it. I really should re-edit that and re-post it, especially since that very editor has revealed himself a hypocrite on religious-sensitivities where Shia-Islam hits at Christianity... UPDATE 1/16: done. Proud to have it as the proto-blog first-link on this site.

But anyway. Once you've decided to conceal facts about group A because you dislike group B which opposes group A, then you're no longer a scholar with respect to group A. You've sold your soul. Like, I believe, Robert Hoyland has sold his soul, and for similar reasons: to struggle (tajhîd) against Islamophobia.

Given that Morris is a Piketty-citing communist, a Red agent, a servant of the Revolution: nobody should feel surprise at any of this. There is a higher truth, to the communist; a political truth, a revolutionary truth. And that latter "truth" is whatever might be of use to resist the strongest adversary to Utopia: which adversary - Morris believes - is extended-family self-interest ("racism") and private property ("capital"). Facts can never get in the way.

posted by Zimri on 20:48 | link | 0 comments

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Non tu quoque

A Danish linguist has investigated the "basic texts" to find out which religion is most warlike. h/t, Lilyesque @ da Council. So, when you read smug Twitterites like Eugene Kane saying As some rush to demonize all Muslims for violence of a few, remember many KKK members were devout Christians who attended church regularly., keep that in mind.

This blog has never claimed that Christianity is perfect. I have never had illusions about individual Christians, either. I have, right here, gone so far as to show how A has led to B. I am not even here to say whether the Ku Klux Klan, or its followers and enablers, were morally right or justified - we are all agreed that we can't make moral judgements, where the question at hand is adherence to base principle. So, when I say the following, know that I am looking into the facts impartially.

Any insinuation that Christianity at its base has condoned, or could condone, the Ku Klux Klan is a lie.

The KKK at most went along with the Southern Baptist Convention's heresy, against the doctrines of Paul especially. To that, the SBC has, oopsie, recognised this and repented. The KKK is not Christian; it never was Christian, and by the 1910s under President Wilson and (later) Governor Morely it had become more-or-less a post-Christian Progressive outfit.

By contrast, check out the texts of Islam. Zoatar at the Council of Ex Muslims brings up an important point, just too many elements to "Islam", but we're not looking into whether Fred Donner (or myself!) is right about Muhammad bringing a pious Semitic oecumenism to the Near East. We are looking at the texts which are canon today. And those texts are - well, they're here, and testably subject to analysis by linguists.

posted by Zimri on 18:50 | link | 0 comments

Sunday, January 11, 2015

Two felonies, one cup

I read this sad story. Some high-school coach in Upnorth recorded a wankvid and accidentally sent it to his students... who weren't amused. So now he is a Sex-Offending Felon. I'm going to come out and say that the felony charges - there are now TWO of them now - need to be dropped. h/t Maet @ ace's ONT.

The initial charges were "Risk of Injury to Child"-a felony-along with two misdemeanor counts each of obscenity and breach of peace. I can buy the second two. Not buying the first, not in days when high-school kids in Connecticut (the targets) have access to the Internet and, I gather, have seen a lot worse on the Internet. As for the "witness tampering", the intended target didn't get the text and so by definition is NOT A WITNESS.

But hey, Connecticut! Without some ludicrous charges, you'll not get a good bargaining-position when dealing with opposing legal counsel. And don't forget Great White Defendant! Gotta run up those sex-offender stats so that those Hispanics and other foreigners (with respect to far-north Connecticut) don't look so bad.

UPDATE: Apparently even other girls aren't allowed to run up the score against the Specialtown Snowflakes.

So, back to Story A, now I'm getting to suspect that we might have a Social Justice War on our hands here. (On our left hands, in this case.) I gotta say, I'm uncomfortable with this. On this blog I don't normally venture to address the distaff side. Yes, I used to do that, on okCupid back when I had a blog-posting account there; but I, er, dumped it. In 2011. So I'll pause, here, to give this issue all due consideration and sensitivity.


Hey news flash, bitches!

There exist creeps out there - which creeps aren't creeping on YOU, or at least aren't trying to, as it happened in the first-noted story, but hey, they're creeping on SOMEBODY. There also exist out there other teams of girl, girls who don't give a shit about your feelings. Quelle horreur! The Vapours!

Get a grip, bitches. (Or whatever the equivalent is.) You are not the galactic core of the universe. I don't give a shit; other girls don't give a shit; and that guy you like? Definitely doesn't give a shit. Live with it.

And if you're female and offended at reading the preceding paras then... yeah, I'm talking about you.

posted by Zimri on 22:09 | link | 0 comments

Saturday, January 10, 2015

The Keys to the Garden

I am pretty sure that the professor Sean Anthony knows I exist; I haven't mailed him or met him, but some years ago I once kinda/sorta called him out on Amazon (in a good way!). On that topic I wonder if he's read House of War.

Part of House of War's theme was the notion of a four-to-eight sided vestibule erected around the Believer, with Gates to Paradise on the sides. The book argued that the Dome of the Rock, and probably the Ka'ba as well, had modeled this fantasy. Toward the end of the writing-process, back in late summer 2012, I threw in an appendix musing about "The Keys to Paradise are Swords". What I'd done - because no-one at the time was doing it for me - was to link that "Keys" slogan with that garbled Jewish-Christian hadith from the Doctrina Jacobi. And still, I didn't much care about the keys. What interested me were their gates. So this essay was a glorified footnote, with little by way of argument.

Sean Anthony has now dealt with the keys, with (much) more care to detail: Muḥammad, the Keys to Paradise, and the Doctrina Iacobi: A Late Antique Puzzle. Really this buttresses that whole essay I did. Wish I'd had it at the time!

posted by Zimri on 17:29 | link | 0 comments


It crossed my notice late last October and through November that there was a spike in book-sales. A couple weeks back I looked up some keywords, and I ran across The Council of Ex-Muslims. First there was zeca, and then countjulian - which comment he then stickied to the forum.

I am grateful for the attention - especially from countjulian. If I am reading him right, he's thrown the thumbs-up to the independent essays and (by extension) to The Arabs and Their Qur'an and all those appendices. That's the first time I've seen feedback on those dry and multitudinous essays. I hope that he enjoys the narrative portions of the two real books, as well.

The forum, by the way, is becoming a must-visit part of my day. I've found a vast pile of new material there; from the above two, and also from Zaotar, with honourable-mentions too many to, er, mention.

posted by Zimri on 17:13 | link | 0 comments

On this site



Random crap

Powered By Blogger TM

Property of author; All Rights Reserved