69 million page views

Amin, you are truly a master of Taqiyya

Reader comment on item: Arabist Snobs
in response to reader comment: More lies...

Submitted by Peter Hall (Australia), Dec 24, 2011 at 21:48

I guess the only way to show you up ... is to dissect what you say point by point, lie by lie. So lets get started. You Stated. I am using a full sized keyboard this time, but unfortunately the editing feature on this blog is not co operating.


"More ....lies and baseless claims - try answering these..... rather than making up EVEN more nonsense. You really are myopic in your view, and I assume the reason you adopt this attitude is that you really have no sensible responses to make. Misspelling of Laser - then whole bunch of lies to cover up."


Well Amin, the point I have made many times is that Arabic does not work well in a modern environment.

There is no word for laser in Arabic. There may be somewhere, but it does not seem to be easy to find because your response if full of holes. The very fact this question is not easily refuted by you is a symptom of weakness in the Arabic language.

I am not an Arabic speaker, so I rely on electronic translators and online translators in languages I do not speak. The effectiveness of online translators is directly related to how many people use them and how often they are used. For translations of English to French for example, most online translators are VERY accurate. The same for English to Japanese. Why is this? The reason is that there are millions of people translating these languages. Demand has made them accurate. Arabic to English then English to Arabic, rarely give the same result, especially when using scientific or modern terms.

Now you harp on trying to be right like a belligerent 5yo , however you have totally missed the point. Arabic to English but more importantly English to Arabic does not work well with online translators. Why? Now if I was writing a order to a Saudi Company, using a online translator wanting to purchase laser cut microchips, I could end up with rice cut chips, or rice crackers. You may not see the problem here, but I can, this is one of many examples of the weakness of Arabic. You asked


Including that it was an adjective?


Well Amin, firstly I will give you a definition of an adjective.

An adjective's job is to modify a noun or pronoun. They are always near the noun or pronoun they are describing. Be careful how you use adjectives such as interesting, beautiful, great, wonderful, or exciting. Many adjectives like these are overused and add little definition to a sentence. Instead, show your reader or listener what you are talking about by using verbs and nouns creatively. Sprinkle fewer well-chosen adjectives for interest. Adjectives are often used to describe the degree of modification. The adjective forms are positive, comparative, and superlative. This tree is tall. (positive) That tree is taller. (comparative) The last tree in the row is the tallest. (superlative)

Now this is the easiest to understand definition I have found. I am using this as I clearly can see you do not understand English very well ! You may ask how do I know this?

Well you total lack of punctuation is a dead give away for someone who has poor English language skills. Even when you are being petty in correction my English, you do this with spelling mistakes and no punctuation.

Now if you understood how the English Language works, you would understand that just because a word is not listed as an adjective, does not mean it cannot be used and an Adjective. I gave you some examples of the word laser being used as an adjective, but your internet sourced knowledge of English demonstrates your lack of understanding of how a sophisticated language works.

Laser pen?

Now tell me Amin, how is laser being used here? Now do you know what a pen is? It is something you use to write with, it is also a noun. Now by adding the word laser, I am modifying the noun, by using the word laser as an adjective. Now a previous example of laser cut can be an adjective depending on context, and considering your limited understanding of English I see why you are confused. I hope this has been educational for you Amin. The next assumption you make is


Sorry ..... which response are you talking about. You have not read ONE book about Arabic. Do not even know Hindi is the language of India. You do not even know no one speaks Classical Arabic. *******************************************************************************************************************

Why do you think I I do not know Hindi is the main native language of India? However do you know that not every Indian speaks Hindi? Do you know how many languages are native to India? Oh, I forgot you are trying to exert your assumed superiority again by making more unfounded assumptions. If your understanding of English was better, you would of realised one of my arguments I presented was that Classical Arabic, like Latin, is not spoken, it is mainly recited by Muslims in their Religious observances. That is why I said how stupid your argument was over the expansion of Islam will further Arabic when I said most non Arabic speaking Muslims only memorise the Qu'ran, they do not understand what they are saying. That is a bit like you Amin, in that you do not understand what you are saying, is that not true? You also repeat again


Yet somehow you think that you hold valid views on Arabic. Yet you know fully well you made them up? Why don't answer why your understanding of Arabic is poor? And how you formed these silly views over Arabic that you keep repeating **********************************************************************************************************************

Amin, Amin, Amin, where have I ever said I speak or understand Arabic? I have stated many times I do not speak Arabic. Now is this an example of your poor memory, your lack of English, you lying, or is it taqiyya? Well Amin, why ask a question that has already been answered? Is this you being dishonest?

