Cross-filed under sarcasm?

Well, Shawn was off-base a bit with his understanding of Islamic history, but I must say that Jay Tea is as well. As a professor who teaches the history of medieval Islam, I can tell you that it is a far more complicated picture than either of you present. And Jay, nothing sets my teeth on edge more than people who mislabel early medieval Europe as "the dark ages" and who disparage Christianity as entering some pit of ignorance after the dissolution of the Roman Empire. That, too, is beyond an oversimplification.

In short, Islam did not single-handedly save ancient civilization and learning by preserving it in the medieval period. Neither was Islam famously tolerant at any time in its history-- yes, it usually had special regard for "people of the book," that is, Christians and Jews, because they worshipped the correct deity. However, pagans, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. were from the earliest days persecuted and forbidden to follow their religions openly in the Islamic empire. Zoroastrian priests were killed by the score, for example, when Iran became part of the empire.

And relations with people of the book was not a simple thing, either. Originally, prayers were recited facing Jerusalem rather than Mecca. This was in a time when Muhammad had a political alliance with Jews in the Medina area. When that alliance fell apart, a revelation conveniently was revealed that instructed Muslims to pray facing Mecca.

While early America is beyond my area of expertise, I got a chuckle out of Jay Tea's explanation of the role of Islam in that period. Clever way to make the point that no, there were not enough Muslims actually living in america to register on the radar screen for many many years. Please ignore nonsense on the internet trying to establish muslims in north america from the days of francis drake-- it's nonsense. For the record, Columbus DID have two muslim ship captains with him, but african muslims (supposedly from the kingdom of Mali) did not explore the new world in the 1300s. Muslims in the united states never numbered more than a few hundred until the 20th century. That's neither good nor bad; it's simply true.

No apology needed.

I wonder where those 1300's muslim's worshipped and kept their camels during the winter? A tent?

Jay, is this a joke? You are giving the Muslims credit for helping the development of our country through their piracy?

That is ludicrous!

At best we can thank them for giving us the US Marines, but our country would have gone forward and gained credibility without the pirates.

You are bending over backwards to be tolerant of a sinister entity that wants to dominate the world and kill you and all the rest of us infidels.

I'm with Shawn on this one.

It has always been my understanding that after the fall of the Roman Empire that Christianity was THE sole repository for knowledge as it was one place where written records were kept. Islam may have played a minor role in keeping alive what bits of knowledge they approved of but I'd hardly qualify them as saving it for the rest of civilization. But that's just what I recall from several of my university history classes and my memory sucks.

As for Islam being tolerant? I think Terri explained it better than I could short of saying that it has always been a cult that killed non-believers.

Wow guy (#4), sense of humor much?

"In short, Islam did not single-handedly save ancient civilization and learning by preserving it in the medieval period. Neither was Islam famously tolerant at any time in its history"

Thank you. I also get indigestion when Bernard Lewis is lauded as the final authority on Orientalism.

The Kingdom of Morocco was one of the first countries, if not the first, to recognize the independence of the US.

http://rabat.usembassy.gov/history.html

Jay, I usually respect your logic but this time you're out in left field. If apologies are needed, you should make one to Shawn, since you didn't get your ducks in a row any better, and I think worse, than he did.

Let me add to the corrections of Jay's post. The Barbary pirates were not the very first challenge the U.S. faced abroad. That initial challenge came in maintaining our neutality with both France and England in turn. France brazenly attempted to inflame American public opinion against the British in order to force the U.S. into it's war against England and it's allies after the French Revolution. It eventually led President Washington to demand the recall of the French ambassador Genet.

England, for it's part, began seizing neutral America's ships and impressing American seamen during that same struggle. This led to the controversial Jay treaty which, although it was widely unpopular, achieved it's main end in keeping us out of war with England.

So Jay, your arguments - like Shawn's - could benefit from more accuracy in supporting facts.

So basically, Jay, you'll protect Islam major export to the world; violence. Whilst putting down one of the blogs contributors for exactly what? Saying what the rest of us are thinking? People who practice Islam got a hell of a long way to go before people start believing this nonsense about their being a religion of peace.

....Hmmm....a bit of snark by Jay I presume?..

..it appears that the sting of boy potus giving the Muslims a high five for the choice of building sites has everyone a bit on edge...

