69 million page views

The master of Taqiyya strikes again

Reader comment on item: Arabist Snobs
in response to reader comment: Winning hands down...I am that good

Submitted by Peter Hall (Australia), Dec 18, 2011 at 23:39

Well Amin, I see you have been patting yourself on the back again telling us how great you are to hide your foolishness. You asked me earlier to find any scholar to support my argument that Arabic is a weak language. I provided one who stated clearly that Arabic was inadequate in his field of science. I even provide the quote. You then revert to Taqiyya and now state you want a western scholar to say the same, OMG do you not trust a fellow Muslim to say the truth? is not a Muslim Scholar good enough for you? Or are you changing the rules to hide that you are embarrassed?

You asked for just one, I provided one, now you change the rules? And you claim to be an expert in languages? As to your claims in relation to online translators, the words you give to not translate both ways, as I said before, translating from English microchip to Arabic then translating the same word back gives the English chip, NOT MICROCHIP. Denial and lie as much as you like, what I say is demonstrate-able and repeatable to every reader here. You say I have given no proof? That demonstrates that you are no expert except in Taqiyya, in that what I propose has not absolute truths, but there are indicative evidence to support what I claim.

I cite the low levels of translations of other languages into Arabic compared to most other languages. I gave the example that there are more books translated into Spanish than have been translated into Arabic over the last 1000 years. I also cite the very small number of Arabic books translated in other languages each year. I also cite the extremely low academic achievements of Arabic speakers and the extremely poor standards of Universities that are in Arabic speaking countries. I also cited to low numbers of Arabic speakers who have won Nobel awards in the sciences and arts. I also showed the very low levels of scientific papers and journals coming out of Arabic speaking countries.All these things show that Arabic is not used by people who read books, write books or who are involved in the sciences.

Considering the large number of people who speak Arabic, they are under represented in these basic measures. All you have responded with are denial, and lies. I have shown my sources and can provide many others to support my position, you have provided no such evidence to support your position. I guess your "victories" you keep claiming and your intellectual dominance you claim, are as hollow as your arguments. The responses your comments get are indicative of your victory or defeat.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islamic_Inventions%3F_How_Islamic_Inventors_Did_Not_Change_The_World

http://www.history-science-technology.com/Articles/articles%208.htm

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Culture/Arts/Jan/07/Is-the-Arabic-language-perfect-or-backwards.ashx#axzz1ghSQ3lDD

http://blog.globalizationpartners.com/arabic-language-for-advertising.aspx

http://www.isesco.org.ma/english/publications/Marabic/P1.php

http://www.studytoanswer.net/myths_ch1.html

http://islamsfatalflaw.blogspot.com/

Submitting....

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".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to The master of Taqiyya strikes again by Peter Hall

Email me if someone replies to my comment

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".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)