Now the second point is, I do not need to know flint knapping to understand that flint tools are weak and inadequate. I have said many times, that I am using the verifiable facts, to show that where Arabic is used as a language, the population is less educated, have lower scientific and technical achievements, read less books, write less books and have lower levels of contribution to literature. I believe the weaknesses of Arabic as a language is a major contributing factor.

Now if you revert to the Arabs bring sciences to the West argument, I would like to state the following;

Firstly, the Arabs and Muslim scholars have contributed very little to Western Science. My proof? Well if Arabia is the centre of Arabic, why is it most Muslim Scientist were living in areas outside of Arabia and usually in lands that were recently Arabised? Why does these great scientific advances not originate in Arabia? The truth is that most great Arabic scientific works are either translations of earlier Grek, Roman, or Indian works into Arabic by populations force-ably made to use Arabic. The last great leap of Arabic Science happened to coincide with the fall of Constantinople, and the release and translation of the libraries of the Byzantine's. The First great Arab advances coincided with the fall of Egypt and the libraries of the Greeks and Egyptians in Alexandria.

The same with the Muslim Scientist in Spain and Egypt, and the Middle East. Most of these claimed discoveries were either translations of other previous works, or by peoples who made discoveries in spite of Arabic and Islam, not because of it.

If Arabic and Islam were good at enabling science and literature, why do areas that were previously high achievers, now failures? It seems the longer a culture uses Arabic, and the longer they are Muslim, the more stupid they become! Your next comment proves my point, you said **********************************************************************************************************************

You try and dismiss my evidence, without any meaningful evidence to refute what I claim, but in doing so you come across as a untruthful snob. Yet you ignore the facts and defend your position by citing other Arabists? Which other Arabists .... who did I cite? Name them .... lying again.


Well Amin, again you call me a liar, and again I show you are either lying yourself, have a bad memory, or are just plain stupid, do you not recall saying the following?


You shows ignorance of whole field of Linguistics.

This is the site of Dr Daniel Pipes - show me one comment of his that decries the Arabic language? It was your claim that Arabic is a weak language - the onus was upon you to provide evidence for your point of view. Yet you have failed to mention single academic, scholar, expert.

But evidence:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language - make this a start - you need the basics.

SIBWAYHI - MG Carter. Edward Lane, Bernard Lewis on Arabic, A. Lockett, Professor Bernard G. Weiss, Wolfdietrich Fischer, A M Schimmel, Claude Addas, J Wansburgh, de Saussure and etc...


Well Amin, you prove to me again and again, that you really do not have a good understanding of English Now I really doubt that you understand the internet. Do you understand that when you write something here, it does not go away? Do you understand that I can cut and paste you own comments to show you are lying or stupid? You said


Very lame. I have been asking and I still have not found a single person who has read the book you claim every person in Europe has read?

Which book? hmmm more lying .... see this is your tactic - you did not even BOTHER to name the book - this is a lie.


Amin, this is like shooting fish in a barrel. Amin, I asked you to name the book ! You claimed the whole of Europe has read classical Arabic. I have asked every person I know in Europe if they have read any Classical Arabic or read any translations of Classical Arabic literature. No one can site a single example, For your information I lived 2 years in Europe, so I do know a lot of locals. You said the following in a previous comment;


Again the whole Europe has read Arabic Classic. As it was Arab civilization its science technology and philosophy that lay basis for West?


Now your response again has me laughing


Which book? hmmm more lying .... see this is your tactic - you did not even BOTHER to name the book - this is a lie.

Do you have any evidence to back up this claim? Or are you going to say it what you said wasevery Arabist in Europe has read it? Well Amin?

I have caught you lying ...... what about it? Where are your answers for them.

Yet you make even more nonsense up - and you dont bother backing it up. Which evidence have you provided. NONE!


You are asking me to provide evidence about my statement, about your lack of evidence and your claims. Now either this is more taqiyya, or your poor understanding of English means you do not understand what I write and what you have written?

How can I provide evidence about your lack of evidence. I asked YOU what was this claimed classical Arabic all of Europe has read? That statement was yours Amin, You cannot hide from answering such a simple question by asking me to provide evidence to refute what you have not yet provided !!!!!

Now do I really have to go through everything you say and treat you like a naughty 5 yo? Or are you going to act like an adult on this site?


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".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 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.)