JT, that was a modest proposal. ;) ww

This kind of thing has played out in U.S. history before: the Know-Nothings attacking Irish Catholic immigration, anti-German sentiment during WW I, the internment of Japanese Americans during WW II.

It always looks like crap in hindsight.

*yawn*...blather, blathered, blathering...on.

"Islam was a fundamental factor in the earliest stages of our nationhood...."

Given Barry's past display of knowledge on US history, this statement doesn't surprise me.

As Terri pointed out, I seriously doubt Muslims were a factor 'in the earliest stages'.

Jay Tea,

"Islam is, at its core, an aggressive religion. It actively promotes spreading its faith by force and conquest. And, historically, it makes a point of supplanting pre-existing faiths and symbology thereof."

-Just one of your many quotes broad-brushing your feelings toward Islam.

Which I happen to agree with.

It's astonishing to me that arguably the most critical writer here regarding Islam would take it upon himself to openly chastise a "colleague" for an article regarding Islam.

Google "Jay Tea Islam Muslim," and you'll find just how outspoken you are about what you publicly consider to be problems with that religion.

As per "airing our dirty laundry" in public, I've been a visitor to Wizbang for years, and never once can I recall one writer feeling the necessity to "apologize" for what another writer posted.

And your "heads up" to me in our group forum really doesn't matter now, does it?

Posting disagreements in the comments section is one thing.

Using an article you disagree with as a springboard to lambaste a "colleague" for his/her opinion is another.

I can take criticism just as well as you, but, I think a modicum of collegial respect should be a given.

-Shawn

Who at Wizbang is going to publicly apologize for Jay Tea's foray into dhimmitude?

Could be way wrong, but it appears that PC has reared it's feces encrusted head here.

Both posters,IMHO, are equally good reads. Seems, Mr T, that if you had issue with Shawn, the chastisement could have been delivered in a slightly less virulent manner.

A lively argument would be preferable to what I see happened, and will bet many readers here concur.

Just my 2/c, all of you here have a great weekend, okay?

Apologize? Jay Tea: Who died and made you Obama?
Heh.

It seems that very few have read Mr. Tea's post carefully.

Mr. Tea clearly overestimated the intelligence of Wizbang readers, and Shawn Mallow also.

You can tell from their comments and views, Mr. Tea, that you're addressing an audience of idiots and morons. When writing think "second graders are reading this" and you'll have better success.

/sarc off - as if that makes any difference.

Muslims in the united states never numbered more than a few hundred until the 20th century. That's neither good nor bad; it's simply true.

Terri - you should know by now that in political discourse today isn't not sufficient for something to be true or false, it also has to be 'bad' or 'good' for the particular projection desired. So there is 'good-true' and 'good-false', and 'bad-true' and 'bad-false'. 'Bad-true' ranks FAR below 'Good-false'.

Rathergate's forged documents are an example of 'Good-false' - so even though it was clearly bogus (as any military admin person from back in the day could see) it was eminently credible.

The 'Bush-AWOL' meme was another 'Good-false' - though patently untrue to any personnel specialist with any experience in the Reserve attendance/points system. The debunking thereof was 'Bad-true', and thus of no import at all in the conversation.

So what we see with Islam and Muslims these days, and the folks supporting them - as you said we need to focus on what's simply true, regardless of whether it's 'good' or 'bad'.

It feels positively Orwellian these days, trying to tease out the tangled web of facts and truth from the mess of spin and lies and misdirections...

What irks me is JT's need to 'apologize'. NO, you don't. You might disagree with what someone else wrote, but it strikes me as rather presumptuous on your part to feel the need to apologize.

Sort of like those who say I should "apologize" for slavery. Huh? My forefathers came from the working classes of Ireland and Germany. They faced their own oppression when they came here as immigrants in the mid to late 1800's. Should I then bleat that I'm "owed" an apology for the way they were treated?

Your so Dane-

"You can tell from their comments and views, Mr. Tea, that you're addressing an audience of idiots and morons. When writing think "second graders are reading this" and you'll have better success."

So your in second grade now Dane? Which on are you? An idiot or a moron? Oh, I know. Your a cross breed called a Moridian.

