Dhimmi, your argument is a non-sequitur

Submitted by zzazzeefrazzee (United States), Feb 21, 2008 at 10:59

Dhimmi Dearest,

You are so bloated with logical fallacies, where does one start:

1) For the nth time- I'm not a talblighi, Pakistani, or even a Muslim. I'm a merely student of language who has no axe to grind, much as you obviously do.

2) I'm very willing to believe you that Allah may very well be derived from Syriac (and that in turn derived from Aramaic, and that in turn derived from Hebrew), but you've STILL never provided a source for this claim. Care to look that one up? I would love to know. After all, you're only helping to prove my premise (which by the way, is purely linguistic, not theological, as you seem to assert)

3) Dhimmi Dearest, your flaming of Mr. Naik, whoever he is, and making disparaging comments (read "Ad Hominem fallacy") about what his name means in Arabic is really rather unbecoming of a mature adult. Naik is a very common surname on the Subcontinent.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".