if you got a dhimmi-complex, that´s your problem, not mine...

Submitted by stewwi (Germany), Oct 30, 2008 at 19:44

hello dhimmi or dhimmi no more or never was dhimmi or whatever you wanna be,

well, you seem to be very sure about me being a muslim (because you´re a narrow-minded redneck and you probably want to be a narrow-minded redneck no more;)) and about giving me great advices à la "abandon islam and the arab imperialism". my advice for you (in terms of "imperialism"): people who live in glass houses shouldn´t throw stones! (if you know what i mean...)
just to let you know: you´re not the first man to discover that there was another version - or better: other versions - of the qur´an and that - of course - dhamma, fatha, kasra, shadda, sukkuun, blabla weren´t written in those ancient versions. in addition to this - and here i ask for your attention cause this might be new to you - there weren´t even dots above or under the letters. that means that one could take a 'ta' for a 'ba' p.e. so far so good...
but back to your vocalisation. "mithl nurihaa kamishkaawah". that´s great, but it doesn´t make any sense! it´s just not arabic and you should admit that. just because you don´t want to read the conventional vocalisation you make up your own one?!? no one would ever understand this. of course one can argue about whether it should be "maalik" or "malik" and everybody who studied arabic for just a second could know that (but you, again, pretend to be the scientist who discovered this breathtaking fact), oooh, you´re so lame, why did you have to choose the word malik/ maalik of all things, that´s sooo lame!
ok, i could explain too many things to you but that would just take too much time, that´s why i´ll specifically write about m-th-l and why it doesn´t make sense (in this context) to vocalise it as "mithl" instead of "mathal". did you notice that in the sura and even in the aya the expression "dharaba mathalan" is used several times? well, you could answer that this also is only a matter of how one reads the non-existing short vowels but then i have to tell you that this expression was known to the arabs even in the time of the (socalled) jahiliya/ gahiliya and it´s senseless in your position to try to invent new arabic expressions that noone ever used before, or - another advice - invent or better create a new language and a fitting dictionary if you want anybody to follow your brilliant ideas.
trying to be smart you supposed me to be or have a "ustadh masri" or to wish to live with the saudis, you wrote about arab imperialism and so on and all that only because of your hurt ego because you don´t wanna admit that your reading (version) of ayat an-nuur doesn´t make any sense. in addition to that, not only your arabic is weak but also your english (at least the orthography) while i assume that you (unlike me) are a native speaker. i criticised your lacking arabic skills because they are directly connected to your wrong version (see: "so make up your mind are we talking about transliteration, vocalisation or arabic skills...")

hope you can overcome all your obvious and hidden complexes one day

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".