Garandfan -

Gotta admit I'm getting a bit tired of the demand for apologies for slavery also. It might not be so bad if it looked like that was a 'final' step in the purported healing process - at which point the race-baiting poverty pimps who feed off making sure their flocks of supporters are feeling as disenfranchised and hostile to the country they're stuck in as possible would all go get jobs as used-car salesmen (where they would do a LOT less damage to the country...) and the black community would suddenly embrace education, marriage and hard work as a way out of the poverty imposed on them by their own cultural icons - but all it opens the door for is further 'healing' efforts. You keep ripping the scab off and gouging underneath with a knife, and it'll never heal.

Teach a man how to fish, and he'll eat for a lifetime. Give a man a fish a day for a year, and the bum will expect you to keep feeding him forever and be pissed when you don't. It's time for the folks who hamstring themselves through their own foolishness to start fishing, because the fish-a-day seems to be running out.

It pains me to say this, but Dane picked up on my intent better than others. (Les, Mike, Dave, Willie, Clark, Proof, Lebron -- glad you caught it, too.) My tone was intended to be sarcastic, and my intention was to take Shawn's piece and expand and expound on it. I thought his piece was pretty good, but I saw some places where I could pile on even more. As for the style... it just seemed fun. I thought I could get away with it.

Shawn, I sent out a pre-emptive apology to the author list; I guess you didn't get it before you read this. Sorry.

J.

That was weak.

I caught it. That is why I did not pile on.

Looked to me like making fun of Laura Shlesinger and other's always apologizing as fast as they can out of some bullshit fear of being labeled a racist or some such nonsense.

The truth needs no defense.

Jay,

Regardless of your intent - accuracy with your historical facts please. Sarcasm always works best when it's supported by the truth. ; )

914, Dr. Laura didn't enter into it. I read Shawn's piece, had a few ideas, thought about putting them into a comment, and then figured I had enough for a full-blown posting. The style just seemed like a bit of fun... something I might have to reconsider for the future.

J.

Highlander.

The issues with England led to the War of 1812 while we had Issues with the Pirates starting in 1785. The first Barbary war was 1801 Just, creating the timeline.

Well, I knew the second half was sarcasm (note my reference in my previous post to JT's "clever way" of making a point with which I was in agreement) and therefore suspected the first half should be read as such as well. However, as Highlander said, there were factual inaccuracies that needed, imho, to be addressed. So many people in America have zero knowledge of Islamic history and there is so much misinformation-- both from those defending Islam from all criticism and from those criticizing Islam-- that I wanted to make a plea for historical accuracy.

Your so Dane-

"You can tell from their comments and views, Mr. Tea, that you're addressing an audience of idiots and morons. When writing think "second graders are reading this" and you'll have better success."

So your in second grade now Dane? Which on are you? An idiot or a moron? Oh, I know. Your a cross breed called a Moridian.

If you cant use your / youre properly, how can anyone take either of your seriously?

Next time coordinate with chaun so he can have a canned response inflating the controversy and then you can both enjoy as the commentors fall backwards over each other. Youse guys gotta think more TEAMWORK!

#34 pretzel brain

It's "You're" not "your" a contraction for "you are"
oh for future reference.... they're, their,& there...there is a difference. :-)

psssst G. ---Read it again. That's my point -ASSHOLE-

I'm not surprised that this is up to 37 comments here because, as a long time Wizbang reader, as a pretty smart guy who limits his use of sarcasm to about once every 15 minutes, I have no idea where this post is coming from, even after reading the comments.

If it is sarcasm, it is disguised to Kaufmanesque levels. Jay makes two points in response to Shawn, the first one being, "About a thousand years ago, as Christianity was leading Europe into the Dark Ages, Islam stepped in and became the custodian of scientific knowledge and advances".

Well, yeah, that is pretty much true, is it not? So where's the sarcasm? (Though linking this to America's "essence" 800 years later is a bit tenuous.)

And if that is a non-sarcastic and genuine statement, and I read it as such, then where comes this rather ludicrous idea that simply because America confronted Islam early on, therefore the assertion that Shawn took issue with, "Islam has always been a part of America" is thus true?

Does this mean that "Nazism has always been a part of America's 20th century superpower status", since it was Nazis that caused us to get there? Maybe it's a semantic, but I think it an important one.... Being "part of me" (my makeup, my essence, my elemntary being), and being the reason I may have taken certain actions, are two very different things.

Or is the first point basically true, and the second one, jus' kiddin' around?

All in all, this is an odd posting, and this is one reader who simply does not know what to make of it.

For the functional idiots like Pretzel Logic the contraction "you're" is short for "you are"....

You can tell from their comments and views, Mr. Tea, that you're [ie. you are] addressing an audience of idiots and morons. When writing think "second graders are reading this" and you'll have better success.

Thanks for illustrating the "functional idiot and moron" clause, Pretzel.

/sarc off, just to be polite.

Way over their heads, Mr. Tea. Dumb it down and you'll get more stars and you won't loose a valuable asset like Mr. Mallow.

well, sarc'ing about Mr. Mallow, but you get my point, I'm sure. Mallow obviously has an audience here that needs him.

Sorry for my usage or personal pronoun abuse or whatever. Sometime's I type something and submit without reading it.

I dont get anal about typo's and mispelling or gramatical screw up's in general. My eye's are bad enough close up the way it is.

I have fun with the political topic's and discourse here. If I were submitting a term paper for grade or being paid I would check my post's carefully. Since neither apply, I just have fun.

And I accidentally used "loose" instead if "lose" in #39 - so we all do it, 914.

But I guess the lesson is if you're going to call someone out on their mistake, make sure it's a mistake and that you're right (or "your right" if you prefer). lol Mr. Mallow could stand to learn that too.

We're trying Dane, but when yur livin in a traler like us consuvativ rubes its tuf. Thanks fur libs like you helpeng us oot.

can u call ur frend oBama and see when my house payment goes away??? he promised.

"psssst G. ---Read it again. That's my point -ASSHOLE-"

pretzel brain....calm down, see smiley face in #36
N e s t l e s
shove it up your
A $ $
side........ways.
:- D

ok, enlighten me. What the heck was the point of your post? repeating mine? Looking for trouble? honestly.

dane..that's my poi....never mind--Jesus H.

Oh for crying out loud. I wasn't looking for trouble but i found it in you darling, your just to much, now just chill out.

Uh, this is SATIRE, right Jay Tea? Either that or you're concerned that some of the religion of peace practitioners are about to bomb your house! Like most conservatives, I'm quite used to watching republicans apologize for one of "their own" having the monumental GALL to tell the truth! Juan McCain practices this on a near daily basis...when he's not up for re-election, that is. But please...don't begin the practice on Wizbang.

Shawn, you had to have read JT's post and said to yourself "He's got to be kidding". You know him better then I am I got the point right away.

Dane reminds me of Muslims. If you don't use contractions properly, or are grammaticly incorrect, you will be stoned. Dane, U R N idiot. That is the new lingo. ww

Actually, Shawn and Jay both are missing some of the earliest influences on the Americas by Islam. If the followers of Islam had not closed down commerce on the Silk Road, There would have been no reason to search for a different path to get to the Black Pepper. Yep, that's right. The need for Black Pepper led to the discovery of the Americas. The other spices could be grown locally.

Jay, I suspected you were spoofing from the start. By them time you finished your analysis of the contribution of the pirates I knew you were spoofing. Pirates... and you never mentioned Willie Stargell? Can't be done. Hadda be a spoof.

For those too young to get the Willie Stargell reference, look it up. I'm too old to do everything for you.

I hope it was satire. But, if so it was a fairly poor job. Actually, I thought it might be an attempt at such, since the logic was so convoluted.

Best to just say what you mean.

We all make grammatical and typographical slips on the net, but they can be grating. Especially, if you have the sense that the writer isn't even trying.

Back to Obama. When I heard his comments, I really hoped that someone with access would challenge him to name five important contributions that Muslims have made to the U.S. Four? Three? Two?
Do I have one?

hcddbz,

Sorry, but you're wrong. The events I referred to in my post took place in 1793-94 - during Washington's second term. Long before 1801. While it is true that the British were up to their old tricks again leading up to the War of 1812, it wasn't their first dance. Google the Jay Treaty and you'll see what I mean. : )

The whole problem, amongst others with this attempt at ridicule of a proposed community center and the entire religion of Islam by lumping the small band of Muslim extremists with all Muslim moderates everywhere, it doesn`t exactly portend well should the GOP and their loonie fringe return to power. With such undisguised scorn good luck in maintaining support from our muslim allies abroad in pursuit of our national interests, or even closer to home, for our soldiers. willing to die for moderate muslims, in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Judging by the contempt felt here for making so little discernment of all muslims and their culture, I can imagine a Sarah Palin presidency would be nothing short of disastrous.

For those interested there is a very good book on the subject of the history and development of Islamic culture and it's decline by Robert Reilly, senior fellow of the American Foreign Policy Council. The book is entitled, The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist Crisis.

While I appreciate that Jay Tea may have been engaging in a bit of hyperbole to make his point, I just wish to point out, from a historical perspective, that Irish Monks also preserved a lot of the historical records during the "Dark Ages". While I don't presume that they were the only one's to preserve the information of civilization after the fall of the Roman Empire, you can't make the case that the Arabians were the only source of refuge.

Thomas Cahill wrote a book on the subject many years ago titled "How the Irish Saved Civilization" that makes the case that due to the dedication of Irish monks in copying texts and their relatively isolated location, they too preserved a lot of information that contributed to the later Renaissance.

http://www.randomhouse.com/features/cahill/irish.html

RadiCalMan, since you mention it, monastics throughout Europe continued to copy, preserve, and even read ancient texts throughout the early medieval period. Cahill oversells the case for the Irish, but that's okay, his book is entertaining even if he does occasionally stretch his evidence. Where the Muslims do deserve some credit is in the preservation of some Greek philosophical works, as the European copyists focused, but not exclusively, on Roman authors. Of course, Greek was not unknown among the christian europeans-- even some women, such as the tragic figure Heloise, were known to be able to read Greek. Still, Avicenna and Averroes, noted Muslim scholars, as well as Jewish scholars, were crucial to transmitting some key works of Aristotle (particularly some of his scientific works), which would prove quite crucial to the development of medieval philosophy.

WTF? Nobody told me we were having an all-out flame war. I think Shawn owes me an apology for something or other, and you guys can't spell for shit, but so what. Personally, Obama has me believing that Islam is peaceful and that both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were Muslim. I'm sure grateful he's out there helping the Gulf economy by swimming. Isn't he simply marvelous?

Jay Tea probably should have tagged the post additionally as satire, or something alluding to that.

Well, it is still pretty easy to overlook a tag, so adding the "satire" label might not have helped much.

I'm still on the group mailing list and although I no longer use that account as my primary email, I do check in and sometimes read the group mail - Maggie sends a good link from time to time, and the whole "draw eel" controversy interested me, for example - and I did read the note from Jay about what he was going to do.

So I KNEW it was satire when I began to read it, and my first thought was, "A lot of people aren't going to get this as satire." Jay did too good a job of it, in Swift style (A Modest Proposal For Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland from Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick was also greeted with great controversy and condemnation).

If I hadn't read the group mail, in which JT described in detail what he was going to do and how he was going to do it, the tip-off for me would have been the apology. Jay apologizing, and for someone else? Especially a junior colleague, whose bloom of youth was entrusted to him to mentor, and teach, and guide until he ends up as deranged as the rest of us. Nah, not buying it.

Heck, Jay didn't even apologize for dropping Mr. Ducky in Tuh-RAY-zuh Heinz-Kerry's vichyssoise back in 2004, although he did apologize for wiping him off on her gown and chivalrously offered to pay for its cleaning, if she could but provide three written estimates.

I thought it was a well-constructed piece on the merits, but if it missed its mark with its intended audience it becomes difficult to rate it a success.

But everyone's entitled to a missed shot every now and again, and Jay's certainly established himself as writer, blogger, and observer well enough that he needn't worry about having to fall back on stalking supermodels anytime soon. Good thing, too - we all lose a step or two over time . . .

In his post number 18, clark smith asks who at Wizbang will publicly apologize for Jay Tea's foray into dhimmitude?

So while I am just passing by and am not in any real sense of the word "of" Wizbang, it is one of my favorite reads and I will therefore handle the apology for Wizbang -- and for you all:

I am very sorry that so many of you didn't get it.

There.

that aught to do it.

(And thank you, Terri, for #2)

Islam, like it or not, is but a manifestation of evil, a hostilely-colonizing, death-cult-like ideology hiding behind has a facade of "religion." A "religion" whose "god" rewards its millions of gutless, hesperophobic, mass-murderers with an eternity of mass rape. A "religion" with a 1400-years-long track record of barbarity, conquest, rape, sexual mutilation, mass-murder and mayhem. So-called "radical Islam" is to so-called "moderate Islam" what Herr Hitler's (modeled on those of the false fuhrer, Muhummud) Sturmabteilung (AKA, "Brownshirts") was to the rest of the German and Austrian forces, to the rest of the Axis Powers' Islamic and other allies -- and to the general Axis Powers' population. (Reminder: we waged total warfare on them *all* - every last one of them)

And, like it or not, Islam will either be totally subdued by Judeo-Christian/Human/Western Civilization -- or it will destroy us.

For, at risk of repeating myself) as, - in his 1899 work, The River War - that well known Anglo-American, Winston Leonard Spencer Jerome-Churchill once observed:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."

And now - in the various forms of Judeo-Christian/Human/Western Civilization's air-transport aeroplanes converted into "make-shift" two-hundred-ton fuel bombs - in the Pakistani Chinese and Europeon-facilitated nuclear armory -- and soon to be in Iran's -- and with the willing assistance of about every one of the dead and decadent Euro-peons' Neo-Soviet's squalidly-fasciSSocialist satellite states -- and the acquiescence of our own permanently-parasitical feral-gummint elitists -- and "administration" -- "radical Islam" has "Christianity's strong arms of science," on its side, too.

So, jokes aside then: Judeo-Christian/Human/Western Civilization is at war for its survival. But has anyone yet noticed?

Sheesh, Jay. Don't you think you were a little hard on the boy? He's probably just the victim of public education. Perhaps you should focus on the real source of the problem.

#53 ??
"....... maintaining support from our muslim allies..."?

WHAT MUSLIM ALLIES???? There are none. All we are doing is supporting one faction against another, until they can assume the power position.

Since before 9/11 I have been stating this is a "Holy War" going back to Abraham and the promise land. The Muslims view it as a Holy War, Christians and Jews know it's a Holy War, why cannot our government face up to it. It Muslims believe they get an expedited trip to God if they kill "infidels" how do you talk them out of it without bringing down his or her entire belief system? Read Genesis and you will see the start of the war. ww

It has been interesting to see the comments born from this piece.

Personally, Dane and Highlander come out as Boobs of the Year for their pettiness.

Gotta admit, Jay's post took me a bit offguard in its outright "harshness."

It think, though you may not agree, the satirical nature and point of the post could have been done without the risk of its unintended misunderstandings, contents expressed in Jay's "pre-apology" or not.

People like Dane and High don't get it.

I can only speak for myself, but, when I write something, I take for granted the intelligence and breadth of knowledge of the readership here. It's not like some two-word Huff-po goose-step. People are actually insightful enough not to have to be hand held through every word or concept posted.

However, predictably ignorant knee-jerk humps like Dane (Who seems to be a reincarnation of one of our past trolls) and High mistake that for intellectual weakness, and don't have their own insight enough to realize that minding their own tongues might just hide the fact they are, well, trolls.

Anyway, the law of unintended consequences may apply here, at least in our little realm of blogging.

Whether that is positive or negative is up to you.

-Shawn

Let's be specific here. It was the arab world that preserved many Greek texts and other ancient writings. Not because they valued them but simply because they couldn't be bothered to destroy them. The preservation has nothing whatsoever to do with islam.

If the islamic or the arab world had actually made heads or tails of the writings they would have done something with them, but instead they sat on them and did little or nothing to advance human understanding. It was the advent of these writings reappearing in the west that kicked off expansion of knowledge seen at the end of the middle ages.

No instead we see the islamic world as the greatest hold out in the world slave trade today. They are centuries behind the rest of the world in respecting the rights of others. While libs proclaim how tolerant muslims are they are comparing them to Christians of half a millenia ago and longer. It's not a great feat to be as tolerant as someone who lived 500-1000 years ago.

On the sliding scale that is liberal morality, islam is tolerant despite stoning gays, treating women as property and trafficking in slaves, but Christianity is intolerant because it's adherents discarded those ideas 100's of years ago.

Shaun is owed an apology for criticizing his post whether JT meant it sarcastically or not.

Shawn is not owed an apology. He owes Jay Tea one. Jesus.

You'd have to be an idiot not to see this post for what it was.

Let's face it - if you're not as smart, or as perceptive, as Wild fucking Willie, you shouldn't be blogging at all. Not on a quality conservative website such as this one.

Bruce, I apologized to Shawn before I ever published. And if he were to apologize to me, I would reject it, as he has done nothing to offend me. I knew, going in, that there would be a chance my sarcasm would escape some. It was a chance I was prepared to take, and will again.

I do NOT need you defending me, and we (speaking on behalf of the entire staff) do NOT need you to tell us how to behave towards each other.

J.

Jay,

You are the one who really stepped in it. You have shown your crass ignorance of the history of both Christianity and Islam. I am not agreeing with the way Shawn said it, but your reaction to his post showed that your feigned "tolerance toward others" is just that.
Now the readers need a double apology.

Shawn: "People like Dane and High don't get it."

Uhm, actually we did get it, and so did a lot of other people. It was you who limped in here crying because you didn't get it Mr. Mallow.

Mr. Addison read the email, presumably the same one you read, and he knew from the email what was up.

"If I hadn't read the group mail, in which JT described in detail what he was going to do and how he was going to do it, the tip-off for me would have been the apology."

Described in detail. But you didn't get it even though you received the same "heads up"

"And your "heads up" to me in our group forum really doesn't matter now, does it?"

Well, no - it doesn't matter if you're too touchy to read and understand that it was humor. But don't go pissing on my leg because you aren't bright enough to understand Mr. Tea's well-written english. A simple "DOH!" would have sufficed. Lighten up, you've been the hurt little puppy enough for one weekend.

Shawn,

What is petty about correcting Jay on his knowledge of history? I think historical accuracy is pretty damn important - under any circumstance! As for Jay's satire - it was poorly done. If most readers are missing it - the writer hasn't done his job properly. Frankly, both you and Jay have made a complete mess of this whole thread. And what do you do in response? You blame your readers.

Wizbang has long been one of my favorite reads. I look forward to future posts with the hope that this kind of foolishness on the part of you two bloggers is at an end.

"About a thousand years ago, as Christianity was leading Europe into the Dark Ages, Islam stepped in and became the custodian of scientific knowledge and advances" taking it by sword as is custom for Islam. Obtuse sarcasm. I liked it.

Yeah Will, you liked it but it´s a crock. It´s not even worth calling an urban legend.
Read some history, not the revamped stuff they are putting out now days, but stuff that´s based on historical evidence.
As I´ve often said, people believe whatever they want to believe, not necessarily what´s true. Obviously you want to believe in a Christianity which is not real so that you can discard it´s claims. That´s intellectual cowardice.

And now that I have read all of the comments, I would say it is wise not to say things you don´t mean - you will be quoted on it some day, and nobody will believe it was a joke.
Just try running for public office if you want the stupid things you said to come out in the headlines.

In response to Terri in post 56, I confess that being an American descended from full blooded Irish stock, I found Thomas Cahill's book to be especially interesting when I happened upon it, but being a realist, I didn't mean to attribute or imply that the Irish monks preserved all or most of the known writings of antiquity. Just that the historical record is often perverted to only attribute this to the Arabs.

Although fictional, Umberto Eco's "The Name of the Rose" illustrates that the Irish monastic experience wasn't necessarily unique in the Middle Ages, but as an interested, but non-academic scholar, of this period, I cannot comment definitively on the contributions of others in preserving or destroying the writings of antiquity.

However, the Archimedes Palimpsest is an interesting example where earlier works were nearly lost, being recycled into religious texts, so the historical record, is at best, mixed.

Well this has been an interesting Monday morning read. Everything in the world that's wrong with blogs - and what's right with blogs - has been represented here.

For the record, I knew sarcasm was to follow right after the title (the author's name was also helpful in the giveaway). I also knew that perhaps the historical information was likely too generalized and maybe not even entirely correct, but that did not detract from my enjoyment. I don't take what anyone says as gospel truth unless I already know it to be true or I can corroborate it elsewhere.

Terri's comments were interesting not just in their content, but in the way that he offered corrections without resorting to personal insult.

Then we have the usuals who never leave a comment without personal insult.